Okay, I know we are all losing our purple minds over the upcoming release of 3121, but I am in a long running dispute with a non-Prince fan regarding who has had more of an impact upon music, Prince or U2. To me the answer is quite simple, however, I am biased, as will most on this website will be. That's why I ask you to answer the question with an objective mind.
[Edited 3/10/06 15:00pm]
[Edited 3/10/06 15:00pm]

U2 hands down.

there's not a right answer to this question. They're both great.

U2 has become too political for my taste. Bono seems to think he can save the world. Poor little man...he has no idea. Besides their music hasn't been all that good in years. Yes they sell out, yes they sell a ton of cds. But the public these days have been hypnotized by the crap that's released. They have no idea what REAL music is.

Jerad51 said:

That's like me asking "Which has made my ass bigger? Snickers or Little Debbie Snack Cakes?" The answer is that BOTH had an impact on my big ass. So, to answer your question, Prince and U2 have both had an impact on music. I am analogy king! Hear me roar! (mew)

P.S. - For the record, I really don't have a big ass. I have a standard issue, normal-sized ass. Seriously. I have won awards for the appropriate size of my ass. "And the award for the most normal-sized ass goes to...the guy in the back, yes, you...the guy with the normal-sized ass." It's very well proportioned also...one cheek located nicely on either side of my crack. It's quite an ass. True dat!
[Edited 3/10/06 15:53pm]

Prince without a doubt. Hiphop's entire synth based sound (the stuff that Neptunes and Timbaland come out with) is completely based on the Minneapolis sound.

This is moronic. Absolutely fucking moronic. Sorry.

Number23 said:

Apology accepted.

Why sport? Appease the little demon in your foul tar choked men hearts. Versus. Always versus. It's always perceptional bestage with anchorless idiots, isn't it? How they define themselves. Isn't anyone allowed a quantum millimentre space to grow and be themselves? To be compared is the dismemberment of the clit or testilciles. Bring on the next ice age. Time for a new idea, God. we are bacteria wiping out ourselves.

I love my wee dog.

Prince's musical influence will last far longer than U2.
A hundred years from now people will still be playing Prince, and hopefully it'll be a vastly greater catalogue than what is currently released.

U2's influence today is greater obviously both politically and culturally. At least at surface level.

Jerad51 said:

Prince easily , you only need to look at the number of artists who cover his work to see that hes hugely admired by new acts, has any artist whose appeared since 1978 come close to the amount of cover versions that Prince's music has ?

Prince. And I do hearing more artists say that they get their influence more from Prince than U2.

"who has had more of an impact upon music, Prince or U2"

U2 are bigger, far more accepted.
more of an impact on music: Prince
more of an impact generally: U2

Number23 said:

And yet you posted a response...actually three. Hmmm...interesting.
[Edited 3/10/06 19:36pm]

bigsexy said:

Yup.

U2 sucks!

Actually, I like "The Joshua Tree" However they're even more inconsistent than 1990's Prince.

Prince has had a fundamental influence on popular music over the last twenty five years. All you would have to do is look at the many reaches of the "minneapolis sound." Purple Rain is a once in a generation musical moment. U2 are a huge corporate machine but I do not see their "musical" influence. Their is no denying Prince's cultural influence. All you have to do is look at the diversity of his audience. My grandmother knows Prince but has never heard of U2. I was embarrassed by U2's concert film and their attempts at reaching "real" music credibility through the blues and R@B. I have always felt that their music is sonically simplistic even as I have respected their politics.

Bono has stated that Prince is the "best" artist deserving of the best contract. He has made numerous statements talking about Prince's endless talent. And like Prince said when asked about his Sign O the Times grammy loss to U2, "I can do what they do, but let them do 'Housequake'"

The bottom line is that the establishment will always prop up a band like U2 with money, awards, etc. but real musicians will respect, listen to and cover Prince.

yea grandma, yea

this is stupid.

prince has (probably) had a greater impact in soul music while U2 has (probably) had a greater impact on rock.

but how can this be measured? are those polled limited to performers/artists or is it the music industry in whole? is it even limited to ONLY music industry people? do we simply ask musicians who influenced their sound more? do we ask producers also? or is it deeper than only influencing someone's sound...is it the basic influence to seek a career in the music biz?

the funniest thing about this whole thread isn't even the topic; its hilarious that some people answered the question with certainty as though this is something they've measured and verified already. in actuality, they gave their opinion which is cool but certainly not scientific.

sallysassalot said:

Duh, obviously "influence" can't be measured. Stop taking things so seriously. This is just a late night bullsh@t session. We all know that NASA conducted a scientific analysis of this thread and declared U2 overrated, Bono a weak singer and the Edge as playing the same ringing note in every song. And the Harvard Psychology Dept. determined that U2 wishes they could take a bite from Prince's purple rock.

jdcxc said:

mmmm, that says plenty and about their respective personalities really, doesn't it. Bono's not the one who comes out looking like a conceited asshole here...

As much as I'm far more of a Prince fan than of U2, Prince simply DOES NOT have the capacity to open-up and write the personal gutwrenching impassioned tracks the way Bono is capible of (ie All I Want Is You, One, Bad, With Or Without You, Sometimes You Can't Make It On Your Own, Running To Stand Still, to name but a few)

While Prince and Bono are both great (tho very different) vocalist, lyrically, Bono can come far more from the heart: Prince's major fundemental flaw is that he is unwilling to show any cracks in the armour and truely explore inner pain and doubt, like all other great musical artist have been able to do for at least one masterpiece. But sadly there'll never be that truely great introspective album - he'll be remembered as the funky partyman: a truely great musician who crossed all frontiers but was unwilling to open up, prefering funky candyfloss. Like Kevin Smith said "he lives in Princeland"
So sure, U2 never tried to do Housequake, and they don't need to. Apples and oranges.

(But Adam Clayton must be the luckiest person in music since Ringo Starr, very average bass player that lucked out into a great group)
[Edited 3/10/06 23:20pm]

jdcxc said:

you're right. i'm sorry. please forgive me.

KrystleEyes said:

You obviously haven't heard Prince's entire catalog (about 1000 songs more than U2) to not heard his many introspective songs. He wouldn't have the loyal fanbase over the last 25 years if they weren't able to connect to his sensitive, quirky, complex songwriting skills. What an obvious stereotype that even he mocks, the "funky partyman." The reason P made that quote was in response to Bono declaring Prince "more than a song and dance man." Like Prince needs to be condescended to by a group of talentless, self-important, media-driven posers. And Adam Clayton is not the only member of that group who would be embarrassed to be on the stage with Prince or alot lesser musicians.

And I'm not really anti U2 but I hate to see their "averageness" glorified in the form of grammys and other false tributes.

They're a bigger name in world music and a bigger draw-card - deal with it (tell fuckin' nana to deal with it too, next time u see her - nootch!)

PS I've heard his entire catalogue of released albums (that were released on cd/vinyl) except ONA, so don't go there noddy

like i said earlier :
U2 are bigger, far more accepted.
more of an impact on music: Prince
more of an impact generally: U2

welcome to the Hef Years -

Jerad51 said:

For the American side= Prince
For the European side= U2

Even as someone who got into music largely in part to listening to U2 in my younger days, I would still say Prince by a long shot.

MickG said:

and while your hands are down there pull your head out yer arse. U2 from the album'Boy' to 'Atomic Boy' all sound the same, lost interest years ago, Gimme Simple Mind's any day.

Prince is a genius and a flawed one at that, but he is not formulatic like the wee irish lads.. go on save the world yawn yawn yawn..... 'top ,oh the mornin. did u know i know Nelson M? and i'm Bush's buddy,' 'oh and here's my latest version of Sunday Bloody Sunday'... yawn yawn yawn...

Housequake, every buddy, every buddy shut the fuck up and lets listen 2 the band, come on ye'all before the U2 come, lets prove the funk and see those lepricon's fall he ye.

Prince Of Course. I don't like U2.