|
Post by anarkissed on Jun 29, 2018 11:34:27 GMT -5
Interesting article below that should have been written around this time last year, as that would have marked the 30th anniversary of the release of "Appetite for Destruction", but appears to be coming out now because there's some high dollar rerelease package coming out. (In keeping with the band's preferred timeline, that appears to be about a year too late.) The article made me notice some level of similarity between the approach of both bands to career choices. Mainly, professional level substance abuse, and sometimes obnoxious live performance behavior. For The Mats, this is often cited as one of the things that kept them from seeing big time mainstream success. For G N'R, it didn't seem to hurt at all. I guess for both, there was always some sense that these things only led to indie cred, in the case of The Replacements, or outlaw cool, in the case of Guns N' Roses. I'm wondering if the difference didn't lie partly in the audiences these bands appealed to, and the expectations for them. When G N' R showed up late or stoned or trashed dressing rooms, I think people just thought they didn't know any better, and were just indulging in typical self-indulgent rock star behavior. When The Mats did these things, I think people always felt it was being done on purpose, as a personal insult to express their disdain for concepts like marketing and publicity. In other words, The Mats were too smart not to realize this kinda shit was going to offend people; G N'R not only didn't care, they couldn't understand why people would even be offended. Anyway, I think the potential discussion is only enhanced by the funny fact that there happens to be one guy who participated in both bands. www.yahoo.com/music/appetite-reconstruction-guns-n-roses-landmark-debut-album-30-years-later-063630123.html
|
|
|
Post by firespirit on Jun 30, 2018 9:47:22 GMT -5
I remember when Appetite first came out in 87 the LA Times gave it a mediocre review. Then like a year later after it started selling like hotcakes Robert Hilburn re-reviewed it, and he gushed all over it...
|
|
|
Post by raccoon on Jun 30, 2018 13:15:02 GMT -5
Interesting article below that should have been written around this time last year, as that would have marked the 30th anniversary of the release of "Appetite for Destruction", but appears to be coming out now because there's some high dollar rerelease package coming out. (In keeping with the band's preferred timeline, that appears to be about a year too late.) Anyway, I think the potential discussion is only enhanced by the funny fact that there happens to be one guy who participated in both bands. www.yahoo.com/music/appetite-reconstruction-guns-n-roses-landmark-debut-album-30-years-later-063630123.htmlI read this article and was struck by the intervention to rescue Slash from his addiction. It made me think of Bob Stinson and left me feeling sad. It's too bad nobody could get through to him with tough love or by any means necessary. I'm sure they tried though. I think the fact that Guns got away with bad behavior that the Mats could not can be attributed to one reason only: record sales. When you are bringing in countless millions of dollars with chart topping singles and album sales for the label (and the entire structure behind the machine), lots of things will be forgiven.
|
|
|
Post by anarkissed on Jun 30, 2018 16:43:25 GMT -5
I think the fact that Guns got away with bad behavior that the Mats could not can be attributed to one reason only: record sales. When you are bringing in countless millions of dollars with chart topping singles and album sales for the label (and the entire structure behind the machine), lots of things will be forgiven. I guess I was thinking some bad behavior might have preceded the chart topping singles and albums. Obviously nobody cared once money was coming in. And I was also thinking in terms of how an audience would react, as opposed to the industry. I know there was always a lotta grumbling about the late and no shows and walking off the stage incidents, but I guess people kept buying anyway. (I'm talking about G N' R here.) Very occasionally, I have come across people who went to see The Mats following word of mouth about how great they were, happened to catch one of the falling down shows, lost interest, and never looked back. Of course, plenty who saw those same shows and swore it was the best live band they had ever seen. Sorry I can't properly edit the quotes within quotes. Never have figured out how to do that.
|
|
|
Post by jimmyrock on Jun 30, 2018 18:59:04 GMT -5
why the success? I think its GnR had big songs and a monster guitar player and they made videos....they are now forever part of classic rock with the Mats being a College/alternative group from the 80s
the opening to welcome to the jungle gets played at NFL stadiums, did the Matts have anything that anthemic?
|
|
|
Post by raccoon on Jun 30, 2018 20:44:43 GMT -5
I will put the songs of the Replacements up against Guns any day of the week. Guns had a HUGE promotional machine behind them that the Replacements did not have. The Replacements have way more artistic value than G n' R.
Rocket Queen? really? Schlock rock.
|
|
|
Post by anarkissed on Jul 1, 2018 1:25:08 GMT -5
why the success? I think its GnR had big songs and a monster guitar player and they made videos....they are now forever part of classic rock with the Mats being a College/alternative group from the 80s the opening to welcome to the jungle gets played at NFL stadiums, did the Matts have anything that anthemic? Well, in a better world, I might have hoped to hear "Bastards of Young" before kickoff, but what are you gonna do, eh? I think your former point is well made. Big songs, classic badass lead guitarist, and, I think, most importantly, actual fucking videos...But I think even that, at that period in time, wasn't a given...If you had brought "Welcome To The Jungle" to me in 1986, when the cool kids were listening to "new music" and Top 40 was Michael Jackson and Prince, I would have said this was way too 70's for anybody. It's pretty traditional for people to point to Nirvana as the sea change that spelled the death of the hair band. But I can remember feeling like G N' R seemed different from those, too...I don't know...Dirtier...Rawer...More real...Somewhat dangerous...Also, deep into bands like R.E.M., and The Replacements, and Husker Du at the time, it was, like, all of a sudden, I didn't have to be embarrassed to remember that I used to like Aerosmith, too...
|
|
|
Post by raccoon on Jul 1, 2018 1:43:38 GMT -5
the opening to welcome to the jungle gets played at NFL stadiums, did the Matts have anything that anthemic? Bon Jovi produced some anthem rock too. Fuck em! But seriously, I love Guns but the body of work produced by the Mats resonates with me on a much deeper level. It's why I'm on this board and not on whatever GNR board must exist somewhere. No denying Slash as a force of nature. I'll still take Bob's mangled, all-too-human solos any time. Paul's lyrics are definitely more intelligent than Guns. You underestimate the importance of the Replacements if you just call them an 80's college rock band. Their reputation and influence continue to grow. Meanwhile, Axl's gut continues to grow... P.S. Who are the Matts?
|
|
|
Post by jimmyrock on Jul 1, 2018 5:21:51 GMT -5
I will put the songs of the Replacements up against Guns any day of the week. Guns had a HUGE promotional machine behind them that the Replacements did not have. The Replacements have way more artistic value than G n' R. Rocket Queen? really? Schlock rock. I am not arguing over which band is better/I like more. It could be the promotion thing but still. Songs aside Appetite "sounds" better than any album the Mats made. Axl is a better all out rock singer than Paul. Slash wrote iconic guitar solos that will be taught to aspiring new guitar players forever, which one of Bob's are in that category? Rocket Queen? Ok, album filler. Still a safe bet more people know that than Shooting Dirty Pool. Welcome to the jungle is a huge song. Lets start there, which Mats song do you put up against it?
|
|
|
Post by jimmyrock on Jul 1, 2018 5:34:32 GMT -5
the opening to welcome to the jungle gets played at NFL stadiums, did the Matts have anything that anthemic? Bon Jovi produced some anthem rock too. Fuck em! But seriously, I love Guns but the body of work produced by the Mats resonates with me on a much deeper level. It's why I'm on this board and not on whatever GNR board must exist somewhere. No denying Slash as a force of nature. I'll still take Bob's mangled, all-too-human solos any time. Paul's lyrics are definitely more intelligent than Guns. You underestimate the importance of the Replacements if you just call them an 80's college rock band. Their reputation and influence continue to grow. Meanwhile, Axl's gut continues to grow... P.S. Who are the Matts? I'm also on this board and not a Guns board. I dont think I am underestimating the importance of the replacements. I dont think their reputation and influence is growing. They had their time and now they are a fringe group for super fans to obsess over. I believe Axl and his gut are currently selling out stadiums.
|
|
|
Post by jimmyrock on Jul 1, 2018 5:39:14 GMT -5
why the success? I think its GnR had big songs and a monster guitar player and they made videos....they are now forever part of classic rock with the Mats being a College/alternative group from the 80s the opening to welcome to the jungle gets played at NFL stadiums, did the Matts have anything that anthemic? Well, in a better world, I might have hoped to hear "Bastards of Young" before kickoff, but what are you gonna do, eh? I think your former point is well made. Big songs, classic badass lead guitarist, and, I think, most importantly, actual fucking videos...But I think even that, at that period in time, wasn't a given...If you had brought "Welcome To The Jungle" to me in 1986, when the cool kids were listening to "new music" and Top 40 was Michael Jackson and Prince, I would have said this was way too 70's for anybody. It's pretty traditional for people to point to Nirvana as the sea change that spelled the death of the hair band. But I can remember feeling like G N' R seemed different from those, too...I don't know...Dirtier...Rawer...More real...Somewhat dangerous...Also, deep into bands like R.E.M., and The Replacements, and Husker Du at the time, it was, like, all of a sudden, I didn't have to be embarrassed to remember that I used to like Aerosmith, too... yep, agree on the the timing thing. Who knows how it might have gone different. I still think they never made a great sounding album. Listen to Tim or Dont tell a sound and both sound dated. 14 songs has a timeless sound, great rock record but audience wasnt there. Actually Paul has a history of making bad sounding albums, Folker is the worst POS that I can think of thats been released by a major artist.
|
|
|
Post by jimmyrock on Jul 1, 2018 5:49:11 GMT -5
Dont tell a Soul
No. Title Writer(s) Length 1. "Talent Show" 3:32 2. "Back to Back" 3:22 3. "We'll Inherit the Earth" 4:22 4. "Achin' to Be" 3:42 5. "They're Blind" 4:37 6. "Anywhere's Better Than Here" 2:49 7. "Asking Me Lies" 3:40 8. "I'll Be You" 3:27 9. "I Won't" 2:43 10. "Rock 'N' Roll Ghost" 3:23 11. "Darlin' One"
Ok, I say songs 1, 4, 5 and 8 and maybe 11 are great songs, the rest? Filler. I dont even rememeber song 9 and I am a super fan.
|
|
|
Post by jimmyrock on Jul 1, 2018 5:53:25 GMT -5
Dont tell a Soul No. Title Writer(s) Length 1. "Talent Show" 3:32 2. "Back to Back" 3:22 3. "We'll Inherit the Earth" 4:22 4. "Achin' to Be" 3:42 5. "They're Blind" 4:37 6. "Anywhere's Better Than Here" 2:49 7. "Asking Me Lies" 3:40 8. "I'll Be You" 3:27 9. "I Won't" 2:43 10. "Rock 'N' Roll Ghost" 3:23 11. "Darlin' One" Ok, I say songs 1, 4, 5 and 8 and maybe 11 are great songs, the rest? Filler. I dont even rememeber song 9 and I am a super fan. Appetite: No. Title Length 1. "Welcome to the Jungle" 4:31 2. "It's So Easy" (Guns N' Roses, West Arkeen) 3:21 3. "Nightrain" 4:26 4. "Out ta Get Me" 4:20 5. "Mr. Brownstone" 3:46 6. "Paradise City" 6:46 Side two No. Title Length 7. "My Michelle" 3:39 8. "Think About You" 3:50 9. "Sweet Child o' Mine" 5:55 10. "You're Crazy" 3:16 11. "Anything Goes" (Guns N' Roses, Chris Weber) 3:25 12. "Rocket Queen" 6:13 oh man are we really trying to compare albums? This whole thing is great. Song 8 and 11 may be weak. So 10 of 12 songs are potentially on the rotation of a classic rock oriented radio show forever. Not bad.
|
|
|
Post by raccoon on Jul 1, 2018 12:43:48 GMT -5
[/quote]
I dont think I am underestimating the importance of the replacements. I dont think their reputation and influence is growing. They had their time and now they are a fringe group for super fans to obsess over.
[/quote]
Alternative facts
|
|
|
Post by raccoon on Jul 1, 2018 13:01:12 GMT -5
Oh how I love a good discussion board battle on a hi-jacked thread!
Also love Axl's racist, xenophobic, homophobic lyrics:
"Police and niggers, that's right Get outta my way Don't need to buy none of your Gold chains today...
Immigrants and faggots They make no sense to me They come to our country And think they'll do as they please Like start some mini-Iran Or spread some fucking disease"
Based on these lyrics I am guessing that maybe the enlightened boys in Guns will take some of the $999 each they are charging for their new bloated box set (what did they make 2 and half albums? and do you even count that piece of shit thing called 'Chinese Democracy?)and help build a wall with our fearless leader.
|
|
|
Post by jimmyrock on Jul 1, 2018 13:15:27 GMT -5
I dont think I am underestimating the importance of the replacements. I dont think their reputation and influence is growing. They had their time and now they are a fringe group for super fans to obsess over. [/quote] Alternative facts [/quote] not facts. my opinion. what is it that makes you think that their reputation and influence is growing?
|
|
|
Post by jimmyrock on Jul 1, 2018 13:16:57 GMT -5
Oh how I love a good discussion board battle on a hi-jacked thread! Also love Axl's racist, xenophobic, homophobic lyrics: "Police and niggers, that's right Get outta my way Don't need to buy none of your Gold chains today... Immigrants and faggots They make no sense to me They come to our country And think they'll do as they please Like start some mini-Iran Or spread some fucking disease" Based on these lyrics I am guessing that maybe the enlightened boys in Guns will take some of the $999 each they are charging for their new bloated box set (what did they make 2 and half albums? and do you even count that piece of shit thing called 'Chinese Democracy?)and help build a wall with our fearless leader. no defense for that from me. they made one great album. but what a great one it is.
|
|
|
Post by anarkissed on Jul 1, 2018 16:33:23 GMT -5
Oh how I love a good discussion board battle on a hi-jacked thread! Just for the record, I wasn't really positing this thread as who's better...It was more about just a couple of things I thought they had in common. Been kinda dead around here lately, so I called it "VS" because I thought it would be more likely to get people's attention...Heh...Thanks for playing along. It's funny...I can imagine a lot of hardcore Replacements fans saying that they liked some Guns 'N Roses, but not the other way around.
|
|
|
Post by anarkissed on Jul 1, 2018 16:41:22 GMT -5
>>what is it that makes you think that their reputation and influence is growing?<< At least since the Goo Goo Dolls were mainstreaming, I pretty frequently come across bands who cite The Replacements as a primary influence. Most of those aren't household names, but there is that. And though I hear bands say they loved "AFD"-era G 'N R, I've never heard anybody say their own bands were influenced by them. Maybe I'm listening to the wrong bands for that. There were some bands that aspired to be The Mats in their wake, and a lot of bands that aspired to be someone like Nirvana in their wake, but I can't recall there being a wave of people trying to sound like G 'N R after them.
|
|
|
Post by jimmyrock on Jul 1, 2018 16:56:01 GMT -5
I can imagine a lot of hardcore Replacements fans saying that they liked some Guns 'N Roses, but not the other way around. why do you think that? In my mind its a bit of a what do you know kind of thing like if you were to ask 20 people to name their favorite GnR song you'd get a lot of the same songs or I dont really like that heavy stuff, ask the same group whats their favorite replacements song and they'd ask, who? Also GnR is a hard rock big arena band and the Mats are much more indie.
|
|