A comparison to Metallica

[droezle]

Droezle -

2011 had a set without Death Magnetic songs and 2010 had only two at most shows. Yet, GNR continues to play 7 songs from their most recent album. Seems really strange that GNR is labeled a "nostalgia cashgrab" when they continue to focus on recent material far more than almost any major band from their generation. The truth is that people who don't like GNR anymore are not going to pay much attention to the facts because their posts are based on emotion, not logic.

And yes, I'm serious about expecting a new GNR album before a new Metallica album.

Metallica - September 25, 2011 - Rock in Rio

Creeping Death

For Whom the Bell Tolls

Fuel

Ride the Lightning

Fade to Black

Cyanide

All Nightmare Long

Sad But True

Welcome Home (Sanitarium)

Orion

One

Master of Puppets

Blackened

Nothing Else Matters

Enter Sandman

--------------------------------------

Am I Evil?

Whiplash

Seek & Destroy

The same goes up for previous and later shows in 2011.

[Guest Broskirose]

Droezle -

2011 had a set without Death Magnetic songs and 2010 had only two at most shows. Yet, GNR continues to play 7 songs from their most recent album. Seems really strange that GNR is labeled a "nostalgia cashgrab" when they continue to focus on recent material far more than almost any major band from their generation. The truth is that people who don't like GNR anymore are not going to pay much attention to the facts because their posts are based on emotion, not logic.

And yes, I'm serious about expecting a new GNR album before a new Metallica album.

Broski -

Do you not find humor in some criticizing one band for being a "nostalgia cashgrab" despite focusing so much on recent material, while another band is DEFENDED from accusations of being a "nostalgia cashgrab" and the evidence to support the premise is that they're too busy playing their most popular nostalgia album in full to have room for recent material!?!?!?

Good for Metallica that they finished touring Death Magnetic. Their tour started a long time before GNR's. So why is GNR being criticized for wanting to finish their touring for Chinese?

The difference is this -

Metallica are making it clear that they are going to bring some nostalgia to the shows by playing The Black Album during it's 25th anniversary tour. Nostalgia in itself is not a bad thing. The problem is that Guns are just touring and no one knows why.

They aren't touring behind an album, ep - anything. They aren't playing AFD for the anniversary, they aren't doing anything creative, they aren't changing the setlists, they aren't changing the stage setup, they aren't releasing dvd's/blurays, they aren't making all their shows available for download, they aren't creating their own festivals. They're just playing markets they've already played countless times with literally nothing to drive them. There is such a huge difference that I can't believe I actually have to explain this.

And what do you mean "finish their touring for Chinese"? Bumblefoot has said himself that it isn't the Chinese Tour anymore. They are just touring to tour. And they're just playing places they've already played.

Since CD's release they've done 2 Latin America legs, soon to be 3 Europe legs, 3 North America legs, an Asian leg and an Australian leg. Just seems a tad excessive. I'm not going to pretend I know Axl's motives because I don't. Maybe the guy really just enjoys pointlessly touring. But, how can you not see that it isn't a wild stretch of the imagination to assume that he's just cashgrabbing and he knows people will show up to get a nostalgia fix? Again, I'm not saying that is the case but it isn't a ridiculous thing to assume.

Point is, people want Guns to do something. We want something new. We want a new album and if they aren't going to do that, they can atleast make touring exciting like Metallica has.

There is a huge difference between these bands and if you can't see it I have no idea what to tell you.

Edited June 27, 2012 by Broskirose

[droezle]

Droezle -

2011 had a set without Death Magnetic songs and 2010 had only two at most shows. Yet, GNR continues to play 7 songs from their most recent album. Seems really strange that GNR is labeled a "nostalgia cashgrab" when they continue to focus on recent material far more than almost any major band from their generation. The truth is that people who don't like GNR anymore are not going to pay much attention to the facts because their posts are based on emotion, not logic.

And yes, I'm serious about expecting a new GNR album before a new Metallica album.

Broski -

Do you not find humor in some criticizing one band for being a "nostalgia cashgrab" despite focusing so much on recent material, while another band is DEFENDED from accusations of being a "nostalgia cashgrab" and the evidence to support the premise is that they're too busy playing their most popular nostalgia album in full to have room for recent material!?!?!?

Good for Metallica that they finished touring Death Magnetic. Their tour started a long time before GNR's. So why is GNR being criticized for wanting to finish their touring for Chinese?

The difference is this -

Metallica are making it clear that they are going to bring some nostalgia to the shows by playing The Black Album during it's 25th anniversary tour. Nostalgia in itself is not a bad thing. The problem is that Guns are just touring and no one knows why.

They aren't touring behind an album, ep - anything. They aren't playing AFD for the anniversary, they aren't doing anything creative, they aren't changing the setlists, they aren't changing the stage setup, they aren't releasing dvd's/blurays, they aren't making all their shows available for download, they aren't creating their own festivals. They're just playing markets they've already played countless times with literally nothing to drive them. There is such a huge difference that I can't beleive I actually explain this.

And what do you mean "finish their touring for Chinese"? Bumblefoot has said himself that it isn't the Chinese Tour anymore. They are just touring to tour. And they're just playing places they've already played.

Since CD's release they've done 2 Latin America legs, soon to be 3 Europe legs, 3 North America legs, an Asian leg and an Australian leg. Just seems a tad excessive. I'm not going to pretend I know Axl's motives because I don't. Maybe the guy really just enjoys pointlessly touring. But, how can you not see that it isn't a wild stretch of the imagination to assume that he's just cashgrabbing and he knows people will show up to get a nostalgia fix? Again, I'm not saying that is the case but it isn't a ridiculous thing to assume.

Point is, people want Guns to do something. We want something new. We want a new album and if they aren't going to do that, they can atleast make touring exciting like Metallica has.

There is a huge difference between these bands and if you can't see it I have no idea what to tell you.

Best post ever

[bran]

Droezle -

2011 had a set without Death Magnetic songs and 2010 had only two at most shows. Yet, GNR continues to play 7 songs from their most recent album. Seems really strange that GNR is labeled a "nostalgia cashgrab" when they continue to focus on recent material far more than almost any major band from their generation. The truth is that people who don't like GNR anymore are not going to pay much attention to the facts because their posts are based on emotion, not logic.

And yes, I'm serious about expecting a new GNR album before a new Metallica album.

Metallica - September 25, 2011 - Rock in Rio

Creeping Death

For Whom the Bell Tolls

Fuel

Ride the Lightning

Fade to Black

Cyanide

All Nightmare Long

Sad But True

Welcome Home (Sanitarium)

Orion

One

Master of Puppets

Blackened

Nothing Else Matters

Enter Sandman

--------------------------------------

Am I Evil?

Whiplash

Seek & Destroy

The same goes up for previous and later shows in 2011.

2-15-12

01) Dexter Intro / Chinese Democracy

02) Welcome To The Jungle

03) It’s So Easy

04) Mr. Brownstone

05) Sorry

06) Shackler’s Revenge

07) Estranged

08) Rocket Queen

09) James Bond Theme

10) Live And Let Die

11) You’re Crazy

12) This I Love

13) Motivation

14) Dizzy Reed Piano Solo

15) Street Of Dreams

16) You Could Be Mine

17) Dj ASHBA Guitar Solo

18) Sweet Child O’ Mine

19) Riff Raff

20) Piano Solo / Another Brick In The Wall (Part 2)

21) November Rain

22) Pink Panther Theme

23) Don’t Cry

24) Knockin’ On Heaven’s Door

25) Civil War

26) Used To Love Her

27) Nightrain

28) Madagascar

29) Better

30) My Michelle

31) Patience

32) Paradise City

so whats your point metallica played 2 songs off their latest while gnr played 7(half the album) metallica keeps it fresh and gnr is a nostalgia act

[Guest Broskirose]

So you've arbitrarily decided that a nostalgia cashgrab is okay if it is stated as such, but a non nostalgia cashgrab becomes a bad thing if it's not stated as such.

No, I never said Metallica were cashgrabbing. They're making things interesting. Putting words in my mouth again.

GNR's set has had far more changes this year than Metallica's.

lol?

If GNR has done all of these legs and all of these excessive tours, how do you explain that it's only been a year of touring, a year off and now a second year of touring? Or is it arbitrarily excessive because it doesn't interest you?

What are you talking about?

Since the release of CD from December of 2009 to the present they've done all the tour legs I said they did. 3 North America, 3 Euro, 2 Latin America. Why the need to play so many legs in the same places?

A lot of people seem very excited by GNR's shows. Maybe most fans just go to shows and enjoy them?

Sure, I'm one of them. Seen this lineup 6 times as you already know. But at the end of the day, you've gotta be realistic.

Droezle -

2011 had a set without Death Magnetic songs and 2010 had only two at most shows. Yet, GNR continues to play 7 songs from their most recent album. Seems really strange that GNR is labeled a "nostalgia cashgrab" when they continue to focus on recent material far more than almost any major band from their generation. The truth is that people who don't like GNR anymore are not going to pay much attention to the facts because their posts are based on emotion, not logic.

And yes, I'm serious about expecting a new GNR album before a new Metallica album.

Metallica - September 25, 2011 - Rock in Rio

Creeping Death

For Whom the Bell Tolls

Fuel

Ride the Lightning

Fade to Black

Cyanide

All Nightmare Long

Sad But True

Welcome Home (Sanitarium)

Orion

One

Master of Puppets

Blackened

Nothing Else Matters

Enter Sandman

--------------------------------------

Am I Evil?

Whiplash

Seek & Destroy

The same goes up for previous and later shows in 2011.

2-15-12

01) Dexter Intro / Chinese Democracy

02) Welcome To The Jungle

03) It’s So Easy

04) Mr. Brownstone

05) Sorry

06) Shackler’s Revenge

07) Estranged

08) Rocket Queen

09) James Bond Theme

10) Live And Let Die

11) You’re Crazy

12) This I Love

13) Motivation

14) Dizzy Reed Piano Solo

15) Street Of Dreams

16) You Could Be Mine

17) Dj ASHBA Guitar Solo

18) Sweet Child O’ Mine

19) Riff Raff

20) Piano Solo / Another Brick In The Wall (Part 2)

21) November Rain

22) Pink Panther Theme

23) Don’t Cry

24) Knockin’ On Heaven’s Door

25) Civil War

26) Used To Love Her

27) Nightrain

28) Madagascar

29) Better

30) My Michelle

31) Patience

32) Paradise City

so whats your point metallica played 2 songs off their latest while gnr played 7(half the album) metallica keeps it fresh and gnr is a nostalgia act

Metallica were not touring Death Magnetic at the time. The World Magnetic tour was over. Forget CD and DM. Metallica changes the setlist more. Regardless of if they play more songs per night from their latest album (after they've finished touring their latest album), they still change their setlists more. During the time that they were actually touring Death Magnetic they'd play on average, 6 songs a night (over half the album).

[DocArunas]

Example Setlist from 2009 Death magnetic tour:

1. That Was Just Your Life

2. The End Of The Line

3. No Remorse

4. The Thing That Should Not Be

5. One

6. Broken, Beat & Scarred

7. My Apocalypse

8. Sad But True

9. Turn the Page

10. All Nightmare Long

11. The Day That Never Comes

12. Master of Puppets

13. Fight Fire With Fire

14. Nothing Else Matters

15. Enter Sandman

Encore

16. Of Wolf & Man

17. Trapped Under Ice

18. Seek & Destroy

From 2010 Death magnetic:

1. Creeping Death

2. For Whom the Bell Tolls

3. Fuel

4. Harvester of Sorrow

5. Fade to Black

6. That Was Just Your Life

7. The End of the Line

8. Sad But True

9. Broken, Beat & Scarred

10. Cyanide

11. One

12. Master of Puppets

13. Battery

14. Nothing Else Matters

15. Enter Sandman

Encore

16. Am I Evil?

17. Blackened

18. Seek & Destroy

Anyway, while its interesting to see how two of the greatest bands still hold up and compare to each other, you cant really do this without getting some harsh comments about it. Both bands have been different from the start with theyr own standards so Anyway... rock1

[Bobbo]

Regardless of what some feel about the quality of Metallica's last few records, they have released four (five if you count Lulu) in the time Axl has taken to release just one. And they are in the process of creating a new album which I personally believe will see the light of day before Axl's next album will. Not to mention they have treated their fans with a lot of extra goodies throughout the years, and their fan clubs and such have plenty more perks than what Axl's offering these days.

Metallica's current tour is a reason with a specific agenda. Celebrating the 20th anniversary of one of the most successful albums of their genre. They're not doing this kind of thing year after year on a regular basis. They consistently move forward. When Metallica were touring consistently in support of their most recent album (an album that was released in 2008), in 2008, 2009, and 2010, they played just as many new songs as Axl does now. And although it's commendable Axl's playing more CD songs now, there have been points since 2009 where they were playing as little as three or four. Not to mention Metallica's back catalog is twice the size as GNR's. And it's been essentially the same band it's always been, not just James and a bunch of replacements milking the back catalog for all it's worth. To me, there's a difference between lineup changes, and a completely different musical outfit. I think the majority of the public would agree with that assertion, especially when it comes to Axl's current situation. And this is coming from someone who is a much, much bigger fan of GNR and just Axl himself than I am of Metallica.

The reason most people use nostalgic cash grab as a negative term towards the nu band is because; they're touring with a set list of 75-85% of songs they had fuck all to do with, and that's what people are paying to see.They're specifically cashing in on songs of yesteryear, case in point; nostalgia. And they've been a "band" for much longer. Even with the CD songs, Fortus, Bumble, and Frank came in later, the latter at the very end where these songs were already pretty established (based on the demos that were leaked) and their contributions seemed to be pretty minimal. Ashba hasn't contributed dick yet. Again, I have no problem with Axl playing the hits he helped create, but the set list should be a little more balanced by now between classic songs and nu songs. Give the nu band an identity of their own, and show us they can put asses in the seats based on their own material, rather than just continuing to live in the old band's shadow. At least if the old band were back together playing these songs, it will be the actual inventors behind the music. The ones that did contribute to songs people actually pay to see. Not an essentially glorified cover band. Not necessarily because they're bad playing the songs, but because a cover's still a cover. You could consider that a nostalgic cash grab, but at least it would be with the people who actually earned that right. Who helped made it nostalgic in the first place. If you don't agree with that, fine, but for the majority of people that do, at least try to understand where they're coming from in terms of this. This goes beyond the Axl VS Slash pissing contest, at least for me.

[SoulMonster]

The reason most people use nostalgic cash grab as a negative term towards the nu band is because; they're touring with a set list of 75-85% of songs they had fuck all to do with

Which is only correct if you exclude Axl from "they". And the fact that they play lots of songs most band members did not co-write has no bearings on whether it is a nostalgia cash grab thing, I think you are mixing up the resentment of Guns N' Roses being a "cover band", as so many critics call it.

They're specifically cashing in on songs of yesteryear, case in point; nostalgia.

Every band with a strong back catalogue who plays old, beloved songs to please their fans, is per definition catering to the nostalgia market and would by necessity be "cashing in on songs of yesteryear". Unless you want the band to ONLY play songs from CD or NOT try to get revenues from the tours, then I don't see what the problem is.

[Bobbo]

Not to mention they have treated their fans with a lot of extra goodies throughout the years

yes, very true. i think my favorite goodie they treated their fans with was, um, lawsuits.

Are you talking about the whole Napster ordeal? If so, and unless there's something else I'm not remembering at the moment, it was well over a decade ago when internet piracy was more or less a new breed. It's over and done with. I've also emphasized the fact I was talking about recent years.

Bobbo, on 27 June 2012 - 04:00 AM, said:

The reason most people use nostalgic cash grab as a negative term towards the nu band is because; they're touring with a set list of 75-85% of songs they had fuck all to do with

Which is only correct if you exclude Axl from "they". And the fact that they play lots of songs most band members did not co-write has no bearings on whether it is a nostalgia cash grab thing, I think you are mixing up the resentment of Guns N' Roses being a "cover band", as so many critics call it.

Bobbo, on 27 June 2012 - 04:00 AM, said:

They're specifically cashing in on songs of yesteryear, case in point; nostalgia.

Every band with a strong back catalogue who plays old, beloved songs to please their fans, is per definition catering to the nostalgia market and would by necessity be "cashing in on songs of yesteryear". Unless you want the band to ONLY play songs from CD or NOT try to get revenues from the tours, then I don't see what the problem is.

1st point; of course I exclude Axl and shit, even Dizzy to some extent from "they", but the fact is, the majority of "members" in the "band" are cashing in on songs they had nothing at all to do with...and blah, blah, the rest of my response is in that previous post; sorry, just don't feel like repeating it again.

2nd point: I already explained why people use the nostalgic cash grabbing for GNR as a negative aspect. They're, nearly everybody currently in "gnr", mostly cashing in on songs they didn't have anything to do with. At all. Again, already described in my previous post, I don't feel like they should play nothing but CD songs, I just think after all this time they should be venturing out past the comfort zone of milking the old songs for most of the shows, and have more of an even playing feel. It currently feels like a complete standstill, and although the crew are saying new music is being worked on, actions speak louder than words...

Sorry, but next time try reading and quoting the whole post, instead of just quoting bits and pieces as I've already answered most of what you were asking in detail.

[SoulMonster]

I already explained why people use the nostalgic cash grabbing for GNR as a negative aspect. They're, nearly everybody currently in "gnr", mostly cashing in on songs they didn't have anything to do with.

And that is why some people here refer to Guns N' Roses as a "cover band", not "nostalgia band" (which is because they play so much old music) or "cash grab band" (which is because they expect to get a profit from touring). You have the expressions mixed up.

I don't feel like they should play nothing but CD songs, I just think after all this time they should be venturing out past the comfort zone of milking the old songs for most of the shows, and have more of an even playing feel.

If you by "even playing feel" mean they should play as much from CD as from older album, it would mean they should play all of CD or cut down the sets drastically. The former is not really possible since most of the fans they are out to please wouldn't enjoy having to endure the whole of CD, the latter is possible but not a good choice because it would lessen the value of the shows.

It currently feels like a complete standstill, and although the crew are saying new music is being worked on, actions speak louder than words...

Yes, and that's why the action of actually having recorded in the studio prior to RIR is so great. In a few years we probably have the next album. Until then, enjoy the shows.

[Bobbo]

The reason most people use nostalgic cash grab as a negative term towards the nu band is because; they're touring with a set list of 75-85% of songs they had fuck all to do with

the set is essentially 1/3 appetite, 1/3 illusions, 1/3 chinese.

so axl had something to do with 100%. dizzy had something to do with 66%. several others had something to do with 33%.

so where do you come to the conclusion that they only had something to do with 15% of the songs?

Come on man, let's not nitpick everything to death. Obviously I didn't take a census for exact percentages, but at most shows, there's way more emphasis placed on the songs of yesteryear than there should be by now, given how much time has passed. The playing field should be a lot more level than it is in terms of people taking them as more than just essentially a trip down memory lane and very little else. I think there's a lot of valid truths in what I initially posted, and given that, the main point remains intact.

[droezle]

Not to mention they have treated their fans with a lot of extra goodies throughout the years

yes, very true. i think my favorite goodie they treated their fans with was, um, lawsuits.

Can you give me a link where i can find all the singles, e.p's, (live) albums and live dvd's that Guns N' Roses have released since Chinese Democracy?

[Guest Satanisk_Slakt]

Your best not to compare New GNR with actual bands; unless you think Spinal Tap is an actual band.

[Bobbo]

SM-

1. For the most part, I think they're both. Essentially just nostalgic cashing grabbing on covers they had nothing to do with for the majority of shows.

2. Sorry, bit of a typo, meant even the playing field, as in having more of an equal balance between songs they've actually created and had a hand in, and the classic stuff from the heyday. I think enough time and chances have been given for them to do that, and the fact that remains missing is a bit frustrating, and only adds more fuel to the fire of the concepts of nostalgia, cashgrabbing, cover band, yadda, yadda, and all that good shit I explained in great detail in my initial post.

3. So they claim, but I personally have a hard time believing it, especially since interviews I remember in that time period with Bumble and Tommy implying that they haven't been in the studio since CD wrapped up. Kinda conflicting with Fortus saying they were in the studio before RIR. Kinda seems like an attempt to keep interest in the nu band, but hey, that's just my view point, and there's no way to know for sure at this point, we'll just have to wait and see, but I personally doubt another nu album will ever see the light of day. Even if they have, and will be recording, we've been here before. If they start debuting new songs, and get serious about getting something out, I'll eat my word, but I can't help but personally doubt it.

[SoulMonster]

SM-

1. For the most part, I think they're both. Essentially just nostalgic cashing grabbing on covers they had nothing to do with for the majority of shows.

Yes, they are catering to the nostalgia market. Yes, they expect a profit from the touring activity. Yes, most band members had little to do with many of the songs being played. I personally don't see a problem with any of this considering there's been so many lineup changed, that the band has a strong back catalogue and that they released a new album only 3.5 years ago.

2. Sorry, bit of a typo, meant even the playing field, as in having more of an equal balance between songs they've actually created and had a hand in, and the classic stuff from the heyday. I think enough time and chances have been given for them to do that, and the fact that remains missing is a bit frustrating, and only adds more fuel to the fire of the concepts of nostalgia, cashgrabbing, cover band, yadda, yadda, and all that good shit I explained in great detail in my initial post.

Yeah. It would have been cool if by now the band would have released 3-4 new albums since 2000 and would have replaced the entire set with only new songs. Or just that the band would have released one more album. I get it. In a few years a new album may have been dropped and perhaps the setlist will feature even more new songs. But the tours will still be for profit (=cash grab), for nostalgia (because old-timers like me will go there primarily to hear the music of our youth) and consist of many songs most band members didn't co-write.

So they claim, but I personally have a hard time believing it, especially since interviews I remember in that time period with Bumble and Tommy implying that they haven't been in the studio since CD wrapped up.

This apparent conflict could be resolved if you accept that the members aren't in the studio simultaneously. Richard could easily have laid down tracks for songs before Tommy or Bumble, or perhaps they laid down tracks earlier (during the late CD sessions). Many possibilities here, I find it a bit weird that you will jump to the conclusion that Richard is outright lying in interviews.

[droezle]

Come on man, let's not nitpick everything to death. Obviously I didn't take a census for exact percentages

But a census was not needed. All you needed was to educate yourself on the subject you were speaking on instead of pulling inaccurate figures out of your ass.

You seem to have an answer on anything but can you also answer this?

Can you give me a link where i can find all the singles, e.p's, (live) albums and live dvd's that Guns N' Roses have released since Chinese Democracy?

[droezle]

anybody have any idea why this droezle guy keeps searching for links to things that nobody mentioned?

Failure. Metallica is more loyal to their fans than G N' R but as expected you are just to ignorant to realise that.

[ARX77]

IMO its unfair to compare GnR w/ Metallica. Metallica has had a steady line up for the most part and has stayed busy with either touring or new music. All in all Metallica plays the same base set of songs EX: master of puppets, one, seek and destroy etc. each night. What Metallica does that GnR should do is change up the newer or uncommon songs. For example GnR could play catcher instead of SOD every night or add dead horse or yesterday's. GnR is suppose to be a band that is unpredictable but has become very predictable. A band w/ no set list supposedly. All in all I hope Guns keeps touring and stays active but I agree they could get a little creative with the set.

But for anyone to think no matter how many albums Nuguns released that we would be at a place were only "new" songs are being played is delusional. Every band has a heyday or prime where they create the songs that define them and for GnR that's AFD, Lies and UYI that will never change

[auad]

- Guns: release Chinese Democracy in 2008

Metallica: release Death Magnetic in 2008 earlier in the year BEFORE Chinese

- Guns: tour in support of Chinese Democracy since 2009 with a break in 2011 before US tour

- Metallica: have toured virtually endlessly since 2008

- Guns: fans are pushing for Axl and the band to release the next album now.

Metallica: they are nowhere near ready to release their next album and have only begun to write.

- Guns: fans complain no new songs are being played

Metallica: play all the old hits. This past weekend at the Orion festival ZERO Death Magnetic songs were played

I just don't understand the GNR fans logic with this double standard

This is such a twisted, warped, horrible comparison.

First of all - Metallica actually gives a shit about their fans, and is doing a whole bunch of other shit besides touring.

They have released new music since Death Magnetic. The Lou Reed album (like it or not) and the Beyond Magnetic EP.

They are also doing their own festival, doing exciting things live such as adding in the Snakepit to their live shows and soon using the biggest stage they've ever used for some Mexico shows with a huge production. They are also filming a movie.

On top of that, their setlists are way more entertaining, change every night (there hasn't been a repeating setlist since 2004), and they handpick each setlist so that the give fans in each city a unique experience from last time. I could seriously go on forever....facefuckingpalm

Are you really making this ridiculous comparison?

Btw, I was at Orion festival. They played To Hell And Back, a song from Beyond Magnetic which was released after Death Magnetic.

this.

metallica is a functional workhaolic band.

gnr is a solo project.

[volcano62]

Fact is Metallica is the most fan friendly band out there

Uh . . . Metallica sued their fans . . .

:rofl-lol:

Plus Lu-Lu is the biggest piece of crap in musical history.

[Silent Jay]

Fact is Metallica is the most fan friendly band out there

Uh . . . Metallica sued their fans . . .

Plus Lu-Lu is the biggest piece of crap in musical history.

I AM THE TABLE !!!!

[dalsh327]

Fact is Metallica is the most fan friendly band out there

Uh . . . Metallica sued their fans . . .

:rofl-lol:

Plus Lu-Lu is the biggest piece of crap in musical history.

It's a Lou Reed project, and Lou got death threats from Metallica fans over it.

And you have to listen to it as a Lou Reed album. It shouldn't count as a Metallica album, even though it's a part of their discography. It was just a collaboration that didn't work from the day they announced it. Doing "Sweet Jane"... fine. Doing a concept album with Lou Reed that's kind of like Berlin? Should've called on Brian Eno.

But they can disown it if they want.

Lou's as volatile and unpredictable (and crazy, he had shock therapy as a kid) as Axl, but Axl's prob. a lot nicer. Lars said Lou was going to "settle it" outside the studio over a lyric with him. Lars declined.

Biggest piece of crap ever is debatable. Metal Machine Music is either brilliance or an hour of a stoned guitarist fiddling with knobs, and deciding to sell it to the fans. Now it would be called "ambient" music, but all guitarists want to explore the possibilities of sounds with a guitar. I don't know - you had a band reproduce it live... art or crap? Always in the ear of the listener.

[bran]

Fact is Metallica is the most fan friendly band out there

Uh . . . Metallica sued their fans . . .

:rofl-lol:

Plus Lu-Lu is the biggest piece of crap in musical history.

It's a Lou Reed project, and Lou got death threats from Metallica fans over it.

And you have to listen to it as a Lou Reed album. It shouldn't count as a Metallica album, even though it's a part of their discography. It was just a collaboration that didn't work from the day they announced it. Doing "Sweet Jane"... fine. Doing a concept album with Lou Reed that's kind of like Berlin? Should've called on Brian Eno.

But they can disown it if they want.

Lou's as volatile and unpredictable (and crazy, he had shock therapy as a kid) as Axl, but Axl's prob. a lot nicer. Lars said Lou was going to "settle it" outside the studio over a lyric with him. Lars declined.

Biggest piece of crap ever is debatable. Metal Machine Music is either brilliance or an hour of a stoned guitarist fiddling with knobs, and deciding to sell it to the fans. Now it would be called "ambient" music, but all guitarists want to explore the possibilities of sounds with a guitar. I don't know - you had a band reproduce it live... art or crap? Always in the ear of the listener.

lars also said (taking another shot at metal fans) fans were misguided and ignorant and people will come to apperciate and like lulu in 20 years

i just cant appreciate some drunk fuck talking over lame ass riffs

[rockerman]

how many albums has metallica released since 1994?

and gnr? without live or cover albums.

Metallica never had all their primary members split up, causing the band to need to be almost completely rebuilt. Bottom line is that Chinese is a few years old and people need to stop acting like GNR hasn't released an album since 1994.

really? has GNR released an album...Really or was that part of the illusion. GNR?? I think the last thing Guns and Roses did was Spaghetti Incident?? this new group made a valient attempt to get the blimp off the ground and onto the stage but to date its pretty much a nostalgia show...more or less.

Hands down Metallica brings it to the masses completely over the top. GNR at the moment is still coasting on the legacy fame.....and Chinese Democracy tour is now 10 years old and counting... something really fucked up about that. kind of embarrassing to embrace contemporary Guns and Roses given that everything they do is based on material thats 10 plus years old. Seriously .....contemplate.....contemporary GNR ???

[The_Universal_Sigh]

- Guns: release Chinese Democracy in 2008

Metallica: release Death Magnetic in 2008 earlier in the year BEFORE Chinese

- Guns: tour in support of Chinese Democracy since 2009 with a break in 2011 before US tour

- Metallica: have toured virtually endlessly since 2008

- Guns: fans are pushing for Axl and the band to release the next album now.

Metallica: they are nowhere near ready to release their next album and have only begun to write.

- Guns: fans complain no new songs are being played

Metallica: play all the old hits. This past weekend at the Orion festival ZERO Death Magnetic songs were played

I just don't understand the GNR fans logic with this double standard

This is such a twisted, warped, horrible comparison.

First of all - Metallica actually gives a shit about their fans, and is doing a whole bunch of other shit besides touring.

They have released new music since Death Magnetic. The Lou Reed album (like it or not) and the Beyond Magnetic EP.

They are also doing their own festival, doing exciting things live such as adding in the Snakepit to their live shows and soon using the biggest stage they've ever used for some Mexico shows with a huge production. They are also filming a movie.

On top of that, their setlists are way more entertaining, change every night (there hasn't been a repeating setlist since 2004), and they handpick each setlist so that the give fans in each city a unique experience from last time. I could seriously go on forever....facefuckingpalm

Are you really making this ridiculous comparison?

Btw, I was at Orion festival. They played To Hell And Back, a song from Beyond Magnetic which was released after Death Magnetic.

Thread should have ended with this post.