Is GNR the most underrated band ever?

[Tom2112]

They certainly aren't underrated. They are however cast aside by a lot due to the look, look of some of the videos, and past nonsense with Axl. 

[Len Cnut]

28 minutes ago, Tom2112 said:

They certainly aren't underrated. They are however cast aside by a lot due to the look, look of some of the videos, and past nonsense with Axl. 

Slash and Izzy are the only ones who had like an enduringly cool look.  Slash with the leather trousers and cowboy boots, a young Slash would look cool even today, same with Iz', Iz' always looked to me like a fuckin' jazz musician at some after hours club in the 40s where they loosened up, took their ties and jackets off and just jammed for the sake of it.  Axls, Slashes look are very much of the time and Duff looked alright, good but if you saw someone like Duff walking down the street now he'd just look like a stereotypical greaser.

[Silverburst80]

4 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

Slash and Izzy are the only ones who had like an enduringly cool look.  Slash with the leather trousers and cowboy boots, a young Slash would look cool even today, same with Iz', Iz' always looked to me like a fuckin' jazz musician at some after hours club in the 40s where they loosened up, took their ties and jackets off and just jammed for the sake of it.  Axls, Slashes look are very much of the time and Duff looked alright, good but if you saw someone like Duff walking down the street now he'd just look like a stereotypical greaser.

Funny Axl said after watching the Ritz show that he thought they looked ridiculous when it's the coolest they ever looked...then again he said he hates how his voice sounds on Lies. He probably thinks his gear on the Illusion tour looked fantastic and his Chinese voice is the best.... I'll never figure that fella out

[UsedYourIllusion]

9 hours ago, acor said:

In this particular thread you had someone's claiming that CD>>>Lies, but my statement about kickass rocker being better than bloated ballads is crazy???

Double Talkin' Jive, Dust N' Bones, Right Next Door to Hell, Perfect Crime, Back Off Bitch, Bad Obsession, The Garden, Garden of Eden, Dead Horse, Bad Apples, Don't Damn Me, Coma, Civil War, 14 Years, Pretty Tied Up, Black Leather, Ain't Going Down, You Could Be Mine are ballads? I only mentioned 2 or 3 ballads.. but I guess all of UYI are ballads

[shotsfired cro]

23 hours ago, Kwick1 said:

I saw the Black Crowes in '91 and rather than face the cop that was yelling at me because I was walking outside holding a beer, I ran to the dumpster. Who was at the dumpster drinking and smoking? The Crowes 😊 I calmly finished my beer and wished them a great show and walked back to the waiting cop. The rest of that night is a memory I don't remember but I didn't wake up in jail. 

The Crowes are great guys. Especially Rich.  Rich and the band had other plans that involved Ed too, unfortunately, Chris woke up one morning and asked his wife to write Rich an mail that involved his and Rich part increase on behalf of Tom's.  There was no way Rich would have done that.  As a matter of fact, Rich is still pissed Chris pulled the plug on everyone rather to have 25th anniversary/farawell tour.  Chris began acting weirdly way before pulling the plug though...He began going to Greatful Dead places, befrending GD friends and people, listening to only GD...as Rich said 'He seemed to have lost it in GD world. He wouldn't do anything that didn't involve GD.  He really belives he is in Greatful Dead. He went insane'.

[RussTCB]

15 minutes ago, shotsfired cro said:

The Crowes are great guys. Especially Rich.  Rich and the band had other plans that involved Ed too, unfortunately, Chris woke up one morning and asked his wife to write Rich an mail that involved his and Rich part increase on behalf of Tom's.  There was no way Rich would have done that.  As a matter of fact, Rich is still pissed Chris pulled the plug on everyone rather to have 25th anniversary/farawell tour.  Chris began acting weirdly way before pulling the plug though...He began going to Greatful Dead places, befrending GD friends and people, listening to only GD...as Rich said 'He seemed to have lost it in GD world. He wouldn't do anything that didn't involve GD.  He really belives he is in Greatful Dead. He went insane'.

Yep. BTW, I believe this song has to be about Chris:

 

[Old_school_gnr_fan]

On 7/2/2019 at 4:38 PM, MYWIFEMYLIFE said:

Their music, lyrics, performances are second to none, they did some of the greatest tours and albums ever but they never got the respect they deserved, what do you think? 

They went from being unknowns outside of Los Angeles in early 1987, to the biggest band in America by the summer of 1988. By the time the 'Illusion' records came to light, they were the biggest band in the world. It was the push by MTV and radio for grunge/alternative, as well as GN'R's own internal destruction, that caused them to lose that title.

The only time I would have considered Guns N' Roses underrated was after the release of AFD, and the nearly yearlong climb to superstardom. The album was just way too good to be ignored.

[Ant]

 

5 hours ago, shotsfired cro said:

He began going to Greatful Dead places, befrending GD friends and people, listening to only GD...as Rich said 'He seemed to have lost it in GD world. He wouldn't do anything that didn't involve GD.  He really belives he is in Greatful Dead. He went insane'.

 Man what is it with that band... it's like Scientology. Fuuuck that, man.

[Powderfinger]

10 hours ago, EvanG said:

I wouldn't call it underrated, but they did kinda become a ''joke'' in the 90's because of Axl's diva behaviour, the ridiculous videos, and typical rock star stuff that wasn't popular anymore after those so-called ''grunge'' bands became big and it was all about relating to the kids and having the guys next door being in a successful rock band. GnR weren't the guys next door with their antics and how they looked like. When Slash was doing the European festivals with Snakepit by 1995 it was kinda like.... ''seriously? that guy from GnR is playing here?'' It was almost like having Bon Jovi on the bill.

Once there was this rock n' roll band
Rollin' on the streets
Time went by and it became a joke
We just needed more and more fulfilling... uh-huh
Time went by and it all went up in smoke

[tadskis]

They can be called underrated in certain way as their arguably best compositions (RQ, Coma, Breakdown, Don't Damn Me) were never released in any form separately and are not that widely known to casual listeners, but the band in the long run overshadowing such pop icons as Madonna or MJ while having the most watched billion view videos from both 80's and 90's is hard to call overall underrated.

Edited July 4, 2019 by tadskis
add on

[Silverburst80]

On 04/07/2019 at 6:53 PM, EvanG said:

I wouldn't call it underrated, but they did kinda become a ''joke'' in the 90's because of Axl's diva behaviour, the ridiculous videos, and typical rock star stuff that wasn't popular anymore after those so-called ''grunge'' bands became big and it was all about relating to the kids and having the guys next door being in a successful rock band. GnR weren't the guys next door with their antics and how they looked like. When Slash was doing the European festivals with Snakepit by 1995 it was kinda like.... ''seriously? that guy from GnR is playing here?'' It was almost like having Bon Jovi on the bill.

Reminds me of the Stone Roses thing, at the time " oh god we can't be seen on stage with that guy!" but recently Mani said it might have been cool after all. Shows how much damage they'd done to themselves at that point and I think if you asked someone in 96 if they'd be selling out stadiums worldwide in 2019 they'd laugh in your face.

Edited July 6, 2019 by Silverburst80

[DieselDaisy]

Guns are a strange one in that they were already almost an anachronism during their heyday. They probably had about two years (1986-87) when they were genuinely cool, pertaining to the zeitgeist at the time of course which believed strippers dancing on stage was the way to go about proceedings, and from then on they looked like a huge dinosaur, ''the last of the power balladeers''. But commercially they were peaking (Illusion tour, November Rain) when they were already becoming a cultural embarrassment, and they looked far more embarrassing in 1992 than they did in 1986-7 when they were punks and had Stradlin's rooster influence at least so it is not as if they were toning down the excess and ridiculous posturing, rather they were amplifying it.

So Rose was putting on his little underpants at the exact moment your Vedders and Corbains were breaking through, and you already had the beginnings of Britpop! It was a remarkable chronological mishap.

[Len Cnut]

22 minutes ago, Silverburst80 said:

Reminds me of the Stone Roses thing, at the time " oh god we can't be seen on stage with that guy!" but recently Mani said it might have been cool after all. Shows how much damage they'd done to themselvesat that point

The thing about iconic, in the strict sense of the word, like a recognisable iconography, is that you fall foul of that thing of becoming cartooney.  The Ramones had it...but when your iconography is like...grand, like a massive top hat and big stringey hair, you become difficult to decontextualise.  When your iconography is understated then you can slip in and odd of different situations but quite frankly Slash would look stupid onstage in his Slash garb in the middle of a bunch of Manc' baggies in the same way Gene Simmons would look stupid onstage with...I dunno, Marvin Gaye.

But perhaps I'm wrong cuz George Clinton had a very grand sort of iconography and I could see him getting in the with The Roses, y'know, the funk connection and that. George Clintons an odd one though.  If Slash got out of his GnR kit then maybe.  A young Slash, a very young Slash, he'd look cool alongside The Roses.  See people always pelt me when I say this but image/clothes mean a lot in pop music.

See that Slash would look cool alongside The Roses. 

[Len Cnut]

14 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

Guns are a strange one in that they were already almost an anachronism during their heyday. They probably had about two years (1986-87) when they were genuinely cool, pertaining to the zeitgeist at the time of course which believed strippers dancing on stage was the way to go about proceedings, and from then on they looked like a huge dinosaur, ''the last of the power balladeers''. But commercially they were peaking (Illusion tour, November Rain) when they were already becoming a cultural embarrassment, and they looked far more embarrassing in 1992 than they did in 1986-7 when they were punks and had Stradlin's rooster influence at least so it is not as if they were toning down the excess and ridiculous posturing, rather they were amplifying it.

So Rose was putting on his little underpants at the exact moment your Vedders and Corbains were breaking through, and you already had the beginnings of Britpop! It was a remarkable chronological mishap.

I think sense of humour has a lot to do with it.  The Red Hot Chili Peppers were from the same area as GnR but the reason The Chilis (back then especially) were so cool in the sense of being contemporary whereas Guns weren't is because Guns took themselves very seriously.  Look at any picture of Guns from back in the day, they are very much posing and very like...y'know, trying to come across as cool, which they were to be fair, to me anyway...but that sort of seriousness about that stuff had very much been punctured long ago. 

[Silverburst80]

9 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

The thing about iconic, in the strict sense of the word, like a recognisable iconography, is that you fall foul of that thing of becoming cartooney.  The Ramones had it...but when your iconography is like...grand, like a massive top hat and big stringey hair, you become difficult to decontextualise.  When your iconography is understated then you can slip in and odd of different situations but quite frankly Slash would look stupid onstage in his Slash garb in the middle of a bunch of Manc' baggies in the same way Gene Simmons would look stupid onstage with...I dunno, Marvin Gaye.

But perhaps I'm wrong cuz George Clinton had a very grand sort of iconography and I could see him getting in the with The Roses, y'know, the funk connection and that. George Clintons an odd one though.  If Slash got out of his GnR kit then maybe.  A young Slash, a very young Slash, he'd look cool alongside The Roses.  See people always pelt me when I say this but image/clothes mean a lot in pop music.

See that Slash would look cool alongside The Roses. 

Yeah visually it would have been weird, but Slash has the funk man it coulda been cool and I think he woulda been respectful and not gone full Slash mode. I could imagine him tearing the arse out of Love Spreads...fuck that BC Rich is tasty btw

Edited July 6, 2019 by Silverburst80

[Len Cnut]

12 minutes ago, Silverburst80 said:

Yeah visually it would have been weird, but Slash has the funk man it coulda been cool and I think he woulda been respectful and not gone full Slash mode. I could imagine him tearing the arse out of Love Spreads

I was listening to Keith Richards solo album on the way to work this morning, enjoying it and thinking 'fuck, this guys fuckin' amazing, he might just be my favourite rock guitarist ever' and I'm thinking about what it is that makes Keiths work so fuckin' great and I concluded that its because he always serves the song.  Its not about his guitar playing, its about the song and if it serves the song its not necessary that Keiths work is the most prominent thing in the mix which I don't think is the case with Slash, not necessarily because he's a show off or something, I think thats just the kind of guitar playing he likes, I can't imagine him toning it down enough to serve a song like Fools Gold very well.  I might be wrong though.

[Silverburst80]

9 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

I was listening to Keith Richards solo album on the way to work this morning, enjoying it and thinking 'fuck, this guys fuckin' amazing, he might just be my favourite rock guitarist ever' and I'm thinking about what it is that makes Keiths work so fuckin' great and I concluded that its because he always serves the song.  Its not about his guitar playing, its about the song and if it serves the song its not necessary that Keiths work is the most prominent thing in the mix which I don't think is the case with Slash, not necessarily because he's a show off or something, I think thats just the kind of guitar playing he likes, I can't imagine him toning it down enough to serve a song like Fools Gold very well.  I might be wrong though.

Yeah I hear ya but I find Slash is abit of a chameleon of a guitarist, he can get onstage with Nile Rodgers or BB King and adapt... end of the day though Squire is the Stone Roses guitarist and no-one else and hell I can't see him pulling off Welcome to the Jungle though I could be wrong!

Edited July 6, 2019 by Silverburst80

[Ralphelmo]

This thread is lol [again].

[Axl's Agony Aunt]

They are one of the best, but not one of the most underrated, because they've received a lot of acclaim and media coverage (cos they know Guns sell!). 

Some people claim they're overrated, cos the classic(ish) line-up only released three real albums (AFD and the two Illusions), but I think quality is more important than quantity.

They rose out of LA Metal (AFD was the best street story album) and took it to a different level - that higher level of epic ballads mostly cos of Axl's vision, life and obsessive meticulousness apparently. 

I think Motley Crue have released more good songs, but Guns have created more great ones.

Edited July 6, 2019 by Axl's Agony Aunt
nobody's perfect

[AncientEvil80]

On 7/2/2019 at 10:38 PM, MYWIFEMYLIFE said:

Their music, lyrics, performances are second to none, they did some of the greatest tours and albums ever but they never got the respect they deserved, what do you think? 

The band that spanned the period from 1986 till mid 1988, before the Australian dates at any rate, was surely the most underrated band ever. Of any musical genre.

They were a work of Genius. 

[RussTCB]

1 hour ago, AncientEvil80 said:

The band that spanned the period from 1986 till mid 1988, before the Australian dates at any rate, was surely the most underrated band ever. Of any musical genre.

They were a work of Genius. 

I still don't understand how a band that sold as many albums as they did during that time can be considered "under rated". 

[AncientEvil80]

21 minutes ago, RussTCB said:

I still don't understand how a band that sold as many albums as they did during that time can be considered "under rated". 

That's why I said 1986 till mid-1988... they weren't selling much back then, if at all, hahah 

Ironically, that's what I label the Best Period and Artistic Peak of the Band (Fall of 1987 being the absolute apex, see Ritz 1987). And that's why it's underrated.

[GnR Chris]

Yes. Underrated in terms of critical acclaim, but not necessarily widespread appeal  (the success of NITL shows people love GNR).

Underrated due to many viewing them as "just" a hair band. Or others thinking they have just a couple good songs (the big radio hits). Or just in the way Axl had been derided in media for so long it created a certain narrative around the band. And lastly, they had such prolific output in such a small number of years before fading away entirely for a decade.

GNR are not given their due for being in the lineage of the Stones and Aerosmith and sort of turning the strip sound on its feet. While Nirvana is wrongly credited with helping kill hair metal, GNR were the ones who blew up on the scene with their brand of rock which left pop bands like Poison in the dust. 

But this can all be perception. When they came through America for the NITL stadium tour, suddenly everyone I knew in my feed was going to these shows. The buzz about Slash's return to GNR helped generate a ton of fanfare.

But yeah, being a huge GNR fan, in some hipster circles, is almost like this ironic notion. F that. GNR forever.

Edited July 6, 2019 by GnR Chris

[RussTCB]

3 hours ago, AncientEvil80 said:

That's why I said 1986 till mid-1988... they weren't selling much back then, if at all, hahah 

Ironically, that's what I label the Best Period and Artistic Peak of the Band (Fall of 1987 being the absolute apex, see Ritz 1987). And that's why it's underrated.

AFD hit #1 in 1988, so that's why I was confused. 

[Ant]

 

20 hours ago, Len Cnut said:

I think sense of humour has a lot to do with it.  The Red Hot Chili Peppers were from the same area as GnR but the reason The Chilis (back then especially) were so cool in the sense of being contemporary whereas Guns weren't is because Guns took themselves very seriously.  Look at any picture of Guns from back in the day, they are very much posing and very like...y'know, trying to come across as cool, which they were to be fair, to me anyway...but that sort of seriousness about that stuff had very much been punctured long ago. 

I wonder if they stuck around if they could have wrenched back the "coolness" by really leaning into the excess, actually leveraged the cartoon aspect as a strength and had some songs to back it up ala The Darkness. That's not the version of GNR I would have liked necessarily but... like an amplified UYI GNR... Axl full Elton John.... dolphin animatronics... massive tongue in cheek stadium shows, haha.... After like '95 when everyone was sick of Unplugged albums and flannels. 

Edited July 7, 2019 by Ant