Did Guns N' Roses really save us from 'The 80's' - synth music and spandex rock

[auad]

no.

the only thing that the band saved was the bank account of the members.

[MYWIFEMYLIFE]

GNR made great music and took advantage of coming after big acts like Stones, bowie, john, ledzep, queen, pistols, Beatles...

They had the perfect mixture of the olds and they had their energy. Nothing comes and will never come close to what GNR was around 88-94. Nothing.

[dalsh327]

Idk man, I love me some synths and spandex rock..

MTV turned its back on bands, new album releases, and band appearances, and the monster they helped create - reality TV -is the reason. They should start letting the music back in. It's another reason why album sales declined, not just Napster.

The prez of mtv released a really interesting video explaining why they don't do music anymore.

It comes down to money. Once people started pirating music, there was such little money going into the music industry, which included mtv. So, mtv being a business, they stopped pushing music and turned to whatever else they could make money from: reality TV.

Mtv is a business, not a charity. So yeah, as a businessperson myself, I completely understand why they turned their backs on music videos. I'd do the same. It was either that or go out of business.

And you can thank all the people who insist that music piracy is a good thing.

The brand should still be focused on music if you're calling it Music Television. It would be like Burger King without the burger, or KFC without the Chicken.

Guns N Roses was so big it's incomprehensable today. There's too much going on now, too many indies, too much social media, just too much. Back then guns n roses had captivated people around the world.

They had stories of drugs, arrest, and just about anything the media could make up or get their hands on. The fact that they were making really good music and pulling together some great shows made them the perfect package.

But with that came the people who wanted to say "they aren't that good!" Or "they will fall apart" but they kept it together for quite a bit longer than they should have. When it fell apart though people were ready to pounce. "Nirvana killed them" and dumb comments like that.

I don't think GNR saved anything, they were just that band that comes along every once in a while and grabs your attention. They were that good, that they could carry the music industry. From big music videos, to double albums they controlled what direction music was heading. When nirvana came along they were doing some good things. They had a great album, but their focus on hating every step was ridiculous. Their music was good but they couldn't carry an industry, they were just helping destroy music. How would their legacy be remembered if Kurt hadn't shot himself? Where were they going with their music. It just seemed like a whole lot of nothing. But people were buying into it at the time so it was fine, but Gn'R is to me a much bigger presence in music than was nirvana.

As far as the slash and Axl view of music changing I think they always found an excellent middle ground. One of my favorite songs is Dead Horse bc of the depressed Intro with Axl on acoustic. And then all of a sudden the song breaking into a great rocker. To me that sounds like GN'R saying yea we can be nirvana but we're not. We are just going to make great rock music!

This post has a lot of nothing in it also, just some thoughts from reading some of what you guys posted. Great discussion though. I just hate when people say nirvana killed gnr. Dumbest thing I've ever heard!

I don't know if I'd call it incomprehensible. Something that people would get out of work to try to get first dibs on and kick anyone's ass that got in their way, that comes pretty close.

[BetterDay7]

I would argue no.

Honestly, as much as we love Guns N' Roses, they were not ALL THAT different from the then current crop of Glam Rock musicians. They were grittier in theme and stylings, yes, but not as real lyrically as say, Metallica was. They weren't as socio-political or issue oriented as a band like Queensyrche. They didn't even really introduce anything that had been missing from Rock, in my opinion. You have a few dark songs on Appetite, but the overriding themes on that album are sex, drugs and rock n' roll--the same old story, just retold a bit differently. GN'R were not the "Dark Knight" of '80s music; they did not reinvent the genre--they offered a take on it that had been done before, but with a tad more depth. They were basically a darker version of Aerosmith on AFD, and then a watered down mix of all their '70s influences on the Illusions.

The only real game changers of the period were U2 (which I hate), Nirvana and R.E.M. Those groups introduced something brand new to the masses. The others simply did what GN'R did--their own take on old '70s stuff. Soundgarden, Pearl Jam and Guns N' Roses were, spiritually speaking, not very far removed. Sound wise yes. But both had the same idea. Take '70s Aerosmith/Zeppelin style rock and repackage it for a new generation.

Guns N' Roses did not save anyone from anything except perhaps individuals. They were already what is called "dad rock" when they began, which is why a good dose of above 30 people in the '80s got into them just as much as the teens and kids.

Guns had a lot harder edge to them than the typical rock band. Legitimately dangerous (riots and whatnot). I was just watching a live video of the Cars in one of these articles about bands that keep getting snubbed for the Hall of Fame. What struck me most about it is just how uptight and nerdy the Cars were in their presentation to the audience. Good music for sure, but lacking anywhere near the energy and "cool" factor GN'R brought to the table.

GN'R was a sleazy 1970's hard rock band trapped in the 1980's Hollywood glam scene. What separated them from Motley Crue and all the others is that they wanted to escape that shitty life instead of enjoying the hell out of it. GN'R easily could have just ended up as some little cult band. I think they accidentally stumbled on to something the public was desperately wanting in rock music at the time: real musicians with an honest perspective on the world.

I think that's true - about stumbling into something bigger than they could have dreamed of.

Also, this may have been mentioned elsewhere, but they were living the r n r life before they became famous, not just afterwards. They were doing these 'dangerous' things (drugs, drink, strippers) as their bona fide lifestyle. Their energy was incredible.