Were they actually the biggest band in their prime?

[tsinindy]

54 minutes ago, -Jaro- said:

Metallica played in Euro Stadiums in 1991 and 1993 (Wherever we may roam and Nowhere Else to Roam tours), also they played that Monster rock in Moscow in 1991 (nobody knows how many people) - so, yes - they were on top then.

AC/DC also played some stadiums in 1991...

 

Understand and maybe that was the case in Europe, but not the U.S.  Met was on the decline and Guns took their spot basically.   

Lets recall Met put the black album out a month or so before UYI came out.

maybe there is some shading of my memory due to time. But I recall way more hype and excitement surrounding GnR and their records and tour than Metallica.

[-Jaro-]

I cannot argue that - I was just 11 when UYI released and didn't have any idea about global scene - just about my close enviroment...

 

[tbaugerud]

Guns N Roses was the biggest spectacle/event in the rock world back then.

I remember it very well.

That said, GnR wasn't the biggest gig around. That was Michael Jackson. He was almost from a different world.

That said, U2, Red Hot Chili Peppers and the rest of the BIG bands that occupied the vacuum created by GnR's break-up and Metallica's decline, were not even in the same division back in the early 90s.

GnR was on their way to becoming the next Stones, like f.ex. Ozzy O. has said several times.

Personally, I have never fallen for the Whole "grunge took over" thing. I think that what happened, was that when the KING(s), GnR (and perhaps Metallica) fell away, the rock scene took a new direction, or rather; it split.

Aerosmith and Bon Jovi somewhat took over the mainstream rock market again, while several new directions hit the ground running. Nirvana was AS MUCH a product of this, as it was their own brilliance. Punk rock began eating its way into the mainstream, With bands like Greenday and The Offspring. Britpop/Britpop also got its Renaissance, with Oasis at the culprit, followed by f.ex. Blur and Pulp.

Hip hop became more and more mainstream as well, so the whole industry was changing. Gone were the 80s hair bands and synth pop. This was a new beginning.

Nirvana was, indeed, the biggest alternative underground band ever, and became world famous quite quickly when they took off. However, they were mere kings in a portion of a once much larger country, now divided.

Beatles, Rolling Stones, Elvis, Michael Jackson, Madonna(?), and to a degree GnR (and maaaaaybe Metallica) were virtually on top of the world.

IMHO, nobody has been since. 

[Ace Nova]

14 hours ago, BadApples87 said:

Of all acts...Grateful Dead were tops in 1991 for tours.  U2 was number 1 in 92-93 for tours.  That doesn't take album sales into consideration.  But, I assume that this thread is referring to Hard Rock/Metal acts.  But I could be wrong, since I did not start the thread.

I have a ton of 'dead heads' as friends but the reason the dead lead in tour dates is because of the number of shows they did and $20 ticket prices...not to mention a large portion of their crowd would follow them and go to dozens of shows per year.  Different animal, IMO.

[Sprite]

15 minutes ago, Kasanova King said:

I have a ton of 'dead heads' as friends but the reason the dead lead in tour dates is because of the number of shows they did and $20 ticket prices...not to mention a large portion of their crowd would follow them and go to dozens of shows per year.  Different animal, IMO.

It's always been rumored you can get the best acid by following the Grateful Deads tours!

[Ace Nova]

3 minutes ago, Sprite said:

It's always been rumored you can get the best acid by following the Grateful Deads tours!

lol....that and as many nitris balloons you can handle....

[Apollo]

15 hours ago, dontdamnmeuyi2015 said:

 

Just like the Rolling Stones before them changed the sound of rock, GNR did the same thing 20 years later.

How so?

Are you saying that GnR changed what was popular at the time (hair metal, pop, real metal) into the grunge scene?

GnR was on top for a very short time. What bands or sound did the inspire? What musical change did they inspire, and if there was one, how come it only lasted maybe a year?

You can say that GnR was born from a bastardization of Queen, Aerosmith and the Rolling Stones. What musical babies did Guns n Roses produce? Avenged 7 Fold? Matchbox 20? 3 Doors Down?

GnR is my favorite band of all time, hands down, nobody even comes closes. But I think people sometimes over inflate the influence or power the band had in the music world. 

*****

As somebody who was alive during the era, it seems that U2 and GnR were the biggest rock bands of that  couple year period. Metallica was right there. And of course GnR's reign was quickly diluted by the influence of Nirvana, Pearl Jam and the rest of grunge. 

Killer Albums by GnR, Skid Row, Bon Jovi, Def Leppard and Motley Crue could have extended the hard rock / hair metal reign for a couple more years and helped battle grunge. But unfortunately, that didn't happen and we got a decade of grunge and shitty bland rock music in the 90s. 

[uncivil war]

IMO, for my age group (I'm late 30's now) Guns were THE hugest band on the planet at the time. U2, INXS and MJ were up there, for sure, but they were "old farts". No other band generated as much hype, controversy and excitement as GNR. 

[MYWIFEMYLIFE]

still is.

[Sprite]

7 hours ago, Apollo said:

How so?

Are you saying that GnR changed what was popular at the time (hair metal, pop, real metal) into the grunge scene?

GnR was on top for a very short time. What bands or sound did the inspire? What musical change did they inspire, and if there was one, how come it only lasted maybe a year?

You can say that GnR was born from a bastardization of Queen, Aerosmith and the Rolling Stones. What musical babies did Guns n Roses produce? Avenged 7 Fold? Matchbox 20? 3 Doors Down?

 

Seems like your criteria of judging a band's success is based off of who they influenced? I guess that's ok but it really doesn't tell the whole story. Who did Lynyrd Skynyrd influence? Best Southern Rock band of all time, hands down. Didn't really have much of an influence on pop music. Does that take away from the moment you hear Call me the Breeze blast on the speakers? 

Rock n roll was still rock n roll in the 80s. So just the era GNR was around in sort of lent itself to that old school sound, especially pre grunge era. It was perfect for that moment, short as it may have been. And sure it's dated as fuck in retrospect, and even in comparison to Nevermind 4 years later. But most great music is dated by today's standards. To me that adds the the art. It makes it what it is today. Right now. That is all we have. 

The grunge style coming into scene in the late 80's/early 90's was being built up for sometime I imagine. I don't think it was because of GNR not having enough pop culture influence or people "tired of their excess". Rock just took a different turn with Nevermind,  just like it took a different turn with Creed, or matchbox 20 and early Coldplay. Or Chuck Berry, Elvis, The Beatles to Sabbath. I don't think Physical Graffiti was any less enjoyed because Sabbath brought heavy metal to the forefront 5 years prior. It's always changing. It's all just evolving sounds that are representative of the culture's reflection.

What went down with Grunge in the early 90's probably had more to do with the Regan years than any band or music style out of the 80s. It was that breakaway from the tradition. Or lashing out at tradition. It was a new, dark outlet for an underground generation who felt they weren't represented, that had been building throughout the culture over the last decade. Don't let fox news fool you, there was an underworld to the Regan years. Whereas GNR may have the "drugs, exess, cool man" vibe, Nirvana and Grunge sort of brought about the downside of that to the forefront, which in my mind is directly related to the War on Drugs, hence the Regan comment. To me this has always been the key to that rise. Also, you can't take away from Nirvana, that was just a killer, perfect album. This also might explain why Grunge was never as big outside of America.

Finally, to me, it's not about who you inspired, it's about the music you made. And Guns N Roses made some timeless art, far surpassing that of most of their peers in the late 80s and early 90s, as far as record sales and my own personal opinion are concerned. Today, at least in my circles, GNR are one of the few bands from that "rock" era that really wields any sort of respect from the general public who aren't the biggest hard rock fans traditionally. Unless you are one of about 10 Rock and Roll bands (Zep, Stones, Nirvana, Queen, ACDC, Guns,  etc.) you are sort of lumped in to that "never heard of" or "That guy from Rock of love's era music"! 

Edited March 2, 2016 by Sprite

[sidman69]

they were definietely one of the biggest bands of 91 and 92. By 93 they were pretty irrelevant in the states. Europe and elsewhere not so much. 

[DieselDaisy]

The Stones were not touring between 1990 and 1994.

[EvanG]

On 2-3-2016 at 1:20 AM, Original said:

Yeah- he's cool.  They are big.  But the Foo's are no GnR circa UYI's era.  Dave isn't a household name. I was 22 in the UYI era, even my old man new who Axl and "that Slash guy" we're.   

In Europe the Foos are really big... I think they sold out two Wembley shows in a row in 2008 and since then they've only gotten bigger. Definitely one of the biggest rock bands of the last years. I don't know if they are bigger than GnR were in the early 90's, but it would come close.

And Dave himself is definitely a household name... he played on almost every record, from Lemmy to Tenacious D to Queens of the Stone Age to forming a musical project with McCartney, etc. He is in every music documentary from the last 15 years (it's even annoying), he played for Obama a couple of times... I can go on.

Edited March 3, 2016 by EvanG

[dario27]

YES THEY WERE.

[Lindy100]

Hell yeah 

 

[Apollo]

50 minutes ago, Sprite said:

Seems like your criteria of judging a band's success is based off of who they influenced? I guess that's ok but it really doesn't tell the whole story. Who did Lynyrd Skynyrd influence? Best Southern Rock band of all time, hands down. Didn't really have much of an influence on pop music. Does that take away from the moment you hear Call me the Breeze blast on the speakers? 

Rock n roll was still rock n roll in the 80s. So just the era GNR was around in sort of lent itself to that old school sound, especially pre grunge era. It was perfect for that moment, short as it may have been. And sure it's dated as fuck in retrospect, and even in comparison to Nevermind 4 years later. But most great music is dated by today's standards. To me that adds the the art. It makes it what it is today. Right now. That is all we have. 

The grunge style coming into scene in the late 80's/early 90's was being built up for sometime I imagine. I don't think it was because of GNR not having enough pop culture influence or people "tired of their excess". Rock just took a different turn with Nevermind,  just like it took a different turn with Creed, or matchbox 20 and early Coldplay. Or Chuck Berry, Elvis, The Beatles to Sabbath. I don't think Physical Graffiti was any less enjoyed because Sabbath brought heavy metal to the forefront 5 years prior. It's always changing. It's all just evolving sounds that are representative of the culture's reflection.

What went down with Grunge in the early 90's probably had more to do with the Regan years than any band or music style out of the 80s. It was that breakaway from the tradition. Or lashing out at tradition. It was a new, dark outlet for an underground generation who felt they weren't represented, that had been building throughout the culture over the last decade. Don't let fox news fool you, there was an underworld to the Regan years. Whereas GNR may have the "drugs, exess, cool man" vibe, Nirvana and Grunge sort of brought about the downside of that to the forefront, which in my mind is directly related to the War on Drugs, hence the Regan comment. To me this has always been the key to that rise. Also, you can't take away from Nirvana, that was just a killer, perfect album. This also might explain why Grunge was never as big outside of America.

Finally, to me, it's not about who you inspired, it's about the music you made. And Guns N Roses made some timeless art, far surpassing that of most of their peers in the late 80s and early 90s, as far as record sales and my own personal opinion are concerned. Today, at least in my circles, GNR are one of the few bands from that "rock" era that really wields any sort of respect from the general public who aren't the biggest hard rock fans traditionally. Unless you are one of about 10 Rock and Roll bands (Zep, Stones, Nirvana, Queen, ACDC, Guns,  etc.) you are sort of lumped in to that "never heard of" or "That guy from Rock of love's era music"! 

Strong and logical post. 

And that's not the sole way that I determine a band's success. I was responding to somebody who specifically said that GnR changed the sound of music. 

There wasn't a "sound" of rock that transitioned between hair metal and grunge. That's the "area" of music that GnR would have influenced or changed. 

Mum curious as to what sound did GnR "change" rock to.  I was 21 and in college when Illusions came out and was a diehard rock music fan. I don't recall a change I. The sound of rock sparked by GnR. Unless you give them credit for starting grunge?

[uncivil war]

4 hours ago, Apollo said:

Strong and logical post. 

And that's not the sole way that I determine a band's success. I was responding to somebody who specifically said that GnR changed the sound of music. 

There wasn't a "sound" of rock that transitioned between hair metal and grunge. That's the "area" of music that GnR would have influenced or changed. 

Mum curious as to what sound did GnR "change" rock to.  I was 21 and in college when Illusions came out and was a diehard rock music fan. I don't recall a change I. The sound of rock sparked by GnR. Unless you give them credit for starting grunge?

If you look at 80's rock, then compare it to 90's rock (not grunge), there is a big difference in the overall sound, attitude and subject matter, and I believe GNR played a huge role in that. 

[gunsguy]

9 hours ago, uncivil war said:

IMO, for my age group (I'm late 30's now) Guns were THE hugest band on the planet at the time. U2, INXS and MJ were up there, for sure, but they were "old farts". No other band generated as much hype, controversy and excitement as GNR. 

This, I have yet to see anything like it.  Of course things are much different now with internet and such. 

[DieselDaisy]

12 minutes ago, uncivil war said:

If you look at 80's rock, then compare it to 90's rock (not grunge), there is a big difference in the overall sound, attitude and subject matter, and I believe GNR played a huge role in that. 

I agree with you but some, of course, would argue that Guns N' Roses were on the opposing cricket club in the war against 1980's rock - Kurt for one.

Edited March 3, 2016 by DieselDaisy

[-Jaro-]

9 hours ago, DieselDaisy said:

The Stones were not touring between 1990 and 1994.

Yes, but Stones were/are/will be so big that their lack of touring for 4-5 years couldn't bring them down...

I'm not even fan of them, and still know/like more their songs than GNR even released...

[Ace Nova]

13 hours ago, Apollo said:

Strong and logical post. 

And that's not the sole way that I determine a band's success. I was responding to somebody who specifically said that GnR changed the sound of music. 

There wasn't a "sound" of rock that transitioned between hair metal and grunge. That's the "area" of music that GnR would have influenced or changed. 

Mum curious as to what sound did GnR "change" rock to.  I was 21 and in college when Illusions came out and was a diehard rock music fan. I don't recall a change I. The sound of rock sparked by GnR. Unless you give them credit for starting grunge?

Maybe I'm not understanding your question...are you saying there was no difference in G N'R's sound from the glam bands of the 80's?

G N' R was the transition from glam to grunge...they had a unique sound...raw and real...harder than the glam bands....which lead to the transition to grunge for a lot of American fans.  It's almost as if G N' R paved the road from glam to real.  Before G N' R it was cool for guys to wear makeup, dress like chicks and sing about fake, made up fantasies....after G N' R it was cool to be real and raw....and that really helped the grunge scene takeover. 

[dalsh327]

1990 article about Sub Pop, over a year before Nirvana became a household name.  Most of the attention was on Soundgarden. 

http://articles.latimes.com/1990-04-22/entertainment/ca-227_1_seattle-sound

2 years later, still a support act. 

 

[tsinindy]

11 minutes ago, Kasanova King said:

Maybe I'm not understanding your question...are you saying there was no difference in G N'R's sound from the glam bands of the 80's?

G N' R was the transition from glam to grunge...they had a unique sound...raw and real...harder than the glam bands....which lead to the transition to grunge for a lot of American fans.  It's almost as if G N' R paved the road from glam to real.  Before G N' R it was cool for guys to wear makeup, dress like chicks and sing about fake, made up fantasies....after G N' R it was cool to be real and raw....and that really helped the grunge scene takeover. 

This is actually a fairly reasonable explanation of the shift from hair metal bands ruling the rock world to grunge taking over.

Guns N Roses killed the very thing they were born from....once Appetite hit, hair metal/glam all that crap was done bc everyone realized it was a facade, not real. GnR was real, there was no bullshit to them.  It was organic and authentic.  Good bye glam and hair metal.

It would have been interesting to see GnR stick around while grunge became hugely popular...how would that have worked out for both genres?

Keep in mind too that when Metallica and the world lost Cliff they lost their center and moral compass and never really stayed true to themselves from that point on...Metallica inevitably became the very thing it opposed and grunge rebelled against.

Edited March 3, 2016 by tsinindy

[D-GenerationX]

In their late 80s / early 90s prime, it was either GNR or U2 with the most legit claim for world's biggest band.

Edited March 3, 2016 by D-GenerationX

[Apollo]

13 minutes ago, Kasanova King said:

Maybe I'm not understanding your question...are you saying there was no difference in G N'R's sound from the glam bands of the 80's?

G N' R was the transition from glam to grunge...they had a unique sound...raw and real...harder than the glam bands....which lead to the transition to grunge for a lot of American fans.  It's almost as if G N' R paved the road from glam to real.  Before G N' R it was cool for guys to wear makeup, dress like chicks and sing about fake, made up fantasies....after G N' R it was cool to be real and raw....and that really helped the grunge scene takeover. 

That's the question I was asking. 

 That's a tough transition though. I mostly agree with you. 

But maybe it's actually a deeper explanation. Appetite showed that kids wanted hard rock with substance. But kids/bands were still glamming it up in 88-89-90. 

I think it was more the pretencious and Axl's ego of the Illusions that led kids to go towards grunge. While you and I loved Estranged and November Rain type videos - there was nothing street and real about them. Spending millions of dollars on videos with dolphins.....there is nothing hardcore about that at all. 

Axl's ego turned a lot of people off. 

So I suppose I can agree that GnR helped pave the way from hair bands to grunge. In a good way (appetite) and a bad way (illusions). 

Though I'm sure grunge fans would laugh at the idea of gnr fans giving GnR fhe credit for starting grunge music.