EvanG

I think both Monuments and Shiny have some good songs. The rest I don't care much about.

Just now, Rovim said:

I think that some fans of music identify with what they like and getting the sub genre "wrong" is a big no no.

Like if somehow cheapens "real hard rock" in some way if you lump it together with something that doesn't contain traditional elements in the music or enough of it so it's like... not hard enough to be accepted or you know... they just don't like a particular band cause it's not as technically complex as what they're used to from their chosen hard rock bands but Nirvana wasn't really just punk or pure punk for me, so I think it's also correct to call it hard rock. That, or I'm over thinking it, and it's 80's make-up dudes and the naked girls.

I think the Nirvana community is that way especially. They still hate GnR because of Axl and everything their god Kurt was against. I'm a big Nirvana fan, but their community is pretty weird and condescending at times. For me it's simple. Nirvana have a lot of songs that fit within the hard rock genre, as they also had punk songs, and especially on Bleach, songs with a lot of metal influences. It can go together, so calling them hard rock, as they did themselves, shouldn't get people's panties in a twist so much.

5 minutes ago, Rovim said:

I think that some fans of old school 60'a 70's and 80's hard rock have this very rigid definition of what it's supposed to sound like. I say this cause I've stumbled upon comments like this specifically about Nirvana. Maybe the amount of punk in their music and the fact that there are more than 1 elements in their music taken from similar but different sub genres make Nirvana and other bands seem like it's not pure hard rock enough to be hard rock. 

like he can't even solo like Jimmy Page. One clue that maybe helps is that Dave Grohl was the drummer of that band. 

besides, punk shares some shit with metal which is similar to hard rock in some ways. Are Load and Reload by Metallica are trash metal records for example? I feel like Hard Rock and Metal are the umbrella definitions of many different genres.

Oh agree with the last part. A lot of the 90's bands, but also 80's bands, had many different influences, and one song could be more metal and another one more punk. GnR is considered a hard rock band, right? I don't think anyone would disagree on here. But they have metal, pop and punk influences in their music as well. Just like Nirvana and Pearl Jam. So why is it not okay to label their music as hard rock? I don't get it. Just because hard rock got a bad rep by the 90's because of those make-up dudes in the 80's with the naked girls in their videos?

1 minute ago, Legendador said:

"I just disagreed with your previous comment that punk and alt-rock killed off hard rock because that's simply not true. "

You nailed it!

Yes, GnRpersia said that on the previous page and I quoted him/her, it wasn't a reference to you. Do you understand how forums work?

14 minutes ago, Legendador said:

I never said punk or alt-rock killed hard rock, and you're wrong about Nirvana considering themselves Hard Rock, they despised everything that HR standed for at the time.

Now, telling me just because a band makes music with guitar with a lot of distortion and loun drums it's considered hard rock, sounds kind of naive, childish and almost that you don't understand shit about rock genres.

Are Nine Inch Nails, Marilyn Manson, Ministry, The Prodigy, hard rock? Well they make music with guitars with a lot of distortion and loud drums. What a joke!

Huh? I never said you said that punk or alt-rock killed hard rock. The other poster said it who I also quoted.

You're wrong. You seem to confuse image with genre here. A lot of rock bands from the 90's didn't want to be compared to the hard rock bands from the 80's because they couldn't relate to the big hair, make-up, spandex pants and cheesy videos on MTV. But they loved to be named in the same sentence as the hard rock acts from the late 60's and 70's, which they were influenced by. Again, I've heard Kurt refer to Nirvana's music as hard rock, as well as punk and several other sub-rock genres, many times. Unfortunately I can't post youtube videos here, but I'm sure you can find it yourself. So what you say is simply not true. They didn't like the antics of some of the 80's hard rock bands, but that doesn't mean they didn't consider their own music hard rock, among other sub-rock genres.

To specify the three songs I mentioned in previous post. They're not punk songs. They're not metal songs. They're not pop songs, although one could argue that the vocal melodies are poppy, especially Teen Spirit. They're not soft rock songs either, so yeah... what else to call them but hard rock songs? 

Great album.

8 hours ago, Legendador said:

Wait, what? Nirvana and Pearl Jam where never considered Hard Rock, if you don't want to call it "Grunge" ok, at least "Aternative Rock" or "Punk-ish Rock" but to those bands, to be put in the Hard Rock category was a major offense and they were far far away from it.

They're not considered hard rock? They make music with guitars with a lot of distortion and loud drums. What should we call it instead? Reggae? They even considered themselves hard rock. I've seen enough interviews with Kurt where he described the music of Nirvana as hard rock. Most of those bands didn't like the word grunge because it was just a made up word by some British journalist. Of course a lot of those bands from that time had also metal and punk and pop influences, but a lot of their music also fell into the hard rock genre. Teen Spirit, Alive, Black Hole Sun, just to name a few of their biggest hits, are all hard rock songs. 

8 hours ago, ©GnrPersia said:

Generally I prefer not to really categorize music bands (and most type of modern art) with subgenres. In a broader sense you might be right and these bands could be rock (but hard rock? I don't know, I'm not good at labeling!).
I'm sure you also do not want to fall into genre trap as well :-) 

I really enjoy such discussions although this is becoming off-topic but keep it coming people!

I just disagreed with your previous comment that punk and alt-rock killed off hard rock because that's simply not true. 

1 hour ago, ©GnrPersia said:

 

During the grunge movement of the early 1990s, alternative rock and punk rock gained popularity and killed Hard Rock's popularity. In addition, Kurt Cobain's suicide also snuffed out grunge 

Grunge isn’t a music genre. Bands like Nirvana and Pearl Jam are also considered hard rock. But it was called ‘grunge’ because that word became popular at the time.

Axl, no matter what you've done, you deserve respect. Even if you make mistakes, you are loveable. No matter your looks, skills, size, age or anything, you're worthwhile. No one can ever take that away from you. Smash, smash, SUH-MASH!

1 minute ago, Carburetta said:

Again, I don’t think the word “shitty” was used by anybody at the time, or since, except maybe by you. 

He regards most things about GnR “shitty” it seems.

13 minutes ago, TheSlashrose said:

Okay, I never said that grunge is a style, so you misunderstood what I said, but could you tell me why bands like Motley Crue, Poison, Van Halen, Kiss and thousands of others disappeared from the map in those days?

Not all those bands disappeared. Kiss and Van Halen were still playing arenas in the 90s. But yeah, the musical climate changed in the early 90s and those guys with the spandex pants disappeared for the most part. I just don’t agree with the term ‘grunge’.

38 minutes ago, mystery said:

Its basically a catch-all term for the music of the (mostly) Seattle bands of that era even though most of them sounded different from each other.  I don't think Guns N' Roses would have become irrelevant or anything but to a lot of the mainstream audience in the US they were starting to seem uncool. 

A lot of alt-bands from the 90s were labelled grunge, no matter where they came from. Bush from England, and Silverchair from Australia, had to explain in every interview that they were rock bands and not grunge bands.
GnR had definitely become somewhat of a joke to some people by 1992 but were still very popular. I think that if they had kept it together and released a really good record in 1994 or 1995, they could have been as huge as Aerosmith was in the mid 90s. In a way they still were even though they weren’t touring or releasing music. When Duff was promoting Neurotic Outsiders and Slash was out with Snakepit, most interviews they did ended up being about GnR.

1 hour ago, TheSlashrose said:

Man, Guns would have survived grunge like Aerosmith and Bon Jovi did, the rest of the bands were swept away. And tell me did grunge survive? No. We have Pearl Jam out there as the only survivor, not even Nirvana would have been able to survive past 1994 even if Kurt hadn't died.

Grunge was a fashion term, not a music genre, and doesn’t have much to do with the bands you mentioned.

Checked the setlists from both Sydney shows and that statement isn't true. Both nights more than half of the songs on the setlist were old songs.

Act Two is out.

There are a million different ways to be creative. I've worked in current bands on leftover songs from some of my previous bands too. Having new bandmembers contribute and adding their parts to an old song, is still a creative process. Just the other day I found an old demo from 2008 that I completely forgot about. The band broke up after we recorded it during rehearsal and I hadn't really thought about it anymore. I showed it to my current band and everyone liked it, so they learned it and put their parts to it and we are playing it now. For us it's a new song even though I wrote it sometime in the 00s.

20 hours ago, mystery said:

I don't get this post, I'm saying the album released almost 15 years ago and that 2008 will be 20 years in a short period of time. My perception of time doesn't see 2008 as that long ago so this post just comes off condescending. 

What's not to get? It's surprising your mind can still be blown by something so obvious. Unless it's not really blown but you just want to repeat how ridiculous it is, something that is being repeated on here every day.

21 minutes ago, Rovim said:

in 1977, Frank Zappa went on the radio.

To talk about the invention of mothers?

7 minutes ago, mystery said:

 My mind is blown thinking that 2008 will be 20 years ago in 5 years and its been 15 years since the album released.

Really? Still?

I think there might be a lot of insecurity involved. He knows about the legacy of Appetite and UYI and that everything will be compared to that. Chinese Democracy was something he worked on for very long with many personal songs and the reaction was ''meh'' at best from most people. Couldn't have been easy. So he is probably not too keen on releasing another record.

51 minutes ago, Karice said:

 Many middle aged men hang up the set for good at like 40, not still going in their late 50's and one at 60. 

Nonsense.

Just now, Rovim said:

we're not there yet, Evan. All I know about you is that you're really tall and snippy. Let's just say I'm a bum with a really fast internet connection.

I had to look that word up. I’m not arrogant at all.
And I’m not tall either. At least not for someone in my country. 
Oldest Goat, now that guy is tall.

4 minutes ago, Rovim said:

it was just a silly joke. The closest thing for having a job in my case is posting on forums. I serial kill in my spare time. 

So are you retired, unemployed or rich?
I’d love not having a job. I’m like the guy in Office Space.