TSI - anyone else's 2nd fav?

[Len Cnut]

11 minutes ago, Silverburst80 said:

It has it's moments but it kind of perfectly sums up the band in 93, disjointed and bloated. Would of been recorded in the fanciest of studios where their every need was catered to when they would have done those songs more justice having been mic'ed up at the hell house after they'd woken up from a heroin binge in 86.

I really don't think they know what their own strengths are sometimes.  I always considered their strengths to be kinda groove heavy music where they struck a balance between a powerful sound and a really danceable groove...and then kinda like classic Americana like country-tinged stuff.  The more metal-flavoured stuff they do seems to be like a band not knowing their strengths.  This is why I think Axl DC, purely sonically speaking here and with no regard for AC/DC purists, seems a fantastic idea...cuz those are songs that they can really bash the fuckin' nuts off.  I thought their cover of Jumping Jack Flash was brilliant cuz it plays right into those aforementioned strengths, groove plus power.  They're infinitely better doing rock n roll that they are leaning towards metal, and this is my personal distaste for Metal aside, it's an awful misuse of the talents of a Slash (or even an Adler) to waste them tryna sound like metalheads.  It's not enough to just do songs you like, i think.  Then again, who am i to dictate? 

I think an interesting Guns album would be like, a bit of blues, a bit of country, some groove-heavy rock n roll, kinda like a mixture of Americana, almost Stonesy if you like.  The punk thing they had a touch of in the looseness of their play and the recklessness of it...but they don't fit comfortably enough directly in that mould to warrant trying to do that shit, it's kinda there in em naturally.

Edited May 6, 2016 by Len B'stard

[Silverburst80]

6 minutes ago, Len B'stard said:

I really don't think they know what their own strengths are sometimes.  I always considered their strengths to be kinda groove heavy music where they struck a balance between a powerful sound and a really danceable groove...and then kinda like classic Americana like country-tinged stuff.  The more metal-flavoured stuff they do seems to be like a band not knowing their strengths.  This is why I think Axl DC, purely sonically speaking here and with no regard for AC/DC purists, seems a fantastic idea...cuz those are songs that they can really bash the fuckin' nuts off.  I thought their cover of Jumping Jack Flash was brilliant cuz it plays right into those aforementioned strengths, groove plus power.  They're infinitely better doing rock n roll that they are leaning towards metal, and this is my personal distaste for Metal aside, it's an awful misuse of the talents of a Slash (or even an Adler) to waste them tryna sound like metalheads.  It's not enough to just do songs you like, i think.  Then again, who am i to dictate? 

I think an interesting Guns album would be like, a bit of blues, a bit of country, some groove-heavy rock n roll, kinda like a mixture of Americana, almost Stonesy if you like. 

Yeah i mean Mr Brownstone in a nutshell is the sound you describe and if we're speaking of covers i dare any fucking band to try and capture the groove, power and straight up coolness of that song as it was laid down on Appetite, ha don't even bother. It's a interesting topic because i do love Guns diversity but when it comes down to it that's when they're at their best for me as well.

[J Dog]

I mean no disrespect, and I don't really question or poke at anyone's taste in music, we all love and hate different stuff. But honestly, I don't see how TSI can be anyone's 2nd favorite. That means it's better than both Illusions or better than one of the Illusions and AFD. That just seems almost impossible.

I do really like....Since I don't Have You, I Don't Care About You, Black Leather, Attitude, Aint it Fun and Down on the Farm.

[Ace Nova]

For me TSI will always be connected to the band breaking up.  When it was released, it was already known that they were more or less done for.  So I guess for that reason, I never gave it much of a shot.  I listened to it a dozen times when it first came out and said, "meh"....this sucks....and in hindsight, the album is ok....what really sucked is knowing that they weren't going to release an original album anytime soon.

Even today, I would rank it at the bottom of their catalog, below their live releases.  

[rickjkd1977]

Not my second favorite but I do enjoy the album. Favorites are Since I don't have you, Attitude, and Down on the farm.

[mikebones]

I think TSI reflects the lack of talent during that time.

[Tom-Ass]

12 hours ago, Free Bird said:

Not my second fav but by far not that hated as it's for most people here.

Same here.. I like it but not more than Appetite, LIES, UYI's or Live Era.. I actually listened to the whole thing all the way through a couple weeks ago for the first time in ages.

[SoundOfAGun]

I still maintain the guitars sound great on it! 

 

[Lumikki]

Ain't it fun is one of my favorite things they've ever done. I love that one. The rest on that album... not so much.

[Sprite]

13 hours ago, Juventino said:

I think part of the bad rap it gets (and some may not like the songs themselves, or the GNR versions - that's fine, their opinion and all) is because of its release. It was the last studio album of the original Guns, so you have comments like 'they're last album was a cover album', etc. Had things gone differently then it would be seen as exactly what it was meant to be - a stopgap before the new album was to come out. Take away the position as last studio release and it's a fun record of a band rocking out to some of their favourites.

Great post. I completely agree. I've said it before that I think symbolism is huge to our brains. And I think a lot of the gripe it gets is because it's seen as the last record by the "Original" group. So it has to support that load even though that wasn't its purpose. Had this been a stop gap album, and there had been another release in 96, TSI becomes much more light hearted. I mean shit, I can see the goofiness of it now and I love it for what it is. I do wish that it isn't the last release from Axl, Slash and Duff, but for what it's worth I think it's just a fun record to listen to. I've always been in the minority in that though. I also love the album because it got me into a lot of the bands including Charles Manson's music. Manson's original might be the only original I prefer out of all of GNR's cover catalog. Fan boy statement to some for sure but I could care less haha. Doesn't mean I don't like the originals. I just love the sound of Guns N Roses.

It's interesting to watch my taste in that record change as I get older. I used to view Aint it fun as one of the staples, but it's now one of my least listened to GNR songs. I am really into Raw Power now which is surprising because I used to rank it with My world.

Edited May 6, 2016 by Sprite

[Download]

8 hours ago, J Dog said:

I mean no disrespect, and I don't really question or poke at anyone's taste in music, we all love and hate different stuff. But honestly, I don't see how TSI can be anyone's 2nd favorite. That means it's better than both Illusions or better than one of the Illusions and AFD. That just seems almost impossible.

I do really like....Since I don't Have You, I Don't Care About You, Black Leather, Attitude, Aint it Fun and Down on the Farm.

Spot on really.

TSI is a great record and its always been a mystery to me, as a fan since 88, that the hardcore fan base dismisses it almost completely.

I lean towards UYI2 over Appetite, but I cant argue whichever way you wanna go, but how does TSI leapfrog Appetite or one of the illusions?

Edit: Appetite has to be my fave. I've played it so many god damn times that at this point I prefer UYI2, but it's gotta be Appetite, and then choose your Illusion

Edited May 6, 2016 by Download

[thunderram]

12 hours ago, Len B'stard said:

First of all, The Stooges, REALLY boys, you wanna cover the fuckin' Stooges?!?  You ain't fuckin' near bad enough to even touch the fuckin' Stooges.

 

Yeah, ok. If you say so.

Some people just love to live their life all alone out in left field. Whatever makes you happy, I guess.

[Silverburst80]

3 hours ago, Lumikki said:

Ain't it fun is one of my favorite things they've ever done. I love that one. The rest on that album... not so much.

I do really love Slash's soloing on that, making that guitar cry!

[Spaghetti Guy]

yes, still listen to it fairly regularly

[Len Cnut]

13 minutes ago, thunderram said:

 

Yeah, ok. If you say so.

Some people just love to live their life all alone out in left field. Whatever makes you happy, I guess.

Do you not see something oddly ironic about the fact that you're slagging me off for liking The Stooges, insinuating it's an attempt at being left field, in defence of a band that took it upon themselves to cover their song, if liking The Stooges makes me someone whoose 'all alone out in left field', all i did was spend 3 mins of my time typing, Axl and the boys spent time and money to record it on and album and put it out, where abouts on the left field does that leave them?  Or their liner notes prompt to 'do yourself a favour and check out the originals'.  I guess you're right, it must be lonely out there in left field.  

The Stooges are a million times the band Guns n Roses ever were...and they know it too.

Edited May 6, 2016 by Len B'stard

[ironicninja]

I'll bet it's not even Gilby's 2nd fav, even though it's the only one he played on

Edited May 6, 2016 by ironicninja

[Silverburst80]

1 hour ago, Sprite said:

Great post. I completely agree. I've said it before that I think symbolism is huge to our brains. And I think a lot of the gripe it gets is because it's seen as the last record by the "Original" group. So it has to support that load even though that wasn't its purpose. Had this been a stop gap album, and there had been another release in 96, TSI becomes much more light hearted. I mean shit, I can see the goofiness of it now and I love it for what it is. I do wish that it isn't the last release from Axl, Slash and Duff, but for what it's worth I think it's just a fun record to listen to. I've always been in the minority in that though. I also love the album because it got me into a lot of the bands including Charles Manson's music. Manson's original might be the only original I prefer out of all of GNR's cover catalog. Fan boy statement to some for sure but I could care less haha. Doesn't mean I don't like the originals. I just love the sound of Guns N Roses.

It's interesting to watch my taste in that record change as I get older. I used to view Aint it fun as one of the staples, but it's now one of my least listened to GNR songs. I am really into Raw Power now which is surprising because I used to rank it with My world.

No-ones really touched on Look at your game haha, i quite like it as un-PC as that is. Along with I don't care about you, New Rose and Ain't it fun, they're ok as well.

[thunderram]

2 hours ago, Len B'stard said:

Do you not see something oddly ironic about the fact that you're slagging me off for liking The Stooges, insinuating it's an attempt at being left field, in defence of a band that took it upon themselves to cover their song, if liking The Stooges makes me someone whoose 'all alone out in left field', all i did was spend 3 mins of my time typing, Axl and the boys spent time and money to record it on and album and put it out, where abouts on the left field does that leave them?  Or their liner notes prompt to 'do yourself a favour and check out the originals'.  I guess you're right, it must be lonely out there in left field.  

The Stooges are a million times the band Guns n Roses ever were...and they know it too.

 

Nothing oddly ironic about it at all -- because I'm not doing what you're suggesting. I'm a fan of The Stooges too, and punk rock in general.

What I'm "slagging" you off about is your last comment and the over-the-top hyperbole. You may believe it, but you certainly don't represent the majority -- hence the reason for the left field comment.

[Len Cnut]

1 minute ago, thunderram said:

 

Nothing oddly ironic about it at all -- because I'm not doing what you're suggesting. I'm a fan of The Stooges too, and punk rock in general.

What I'm "slagging" you off about is your last comment and the over-the-top hyperbole. You may believe it, but you certainly don't represent the majority -- hence the reason for the left field comment.

And of course majority opinion = fact.  No, i didnt think so either.  There aint an album GnR made that can stand up to Raw Power, not in quality, not in influence, not in originality, not in any sense, there's a reason why bands like GnR look up to The Stooges.  And if you think there's anything vaguely left field about rating The Stooges in 2016 well then I'm afraid its time you flip your calendar along a piece.

[Iron MikeyJ]

2nd fav? Nope. But I tell you what it is, it is the Axl and Slash album. Those two NEVER sounded better than they do in that album, so that alone makes it VERY appealing. But overall, the material is a little thin imo. No way I can put it a head of the Illusions or even Lies for that matter. But it CAN give CD a run for it's money.

[Iron MikeyJ]

Human Being is a fun song. I can't understand what the he'll he is saying half the time, but it's probably the song from TSI I've been jamming to the most the last year or so.

Before that Black Leather was ALWAYS in my gnr playlists.

[thunderram]

3 minutes ago, Len B'stard said:

And of course majority opinion = fact.  No, i didnt think so either.  There aint an album GnR made that can stand up to Raw Power, not in quality, not in influence, not in originality, not in any sense, there's a reason why bands like GnR look up to The Stooges.  And if you think there's anything vaguely left field about rating The Stooges in 2016 well then I'm afraid its time you flip your calendar along a piece.

 

Of course a majority opinion doesn't equal fact. But neither does the opinion of the minority or just one. You positioned you opinion as fact, did you not? In reality, it is a left field opinion hence my comment and why I originally replied.

Furthermore, the majority opinion, while still not fact, carries a lot more weight and credibility than the minority or one. Majority rules. That's how laws and codes of conduct get made, my friend. So I'm not sure what your point is in regard to that.

GN'R looks up to The Stooges and other bands of that era because they came before them and were influences, not necessarily because they are better or more accomplished.

Lastly, how many copies of Raw Power sold compared to Appetite for Destruction? To quote you "there's a reason why" AFD is one of the best selling albums of all-time and Raw Power isn't even close.

In what is largely a subjective argument over personal preference, the above at least lends something concrete and measurable to discussion.

In summary, I have no problem with your opinion, as far out in left field as I believe it to be. I just take issue with it being presented as unequivocal truth when it's anything but.

[Sprite]

15 minutes ago, thunderram said:

 

Of course a majority opinion doesn't equal fact. But neither does the opinion of the minority or just one. You positioned you opinion as fact, did you not? In reality, it is a left field opinion hence my comment and why I originally replied.

Furthermore, the majority opinion, while still not fact, carries a lot more weight and credibility than the minority or one. Majority rules. That's how laws and codes of conduct get made, my friend. So I'm not sure what your point is in regard to that.

GN'R looks up to The Stooges and other bands of that era because they came before them and were influences, not necessarily because they are better or more accomplished.

Lastly, how many copies of Raw Power sold compared to Appetite for Destruction? To quote you "there's a reason why" AFD is one of the best selling albums of all-time and Raw Power isn't even close.

In what is largely a subjective argument over personal preference, the above at least lends something concrete and measurable to discussion.

In summary, I have no problem with your opinion, as far out in left field as I believe it to be. I just take issue with it being presented as unequivocal truth when it's anything but.

So happy on all the points you made. I was reading and wanted to jump in but you covered t perfectly. Len likes to argue anything and he seems to have quite a distaste for a lot of guns material, or at least is constantly on the prowl to let you know someone is better or Axl is a "cock". I still think he's a great poster though. Get ready- he's about to pick apart everything wrong with this too.

Back on subject, of course the stooges were a great band and highly influential. Hence the reason they were covered on TSI by a band they had a huge influence over. But to go out and say "there ain't an album gnr made that can stand up to the stooges in quality" is the funniest, most left field thing I've read all day!

Edited May 7, 2016 by Sprite

[RONIN]

Never liked this Album much but Ain't it Fun is great. Easily one of their best covers. It's also worth pointing out that IMHO the mixing is so much better here than illusions as is Matt's drumming. Axl and Slash are at the peak of their abilities here even though the material isn't a great fit.

That '96 album would have been killer had it come out -- probably would have featured the last prime era Axl vocals.

[thunderram]

1 hour ago, Sprite said:

So happy on all the points you made. I was reading and wanted to jump in but you covered t perfectly. Len likes to argue anything and he seems to have quite a distaste for a lot of guns material, or at least is constantly on the prowl to let you know someone is better or Axl is a "cock".

 

Thanks Sprite.

You touched on something else I fail to understand and have been meaning to comment on. The fact that there are so many members of this site -- a Guns N' Roses themed site no less -- that seemingly do nothing but criticize the band and it's members ad nauseam. I often read comments about how this band or that band is better or this vocalist/guitarist or that vocalist/guitarist is far superior. I wonder WTF these people are doing here? I mean, it seems like these people don't even like GN'R, so why would you come to a fan site dedicated to --- well, GUNS N' ROSES?

The easy answer is that they are merely T-ROLLS with nothing better to do in life. And, for some, that's likely the case. But many of them proclaim to be diehard fans of the band. If so, I don't get it. Hell, even if you are just a casual fan -- why would you bother coming here? I would like to believe the vast majority that took the time to sign up for this site actually have a strong liking and addiction to this band that they want to share with like-minded individuals. Unfortunately, it doesn't often seem this way. I've only been a member of this site for 4 months, but I've seen enough already to come to that conclusion.

I'm not saying that it's unfair to be critical or that everything has to be positive. I just don't get why someone would bother spending time here unless they were a huge fan and as a huge fan I don't get how someone could constantly believe other bands and band members are so superior.

Someone please 'splain this to me

Edited May 7, 2016 by thunderram