Comparing GNR live performances to other acts

[Amir]

Phish are popular because they are a conciously trippy band. They appeal to America's drug population.

Have you ever seen that episode of The Simpsons where the audience is completely tripped out at Hullabalooza? Even though there's nothing extraordinary going on onstage.

That's a Phish audience.

And you're an idiot with shit taste.

Only the most crazed fans would defend those concerts, I think most of us here would happily accept those were 2 pretty god-awful concerts. Seen plenty of bands, like plenty of genres, never seen the appeal of jam bands, just not my thing, not gonna accuse anyone of having "shit taste".

Apart from magisme for seeing DMB multiple times. Shame on you.

[John Bonham]

I guess a lot of the Bumblenerds that frequent this forum just hate Rock music. Phish is 1 guitar, bass, drums and keys. They are fundamentally the same music form as Led Zeppelin, Jimi Hendrix.

[Amir]

Except nowhere near as amazing as Led Zeppelin or Hendrix. Whatever, man, it's not to my taste.

[John Bonham]

Except nowhere near as amazing as Led Zeppelin or Hendrix.

Agreed!!!

I'm just responding to kids like NGOG that feel comfortable reviewing concerts they've never seen or heard.

Go watch some more more cartoons you little dweeb.

[Guest NGOG]

Bumblenerds

Ha, you took that expression right from thegnrforum.

I'm an "idiot" with "shit taste" - that embodies the level of debate you're capable of.

[John Bonham]

Bumblenerds

Ha, you took that expression right from thegnrforum.

I'm an "idiot" with "shit taste" - that embodies the level of debate you're capable of.

You are, what, 15 years old? Please don't lecture me on anything. Go follow the WAGS of Guns N' Roses you asslicker.

"Bumblenerd" is a phrase we've been using around here since 2006............. long before you joined this community. What is your fascination with TGR forum?

[Guest NGOG]

I'm just responding to kids like NGOG that feel comfortable reviewing concerts they've never seen or heard.

Go watch some more more cartoons you little dweeb.

Ha, a bit like you shitting on GNR shows you've never been to? Suddenly forgot about YouTube have you?

I literally lol'ed at that second part.

Seriously dude, the cyberpolice are calling. They need you to catch more "kids that are menacing the internetz".

[Guest NGOG]

You are, what, 15 years old? Please don't lecture me on anything. Go follow the WAGS of Guns N' Roses you asslicker.

"Bumblenerd" is a phrase we've been using around here since 2006............. long before you joined this community. What is your fascination with TGR forum?

I'm pretty sure you're aware that I'm 19, though. And you're what, 40 something? Didn't stop you having a nude avatar.

Nice use of the strawman arguement. I wasn't aware that I was paying particular attention to "GNR WAGs". But feel free to go and post one of the three million tweets you've collected.

Yeah, reading a thread I was linked to equates to fascination. Further evidence that you take all of this too seriously.

[John Bonham]

Well, your @GunsNRosesNews regularly spews venom Slash's way, you don't Follow him or Re-Tweet him, but you have a very gay fascination with the ex-wife and daughters of one of the most useless members of GN'R ever, and you are Follow and Re-Tweet all of Axl's housekeeper's kids and baby daddies, etc. I thought you were naive young girl for years, but you're actually male.

[Guest NGOG]

regularly spews venom Slash's way, you don't Follow him or Re-Tweet him

but you have a very gay fascination with the ex-wife and daughters of one of the most useless members of GN'R ever

Ha, this is hilarious. Not portraying yourself in a particularly rational light here.

As well as your post being utterly ridiculous, have you ever heard of developing a useful source? Why have you neglected to mention that the account also follows Susan McKagan?

Stop taking the internet so seriously, it's not healthy.

Edit: How do I report a PM? JB is trying to bait my sexuality privately. "Did you know, that you are gay?" - dude is still living in the 80s.

Edited February 8, 2014 by NGOG

[John Bonham]

A source!!!!! Lisa Reed a source!!

Funniest thing I've read all year. Even Fucking Dizzy Reed doesn't know anything about this band.

P N' T!

[John Bonham]

As well as your post being utterly ridiculous, have you ever heard of developing a useful source? Why have you neglected to mention that the account also follows Susan McKagan?

Like I said, you seem really into the Wives And GirlfriendS.

[username]

GnR is a good live band. GnR 2006 was a better live band. But not the best I've seen. Live gigs are very difficult to compare really. I mean, the styles are just so different. How could I compare a BB King live show to a GnR live show to a Pink Floyd show. And it gets even harder when you take other (not as closely related) musical styles into the mix. It's impossible. They can all be amazing in their own way.

But in terms of a rock show, GnR is solid. I wouldn't say untouchable. I've seen better live shows and GnR. Springsteen has been consistently stellar for example. Same would go for the Stones and probably Aerosmith. And on top of that I'd say the 2006 GnR gig I saw was vastly superior to the 2010 GnR gig I saw. That had a lot to do with passion and bandmembers. And then there's stuff like setlists, how long they play, small mistakes, the crowd, the size, the venue, how many other things you've seen etc.

My main point - it's nearly impossible to compare several good live experiences and completely impossible to be objective.

I will say this though - GnR has gotten worse live since 2006. More scripted, less passionate. In 2006 there was more fire and a sense of danger. Anything could still happen. Assuming they'd even show up at all. Right now, it seems more like a group of guys going through the motions. Poser Ashba being the worst. But yeah, they're slipping towards the level of a really good coverband.

[Amir]

While I agree that Ashba is a step down from Finck, I think you're not giving enough credit to Axl and the rest of the band for 2009-10. They were playing a ton of songs from CD, mixing it up, it wasn't unusual to get IRS, classics like Nice Boys got played a few times, and Axl was giving it his all nearly every time he did TIL. When they started in 2009, things like Whole Lotta Rosie and Another Brick in the Wall were unscripted.

2011 onwards, I agree with you, it's been much more scripted. As I said before, even my dad noticed they were still playing that Brick in the Wall cover (didn't bother me so much since I quite like it). Think the best thing I can say about 2013 was finally ditching SOD (most boring part of any GNR show I've been to by far, the Motivation/Dizzy Reed Solo/SOD combo was a real vibe-killer) and playing Catcher regularly.

Edited February 8, 2014 by Amir

[John Bonham]

GnR is a good live band. GnR 2006 was a better live band. But not the best I've seen. Live gigs are very difficult to compare really. I mean, the styles are just so different. How could I compare a BB King live show to a GnR live show to a Pink Floyd show. And it gets even harder when you take other (not as closely related) musical styles into the mix. It's impossible. They can all be amazing in their own way.

But in terms of a rock show, GnR is solid. I wouldn't say untouchable. I've seen better live shows and GnR. Springsteen has been consistently stellar for example. Same would go for the Stones and probably Aerosmith. And on top of that I'd say the 2006 GnR gig I saw was vastly superior to the 2010 GnR gig I saw. That had a lot to do with passion and bandmembers. And then there's stuff like setlists, how long they play, small mistakes, the crowd, the size, the venue, how many other things you've seen etc.

My main point - it's nearly impossible to compare several good live experiences and completely impossible to be objective.

I will say this though - GnR has gotten worse live since 2006. More scripted, less passionate. In 2006 there was more fire and a sense of danger. Anything could still happen. Assuming they'd even show up at all. Right now, it seems more like a group of guys going through the motions. Poser Ashba being the worst. But yeah, they're slipping towards the level of a really good coverband.

Nu-GnR 1999-2006 were interesting.

2009 to present... worst lineup ever! In my opinion, of course.

[stumbleine]

GNR after Slash and the boys is Axl.

it's him everyone comes to see.

"the last rockstar"....all that bullshit covering up that it's only a name.

W Axl Rose doesnt represent anything anymore.not rock n roll.he's a recluse,cruel millionaire

wasting money he gets by doing the laziest thing i can possibly think of.

instead of dealing with the past,celebrate the legacy ,he plays AFD live with some yes-men

30 years later to people who either werent there when Axl stood for something or are tourists who knows

a couple of songs and know the name GNR.

it's a shame people waste hundreds of dollars on an empty Axl.

Metallica,Bruce,Pearl Jam,the new AIC....if i wasnt hooked on Axl I wouldn't go to Vegas.

[sweetness]

My thing is it's just hard to justify paying that much for tickets to see an artist who you know is going to be several hours late and most likely not going to sound very good, especially considering most of the shows I go to are priced at $20 tops and are almost always mind blowing experiences. Paying $70+ to see this band feels like a total rip-off

Edited February 8, 2014 by sweetness

[John Bonham]

I'm going to see Burning Spear "up close and personal" next week for $22.

$22

And it's not someone pretending to be Burning Spear, it's really him.

[aranrod]

Live gigs are very difficult to compare really. I mean, the styles are just so different. How could I compare a BB King live show to a GnR live show to a Pink Floyd show. And it gets even harder when you take other (not as closely related) musical styles into the mix. It's impossible. They can all be amazing in their own way.

And then there's stuff like setlists, how long they play, small mistakes, the crowd, the size, the venue, how many other things you've seen etc.

My main point - it's nearly impossible to compare several good live experiences and completely impossible to be objective.

This is so true.

On average I see a 20-25 concerts and festivals per month - small ones as well as big ones (depending on the season), but the 8 Guns shows I saw in the 90s simply were a blast. The danger, Axl's unpredictability, and the rawness of the band as a whole made a Guns show like watching a thriller : Having no clue what would happen next. When Axl stormed off we thought the show was over. But he came back all fiery and the band blasted off again. It just was, well, breathtakingly intense.

No, Axl and Guns needed no fireworks (apart from PC). They were the fireworks.

After each show I thought: Yay! I did again. I got out alive!

I never had that feeling with other bands and I've seen a lot of really great shows - so to me, I can't compare them to any other band and I will never even try to.

Like Username says: it's impossible to be objective. Which is a good thing, really, it keeps the variety in music going.

The 2012 shows I saw were totally different. They were solid, there was nothing to fear anymore, great shows, but still incomparable to other gigs as Axl is so inconsistent.

Edit: something went wrong with the quoting...

[username]

Live gigs are very difficult to compare really. I mean, the styles are just so different. How could I compare a BB King live show to a GnR live show to a Pink Floyd show. And it gets even harder when you take other (not as closely related) musical styles into the mix. It's impossible. They can all be amazing in their own way.

And then there's stuff like setlists, how long they play, small mistakes, the crowd, the size, the venue, how many other things you've seen etc.

My main point - it's nearly impossible to compare several good live experiences and completely impossible to be objective.

This is so true.

On average I see a 20-25 concerts and festivals per month - small ones as well as big ones (depending on the season), but the 8 Guns shows I saw in the 90s simply were a blast. The danger, Axl's unpredictability, and the rawness of the band as a whole made a Guns show like watching a thriller : Having no clue what would happen next. When Axl stormed off we thought the show was over. But he came back all fiery and the band blasted off again. It just was, well, breathtakingly intense.

No, Axl and Guns needed no fireworks (apart from PC). They were the fireworks.

After each show I thought: Yay! I did again. I got out alive!

I never had that feeling with other bands and I've seen a lot of really great shows - so to me, I can't compare them to any other band and I will never even try to.

Like Username says: it's impossible to be objective. Which is a good thing, really, it keeps the variety in music going.

The 2012 shows I saw were totally different. They were solid, there was nothing to fear anymore, great shows, but still incomparable to other gigs as Axl is so inconsistent.

Edit: something went wrong with the quoting...

Fixed.

Also, DANG! 20-25 a month? I used to think doing 30 or so a year was a lot. High-profile gigs anyway.

edit:

Interests I'm a rock-photographer and writer

This explains a lot.

Location The Netherlands

This means we've probably been to a lot of the same gigs. Edited February 8, 2014 by username

[Powerage5]

Attending concerts is something I do very often. Last year I saw Sebastian Bach twice, Gilby Clarke, Metallica, Alice in Chains, Rob Zombie, Aerosmith and Whitesnake (also twice). I also like to go to non-rock concerts, like Joss Stone (I love that girl!), Dave Matthews and Maroon 5.

Every concert is a different kind of experience for me- not just compared to GNR. But even with some late starts, nothing, I mean NOTHING, compares to the excitement there is in a GNR gig. The only band that has made me feel as pumped up as if I were in a GNR concert is Aerosmith. They put on a GREAT show, but their audience sucks monkey balls, and it ends up messing with my concert experience a little bit...I mean...It kills my vibe a little bit when I see people losing their shit to "Jaded" or any of their "girly rock songs" and five minutes later they have no clue of what is "Back in the Saddle", "Kings and Queens", "Train Kept a rolling" or "Mama Kin". GNR, on the other hand, has people losing their shit from "Chinese" to "Paradise"...it's insane!

I've been to a hell lot of concerts in my life (Ozzy, Black Label Society, Queen, Faith No More, Judas Priest, Metallica, Aerosmith, Bach...) and none of those bands have an audience as rowdy as GNR's. And it makes a HUGE difference when you want to compare the live experiences thing...

As far as the band itself, I still think GNR is a step ahead of most of them. Sometimes we like to bash the band or axl for "not being in a good shape", but I don't see all of those other acts bringing their A game all the time either...

Having seen GN'R 8 times (And been on the barrier or at the stage all 8 times), I don't find their crowds rowdy at all. Generally fun, but not rowdy. The one exception is at the end of The Ritz gig, there was a huge surge forward by literally like everyone on the floor, split the people on the barrier in half and we were getting pushed off to the side, but couldn't move our feet because there were already too many people on the barrier. For me, the rowdiest crowds are Maiden (In Europe), The Mighty Mighty Bosstones, and Anthrax. I'm also one and one for Iggy & The Stooges; the Toronto 2010 show was literally the craziest crowd I've ever been a part of (Zint was there and said the same thing) - 50,000 for a free show at Yonge And Dundas Square...I was at the back of the square and the crowd was still as rowdy as they are up front usually. Then a few weeks later at Sonisphere Sweden, got right up to the barrier, and there was even breathing room.

Anyways, how some of my other favorite live acts compare:

-Iron Maiden - they're my favorite live act, no doubt about it. That said, there are certainly still things I would improve. Maiden put on a huge production - while it might be cheesy to some having all the different backdrops and the big Eddies that walk on stage and rise up behind the stage, it's still something to see. Maiden crowds are absolutely the best and most positive, but also extremely rough in Europe (Especially Sweden). Maiden do not switch their setlists up at all in the middle of a tour, if they have a song that isn't gelling well after the first couple gigs of a tour they drop it instead of trying to improve it, and add one of their most god-forsaken songs (Wrathchild)...at least with Guns there's always the possibility that you might get a surprise. That said, the setlists from tour to tour vary wildly, and they're good at throwing in gems that they haven'y played, sometimes in upwards of 25 years. The two big negatives for me are their merch and their tour announcements. The quality of their merch has dropped severely in the last few years - some of my shirts the print has started to crack after a single wash (While my shirts from 2010 still look brand new). They don't price their merch according to the market they're in - I thought it was pretty disgusting in Romania last summer when shirts cost twice as much as a ticket, just because that's what they cost in the rest of Europe. Tour announcements are my biggest problem though. The band knows very well how many people travel all over the world to see just about every gig, and how those of us that do practically plan our lives around Maiden. Yet they still slowly drip out the dates. Last Summer's European tour they took over 9 months to announce all the gigs...for a 10 week tour.

-Anthrax - These guys are one of the highest energy live acts there is. Joey, Scott, and Frank never stand still for almost two hours. In terms of setlists, they're similar to GN'R in that it's usually pretty static, but every once in a while they throw a curveball. Last year when they did Among The Living in it's entirety was such a case - a few of those songs had never been played live. Ticket prices are extremely reasonable; the co-headline tour they did with Testament (And Death Angel opening) was $25.

-Alice Cooper - Alice is a master performer, through and through. His show is non-stop energy and theatrics, and he always has one of the tightest bands in the business. His shows are admittedly a bit on the short side nowadays (Usually about 80-90 minutes), but given his age combined with how demanding his show is, I guess you can't really complain. He hits the same markets every single year, still manages to release new albums every 3-4 years, and changes up his stage show and setlist every other year.

-The Mighty Mighty Bosstones - These guys are the epitome of how a band should treat their fans. The big thing to keep in mind about the Bosstones is how inactive they are for a band that isn't on hiatus. They all have day jobs, and at most do a single two week tour per year, plus a handful of hometown gigs in Boston every December. Last year for example, they did a total of 10 gigs - and that was considered a fairly active year by their standards. Despite the fact that their fans are pretty starved for live shows, they manage to avoid being a nostalgia act. They're always throwing some curveballs and rarities into the setlist at every single gig, you really never know what you'll get. They take that idea to the extreme at the annual Hometown Throwdown every December. They do 3 gigs on consecutive days at the Boston House Of Blues. Normally a no-stage-show band, they make the Throwdown a huge production; this year's stage was a sort of variety hour stage set. They repeat almost no songs between nights - this year the setlists added up to a total of 86 songs, 66 of which were unique to one night, 5 were played all 3 nights, and the last few were played twice. 2 songs had never been played live before, about a dozen were played for the second time ever, and another handful were played for the third of fourth time. They play B-sides, they play unreleased songs, they play LP-only bonus songs, they play everything. They always throw in a couple extra "activities" throughout the weekend also; this year they had a meet and greet down the street from the HOB, and a sled-with-the-Bosstones day in Fenway Park. On top of all of that, all the proceeds from the gigs and activities go to a given charity every year. Frankly, the only thing to complain about with these guys is that they're not as active as they used to be.

Honestly, GN'R are one of my favorite live acts. Of course I wish the band would progress artistically. But when they come on stage, I always have a great time. I can always find something to gripe about no matter who the artist is. Do I wish the Vegas residency would have the same variety in the setlist as a Bosstones Hometown Throwdown? Absolutely. But switching off, do I wish the Bosstones would tour with the same frequency as GN'R? You bet.

[aranrod]

Live gigs are very difficult to compare really. I mean, the styles are just so different. How could I compare a BB King live show to a GnR live show to a Pink Floyd show. And it gets even harder when you take other (not as closely related) musical styles into the mix. It's impossible. They can all be amazing in their own way.

And then there's stuff like setlists, how long they play, small mistakes, the crowd, the size, the venue, how many other things you've seen etc.

My main point - it's nearly impossible to compare several good live experiences and completely impossible to be objective.

This is so true.

On average I see a 20-25 concerts and festivals per month - small ones as well as big ones (depending on the season), but the 8 Guns shows I saw in the 90s simply were a blast. The danger, Axl's unpredictability, and the rawness of the band as a whole made a Guns show like watching a thriller : Having no clue what would happen next. When Axl stormed off we thought the show was over. But he came back all fiery and the band blasted off again. It just was, well, breathtakingly intense.

No, Axl and Guns needed no fireworks (apart from PC). They were the fireworks.

After each show I thought: Yay! I did again. I got out alive!

I never had that feeling with other bands and I've seen a lot of really great shows - so to me, I can't compare them to any other band and I will never even try to.

Like Username says: it's impossible to be objective. Which is a good thing, really, it keeps the variety in music going.

The 2012 shows I saw were totally different. They were solid, there was nothing to fear anymore, great shows, but still incomparable to other gigs as Axl is so inconsistent.

Edit: something went wrong with the quoting...

Fixed.

Also, DANG! 20-25 a month? I used to think doing 30 or so a year was a lot. High-profile gigs anyway.

edit:

Interests I'm a rock-photographer and writer

This explains a lot.

Location The Netherlands

This means we've probably been to a lot of the same gigs.

I bet we have.

[aranrod]

P.S. Yes, I had a look, we sure have been to a lot of the same gigs.

Edited February 9, 2014 by aranrod

[Axl_morris]

For me it's hard to compare as I don't know any other bands back catalogue as much as I know GNR's.

I like the use of pyro, and that smell is when you KNOW your are at a GNR show. It's the only place I ever smell it. Fuckin' great cause you associate that smell with GNR. Maybe it's just me.

[circusboy666]

for my money(and i've been to way over 200 concerts) GNR is up there with the greatest performers. the one thing i think actually takes away from the overall rating of a guns show is it is too long. If shows were closer to 2 hours the setlists could be way different since they couldnt pack all the same songs in each night. they must be exhausted after the shows...3 hours is a long time up there and im sure it takes a toll on their performance. But with my money no one puts on better shows than les claypool or mike patton. Each one has different shows all the time, very energetic and intimate and shows are almost always 2 hours or less. only other band who i think is as good or better than GUNS as far as big bands is Pearl Jam. Different show every time and the crowd is so into it...