liers Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 If they ever release a song that has atleast one radio hit, then it's possible. If not, then it could still be a classic example of failure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volcano62 Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 No, because the current band means nothing for the vast majority of the world. Not really...CD came out in a era that classic rock is not relevant anymore, so no matter how good some songs might be, they'll never reach classic cult status. It's just the way it is. Muse and a few other bands are big enough to be considered classics someday. But in general, electronic-pop and hip hop are ruling. I don't know how anybody can listen to Muse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvH Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 No, because the current band means nothing for the vast majority of the world. Not really...CD came out in a era that classic rock is not relevant anymore, so no matter how good some songs might be, they'll never reach classic cult status. It's just the way it is. Muse and a few other bands are big enough to be considered classics someday. But in general, electronic-pop and hip hop are ruling. I don't know how anybody can listen to Muse.I agree. Even worse, how journalists can compare this band to Queen is beyond my human capacities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volcano62 Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 No, because the current band means nothing for the vast majority of the world. Not really...CD came out in a era that classic rock is not relevant anymore, so no matter how good some songs might be, they'll never reach classic cult status. It's just the way it is. Muse and a few other bands are big enough to be considered classics someday. But in general, electronic-pop and hip hop are ruling. I don't know how anybody can listen to Muse.I agree. Even worse, how journalists can compare this band to Queen is beyond my human capacities.Come again? Someone in this world compared them to Queen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruno P. Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 While I doubt anyone in their right mind would compare Muse to Queen, well, they're doing something different and big rather than most emo bands out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volcano62 Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 While I doubt anyone in their right mind would compare Muse to Queen, well, they're doing something different and big rather than most emo bands out there.Yeah but come on man.....it's boring as fuck.I'd rather go to a Poison concert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvH Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 No, because the current band means nothing for the vast majority of the world. Not really...CD came out in a era that classic rock is not relevant anymore, so no matter how good some songs might be, they'll never reach classic cult status. It's just the way it is. Muse and a few other bands are big enough to be considered classics someday. But in general, electronic-pop and hip hop are ruling. I don't know how anybody can listen to Muse.I agree. Even worse, how journalists can compare this band to Queen is beyond my human capacities.Come again? Someone in this world compared them to Queen?Erm yes. Nearly evertime I see a Muse documentary on the TV or read an article, they brag about how much Queen is their major inspiration and how their music is similar, because it's "baroque", and grandiose, and whatever pompuous adjective they find without knowing what it means. What an insult. Muse is crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
machinegunner Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 By the conventional lazy-ass radio and rock magazines definition of "classic" (as opposed to the diehard fan definition), you just have to stick at it for long enough and keep releasing product and do tours that don't fail and project a reasonably acceptable image, and you will be deemed "classic" in retrospect. Say 10yrs. And if you're better than mediocre... watch out, you'll be called an absolute legend! It's all about giving them palatable stories to tell along with some palatable product, for them to make some nostalgia out of, and Guns should have enough of both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhazUp Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 The fact that this current band bears the GNR name and the GNR legacy as a whole already has a list of classic songs I don't see how the current band can turn themselves into a standalone "classic" entity. They will forever be associated with the classic songs already written and performed by a different group of collaborating musicians Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunzen Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 (edited) I don't give a shit about a bands legacy. If the music is good, I buy it and listen. Who gives a shit, who gives a fuck? I don't even think Axl and Slash care about that shit as much as some of you star fuckers on this board. I personally think my EZ Green from Scotts in regards to patching the spots on my grass is more important than the legacy of anything. Edited April 21, 2013 by Gunzen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moreblack Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 The fact that this current band bears the GNR name and the GNR legacy as a whole already has a list of classic songs I don't see how the current band can turn themselves into a standalone "classic" entity. They will forever be associated with the classic songs already written and performed by a different group of collaborating musiciansTo an extent, that removes the need to. All they really have to do is go play the classic band's material and if they must, release the odd new thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhazUp Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 The fact that this current band bears the GNR name and the GNR legacy as a whole already has a list of classic songs I don't see how the current band can turn themselves into a standalone "classic" entity. They will forever be associated with the classic songs already written and performed by a different group of collaborating musiciansTo an extent, that removes the need to. All they really have to do is go play the classic band's material and if they must, release the odd new thing.Yeah that sort of is like a "guilty by associaction" thing by default Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruno P. Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 (edited) Are we talking about a fkn rock band or about a divine entity or something like that? Haha, some of you take rock too seriously. It's just a band, not religion or something like that. Edited April 21, 2013 by Bruno Poeys Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
machinegunner Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 (edited) GN'R with all past alumni (including the "classic GN'R line-up"), could eventually ALL be deemed classic... edit-spelling Edited April 21, 2013 by machinegunner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruno P. Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 I'd rather go to a Poison concert.I wouldn't by any means, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
izzygirl Posted April 22, 2013 Share Posted April 22, 2013 (edited) No, because the current band means nothing for the vast majority of the world. Not really...CD came out in a era that classic rock is not relevant anymore, so no matter how good some songs might be, they'll never reach classic cult status. It's just the way it is. Muse and a few other bands are big enough to be considered classics someday. But in general, electronic-pop and hip hop are ruling. I don't know how anybody can listen to Muse. I agree. But for some odd reason people like them. But there are lots of people with a weird musical taste, if you know what I mean. Edit: you don't even have to be really good to be considered a classic, it's enough with you being "famous" and all that. Edited April 22, 2013 by izzygirl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasted Posted April 22, 2013 Share Posted April 22, 2013 The media has its agenda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trqster Posted April 22, 2013 Share Posted April 22, 2013 Classic rock also has an era thing about it... Most of the great rock classics were written and put out in the 80's and early 90's (Bon Jovi, Gn'R, Queen). Was that just a coincidence? Not really imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashbalove Posted April 22, 2013 Share Posted April 22, 2013 The media has its agenda.the media has its agenda against axl rose. why axl doesn't show up to public media events like the GNR HOF or the 2013 HOF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvH Posted April 22, 2013 Share Posted April 22, 2013 Classic rock also has an era thing about it... Most of the great rock classics were written and put out in the 80's and early 90's (Bon Jovi, Gn'R, Queen). Was that just a coincidence? Not really imo.Queen is a 70s band, but I get your point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasted Posted April 22, 2013 Share Posted April 22, 2013 The media has its agenda.the media has its agenda against axl rose. why axl doesn't show up to public media events like the GNR HOF or the 2013 HOFJust the idea of something being classic is kind of media term, it's what magazines push. It's part of being a fan, which record is the best or most important. I just wonder if musicians really think like that. Often they seem oblivious to these things. Like Jagger on CNN talking about Exile, not really seeing the attraction of the album. GNR seems like an example of extreme pragmatism in the face of hysteria. To the musicians who signed up to do GNR, they don't see it as such blasphemy as some fans do. Is it because it's accepted that this isn't the classic line up and so what? or is it just pure careerism of people like Bucket or Dj. Are there only that many bands that actually make enough money to survive that it's just beggars can't be choosers?There's just such a glaring reality gap between the current band feeling like the real band and them basically still living off the after glow of AFD.Or is this whole thing classic, from the AFD line up, through the insanity of the CD era to now where we have a Touring juggernaut that could put out another AXl Rose project. Is that how the world will see it?With people like Brian Wilson or Jagger even Lennon at some point people saw them as untouchable legends. Now it's like they are legends but so what? In the end they become the focal point of some sensationalist magazine articles, but somewhere they have a real life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
izzydoezit Posted April 22, 2013 Author Share Posted April 22, 2013 The media has its agenda.the media has its agenda against axl rose. why axl doesn't show up to public media events like the GNR HOF or the 2013 HOFNo agenda bullshit there. Axl was shat upon by the public and the HOF and his band was spitted out of the HOF induction. So it was an ego thing. Going there would be admitting his own failure. And Axl is known for never admitting to anything he has done wrong or not well enough.His ridiculousness peaked by saying that he couldn't write music because of Slash and Stephanie. He is a person that has never blamed himself for anything. It's just so ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lies They Tell Posted April 22, 2013 Share Posted April 22, 2013 The media has its agenda.the media has its agenda against axl rose. why axl doesn't show up to public media events like the GNR HOF or the 2013 HOFNo agenda bullshit there. Axl was shat upon by the public and the HOF and his band was spitted out of the HOF induction. So it was an ego thing. Going there would be admitting his own failure. And Axl is known for never admitting to anything he has done wrong or not well enough.His ridiculousness peaked by saying that he couldn't write music because of Slash and Stephanie. He is a person that has never blamed himself for anything. It's just so ridiculous.You know, it's pretty normal that people try to justify their own decisions in life. I don't recall Slash ever blaming himself for anything either. And it's probably true that Slash and Stephany did make Axl's life miserable, just like Axl probably made their lives miserable. And actually Axl did partly blame himself for the 2002 Philadelphia no show. And on that metal show he kinda blamed himself for not putting an end to certain rumours before they developed into something larger. Just because he tries to justify his decisions doens't mean that he never admits he's done mistakes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasted Posted April 22, 2013 Share Posted April 22, 2013 The industry is basically a reunion industry. Its a career move. Starting a new band for each record is probably too difficult for the media to understand. People like the camaradie and unity of a steady line up that respects the fanbase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volcano62 Posted April 22, 2013 Share Posted April 22, 2013 The media has its agenda.the media has its agenda against axl rose. why axl doesn't show up to public media events like the GNR HOF or the 2013 HOFNo agenda bullshit there. Axl was shat upon by the public and the HOF and his band was spitted out of the HOF induction. So it was an ego thing. Going there would be admitting his own failure. And Axl is known for never admitting to anything he has done wrong or not well enough.His ridiculousness peaked by saying that he couldn't write music because of Slash and Stephanie. He is a person that has never blamed himself for anything. It's just so ridiculous.You know, it's pretty normal that people try to justify their own decisions in life. I don't recall Slash ever blaming himself for anything either. And it's probably true that Slash and Stephany did make Axl's life miserable, just like Axl probably made their lives miserable. And actually Axl did partly blame himself for the 2002 Philadelphia no show. And on that metal show he kinda blamed himself for not putting an end to certain rumours before they developed into something larger. Just because he tries to justify his decisions doens't mean that he never admits he's done mistakes.Great post! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts