FW: [Powderworks] Thanks Pete
Bawolski@aol.com
Bawolski@aol.com
Tue, 3 Dec 2002 20:08:36 EST
--part1_184.12e5645c.2b1eaf94_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 12/3/2002 2:24:36 AM Pacific Standard Time,
mrnoisy@iprimus.com.au writes:
> I'm just wondering why U2 have just gotten bigger, whereas the Oils
> popularity waned so much during the 90's that a lot of people are surprised
> when they hear that they are still around.
> Is it because they are Aussie? Did ESM/Breathe turn mainstream audiences
> off?
> I think all of their albums post D&D could have been top 10 in the states
> had things been a little different.
>
When Blue Sky Mining was released it seemed like the Oils were on the verge
of U2 type stardom. I felt that CD was going to be their Joshua Tree. I
remember that it was the feature review in Rolling Stone (U.S.) magazine
and got an excellent write up (whereas Capricornia didn't get reviewed
at all). The tour that year was pretty big from what I remember (three
nights here in L.A. at pretty sizeable venues) but obviously in the end
U2 like stardom wasn't to be. It's funny that you mention the possibility
that some of their other '90's albums may have turned off mainstream
audiences when you look at the limited work that U2 did during that
same period after Achtung Baby - Zooropa and Pop were pretty challenging
albums that I wouldn't consider among their best, yet they retained their
audience and are now bigger than ever.
Mike.
--part1_184.12e5645c.2b1eaf94_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">In a message dated 12/3/2002 2:24:36 AM Pacific Standard Time, mrnoisy@iprimus.com.au writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">I'm just wondering why U2 have just gotten bigger, whereas the Oils<BR>
popularity waned so much during the 90's that a lot of people are surprised<BR>
when they hear that they are still around.<BR>
Is it because they are Aussie? Did ESM/Breathe turn mainstream audiences<BR>
off?<BR>
I think all of their albums post D&D could have been top 10 in the states<BR>
had things been a little different.<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
When Blue Sky Mining was released it seemed like the Oils were on the verge <BR>
of U2 type stardom. I felt that CD was going to be their Joshua Tree. I <BR>
remember that it was the feature review in Rolling Stone (U.S.) magazine<BR>
and got an excellent write up (whereas Capricornia didn't get reviewed<BR>
at all). The tour that year was pretty big from what I remember (three <BR>
nights here in L.A. at pretty sizeable venues) but obviously in the end<BR>
U2 like stardom wasn't to be. It's funny that you mention the possibility<BR>
that some of their other '90's albums may have turned off mainstream <BR>
audiences when you look at the limited work that U2 did during that <BR>
same period after Achtung Baby - Zooropa and Pop were pretty challenging<BR>
albums that I wouldn't consider among their best, yet they retained their <BR>
audience and are now bigger than ever. <BR>
<BR>
Mike.<BR>
</FONT></HTML>
--part1_184.12e5645c.2b1eaf94_boundary--