That's not what I am saying, trying different things is obviously a good thing, I just feel their direction is based on chart success and what the kids are into. As a band, that seems to be the motivation on any different things they might do, even the sound of a currently popular synth will appear for instance. Whereas the bands I admire try different things based on there own direction and what they want to do.

I don't get why Coldplay are so popular. They're really bland and they're nothing special. There's nothing about them which stands out. I did like the song they did with Rihanna (Princess of China) but overall I find their music boring. It's pure lift muzak IMO.

It was a decent enough song for a fan tbh (Speed of Sound was the one beaten by Crazy Frog as pointed out) and great live for the first few times. It did get old fast though. Chris was well pissed off at the time about Crazy Frog though, moaning every gig about it


It's all politics. Chris Martin's been in the thick of the music indutry 'mafia' for many years now - hence collaborations with Jay-Z, Kanye etc and now a major player in Tidal. You don't get to become a huge band in the States unless you have major record company backing, as they did from very early on, and it's never an accident. The thing is, that's not the sound Coldplay first became big with, so they introduced that aspect to their own stuff gradually. As Mrs Merton might ask:

'So Chris Martin, as an upper middle class privately educated ex-choirboy, how did you and ex-crack dealing gang member from the hood Jay-Z become overnight best friends?'

I can't believe what I am reading! How ignorant are some of the posters in this thread!?

Music is a universally loved art form, everybody on this planet has their own unique musical tastes.

OK, well you did talk about them being polar opposites as though that was an issue.

You seem to be assuming that Coldplay aren't trying things based on their own direction, when really you just mean you don't like it. Which isn't the same thing. Why would you assume that they're not doing what they want to do?

I get that lots of people don't like Colplay, because most people don't like a lot of bands. I just don't get the whole thing about them being bland and boring. I'd certainly agree that all of their albums have some pretty dull filler, but they've been around so long now that they have a strong enough catalogue of great stuff to do an incredible two hour live show that has tens of thousands of people bouncing pretty much the whole time.

And its not as though musical experimentation is automatically exciting music - IMO a lot of Radiohead's stuff that gets so revered is incredibly dull.

So what if kids are into Coldplay? They have as much right as you to form their own musical tastes, and it doesn't make you superior if they like Coldplay and you don't.
Besides, IN MY OPINION, that's what makes Coldplay one of the greatest bands today, they have something for everyone in their back catalogue, thats just the way they have evolved. But it seems they can't win, whatever they do they will be criticised.
Besides I'm sure they're bothered about what a bunch of snobs are saying when they're relaxing in their multi million pound homes.

you always get called a snob for saying Coldplay's main aim is to appeal to the mainstream. I'm not even bashing that, I am just saying I prefer bands that don't do that. Simple really. I cant say I am trying to bother them, I don't sit here thinking of ways to upset Coldplay, actually maybe ill send Chris a note and ask if he can ease up on doing duets with the current chart topping hot properties. Its not being a snob to say they sold out a bit, they did and as you say are doing well in their mansions. good on em

No because he probably didn't do that to remain relevant, he did it because that's where his artisitc direction took him. Coldplay have no artistic direction.

However, I agree that unusual collaborations are interesting. It just annoys me when musicians try to jump on 'popular' artists as Coldplay did here. I didn't like it either when The Vamps did this with Demi Lovato and Omi, although I do like that band generally.

OK, then the goalposts are shifting as the original issue seemed to be artists collaborating with polar opposites.

Of course Coldplay have an artistic direction. As I said before, its fine that people don't like a band, but this whole dressing it up in waffle about not having an artistic direction is totally transparent.

They have one artistic direction, and that's to do whatever makes them as popular as possible.

Surely you can see that's different? The issue was artists who are polar opposites collaborating because they want to remain relevant. Surely you can see there's more of an issue with that than an artist collaborating with someone very different to them because that's what they actually want to do (without having in mind the financial/business benefit of it).

Coldplay duetting with Rihanna was a purely a financial decision. I highly doubt it had anything to do with music.

coldplay aren't bad singers TBH

I've never quite understood the Coldplay hate but suspect it's often considered cool by certain types to be seen not to like them. No idea why they get the hate over bands such as Travis though who are 100x more bland and tedious

theres a difference between coldplay and travis? apart from travis being defunkt for 15 odd years now of course..

Travis had a new album earlier this year, they just stopped selling.

Kaiser chiefs are having a bash at the same thing. New single, something to do with parachutes I think?

Modern England absolutely worships bland mediocrity. Look at the success of Adele. People, for some strange reason, want to believe their favourite rockstar could be their next door neighbour. So it's out with your Freddie Mercury, Janis Joplin or Axl Rose and in with Chris Martin, who by all rights looks and acts like he should be the 4th most popular presenter on Countryfile.

absolutely right, hence my rant at the snowflake generation lacking inspiration to create something new and exciting.

I was going to start a separate thread, but thought better of it as this one is still rumbling along.

I've only just got round to watching my recording of the Glastonbury Coldplay gig and thought they were excellent as usual. I particularly liked the section with Barry Gibb, and their tribute to Viola Beach was a nice touch.

I was fascinated by the illuminated wrist bands that most of the crowd seemed to be wearing. Did they have to buy them on their way into the ground, or did Coldplay issue them? How were they activated? I assume there was some sort of wi-fi at play here, controlled by the lighting technicians backstage perhaps, because everyone's wrist glowed the same colour - either white, red or blue if I remember correctly - at the same time. The effect in the darkness as seen from the stage was most atmospheric. I wonder if this was a first?

Coldplay have been doing that for years:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-19322214

Thanks for that. I assume they were called Xylobands as a reference to Coldplay's Mylo Xyloto .. I can hardly believe it's nearly five years since that album came out.

This is my view, their early stuff was good and they have some great tracks but I also find a lot of there stuff a bit bland and I'm not a big fan of their recent stuff.

Just the two of us then !

Plus the millions who actually love everything about them

Well the last two are as good as their early stuff IMHO .

In fact Ghosts was compared to Parachutes by so many people due to the strip-backed sound and the beautiful songs ...

Have you given Ghosts a fair crack of the whip !?

We didn't need Travis as soon as we had Coldplay