Jump to content

Duff is playing the Grammys tonight


Recommended Posts

I don't usually turn award shows on, but was curious about the HV set. I don't have high expectation of the musical acts on award shows as what few I have seen they rarely sound great in my opinion. I did not have high expectations for HV's performance. In the end I thought it was fun looking, but the guitars sounded messy to me.

Wasn't a fan of Kendrick's performance at all. I am just not a big fan of musical theater :shrugs:  Whenever it started to get good it would pull back into a theater type performance with an irritating saxophone.  The saxophone grated on my nerves, especially at the beginning. Wasn't impressed with the Alexander Hamilton Broadway act either. I get other people liked them, and more power to you if you did, just not my cup of tea.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Jephro Rucastle said:

Does anybody know what kind of bass Duff is playing? Basically like his signatire model (P/J pickups, P body, J neck) and is says "Duff" on the round part of the headstock, but i cant read the small lettering along the bottom. Thanks for any help. FWIW, its not because I thought it sounded good (mix was awful) I'm just into gear. Thanks again

I was wondering the same thing. Definitely no Fender logo on that thing even thought it looks just like one. It was really nice whatever it was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Nicklord said:

He was later when they showed musicians that passed away since the last Grammys. It's not because of drug use, it's because he isn't on level with BB King, Glenn Fry, Lemmy and David Bowie.

In terms of popularity, the only one who would be considered a lot more popular would be David Bowie....he's about par (in terms of popularity) with the rest of those guys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Kasanova King said:

In terms of popularity, the only one who would be considered a lot more popular would be David Bowie....he's about par (in terms of popularity) with the rest of those guys.

Weiland before BB King and Lemmy? You have to be kidding? BB King is a titan of twentieth century American music, a legend you can talk about alongside your Elvises and Aretha Franklins whereas Lemmy inspired 99% of the hard rock and metal bands that have ever existed.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, DieselDaisy said:

Weiland before BB King and Lemmy? You have to be kidding? BB King is a titan of twentieth century American music, a legend you can talk about alongside your Elvises and Aretha Franklins whereas Lemmy inspired 99% of the hard rock and metal bands that have ever existed.

I specifically said popularity...and I meant on a global level.  Pretty sure Weiland has sold more records (globally) between STP, Velvet Revolver and solo projects than those guys...other than Bowie...maybe Fry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Kasanova King said:

lol...it was a great performance...and he did flow fine...with a ton of power behind his performance. I didn't notice anything controversial about it, so not sure what you're referring to.

Wow. Then you simple aren't paying attention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Apollo said:

I think my son's music sucks. 

My parents thought that my music sucked. 

My grandparents thought that my parent's music sucked. 

And so on. 

Think about this. There have been generations that thought Elvis sucked. That The Beatles sucked. That Led Zep and The Rolling Stones sucked. And......that Guns n Roses sucked. 

Older generations rarely get or understand the current generations music. 

Pop music and awards shows are mainly for what is popular and for the younger crowd. We might not like a band, but if millions of people do......

(Not 100% of the time, obviously. But the majority of the time.)

Times have drastically changed in terms of this though. My Dad actually likes my music, I liked my Dad's music and can totally appreciate my grandparents music. Can you honestly sit there and say it's just a  generational thing now as compared to back in the day. Theres a massive difference. Todays' music in the mainstream is pretty fucking awful for the most part and when performances like Kendrick Lamar's are labelled as great that's a pretty sad sign of where the state of mainstream music is today. The standards of performance are so fucking low anymore. There's a reason why only the "nostalgia" acts sell massive tours. It's all about performance. Anyone think Kendrick Lamar is doinga  wrold wide arena tour selling it out on his own? Nope. Why? Because the performance is fucking terrible and nobody really enjoys it.  I'm not old enough that I should be jaded about it today's mainstream music. People in their mid 30s when I was in high school were still digging the mainstream music scene. Not so much these days. The music industry has been in decline since the late 90s. Right out of high school I noticed it happening. To ignore this is just being blind.  This isn't a matter of just getting old and not "getting" the younger generation. It's a pretty obvious case of complete lack of quality in terms of product and performances. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Babooshka said:

I just watched it on youtube, and I can't stand that sort of editing. Flashing all over the place with quick cuts. You see nothing, you don't get a sense of the performance at all.

Same reason I can't enjoy any of the live Iron Maiden dvds from Rock In Rio onwards. Except for Flight 666 which was directed by someone other than the band.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Bono said:

Times have drastically changed in terms of this though. My Dad actually likes my music, I liked my Dad's music and can totally appreciate my grandparents music. Can you honestly sit there and say it's just a  generational thing now as compared to back in the day. Theres a massive difference. Todays' music in the mainstream is pretty fucking awful for the most part and when performances like Kendrick Lamar's are labelled as great that's a pretty sad sign of where the state of mainstream music is today. The standards of performance are so fucking low anymore. There's a reason why only the "nostalgia" acts sell massive tours. It's all about performance. Anyone think Kendrick Lamar is doinga  wrold wide arena tour selling it out on his own? Nope. Why? Because the performance is fucking terrible and nobody really enjoys it.  I'm not old enough that I should be jaded about it today's mainstream music. People in their mid 30s when I was in high school were still digging the mainstream music scene. Not so much these days. The music industry has been in decline since the late 90s. Right out of high school I noticed it happening. To ignore this is just being blind.  This isn't a matter of just getting old and not "getting" the younger generation. It's a pretty obvious case of complete lack of quality in terms of product and performances. 

 

I agree, just need to look at music festivals! specially hard rock/ metal Its the same bands over and over and its the older band who headline them. I went to a UK festival 3 years ago and two of the three headliners are the same this year.

I think the problem about music and why a massive decline is being seen is  that folk are now into other things as at the end of the day music is like movies, gaming etc Its a source of entertainment and not many folk are going to take time to listen to a full albums  etc when you can just pick up a controller or just switch on netflix and relax. Out of my friends I'm probably the only one who still buys albums. A lot of modern band are really poor as I think musicians are now have become too snobbery and go on and on about the art etc when at the end of the day they need to be entertaining. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, RussTCB said:

Yeah, that's how it usually is with The Grammys though. The feel like fast editing = rocking out apparently.

I felt the same way while watching the GnR concert DVD from last year. I couldn't even watch the entire thing. We don't need a different camera shot every three seconds. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Kasanova King said:

In terms of popularity, the only one who would be considered a lot more popular would be David Bowie....he's about par (in terms of popularity) with the rest of those guys.

Glen Frey sold over 100 million albums with the Eagles. Pretty sure Weidland isn't even in that same conversation. 

Scott had a good career. But he isn't on the same level as BB King, Bowie, Lemmy or Frey. Maybe not even one level below. More like two or three levels below, tbh. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Apollo said:

Glen Frey sold over 100 million albums with the Eagles. Pretty sure Weidland isn't even in that same conversation. 

Scott had a good career. But he isn't on the same level as BB King, Bowie, Lemmy or Frey. Maybe not even one level below. More like two or three levels below, tbh. 

I added Frey in my follow up post as being more popular...so he's in the middle in terms of popularity since he's probably outsold Lemmy and BB King.

I'm not debating whether or not he was more influential than any of those guys...just saying that he was about as popular as them.   And since the Grammys are basically a popularity contest, one would think some sort of small tribute (1 min of one of his songs, etc) could have been done...but the reason nothing was done for him is because of the way he died.....Hollywood really frowned upon his lifestyle in his later years and basically looked the other way after he passed.

Edited by Kasanova King
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, smoking guns said:

Scott is considered one of the greatest frontmen ever. Top 10-15 all time in Rock. I like Lemmy, but Motörhead was not mainstream at ALL!!!  STP are one of THE bands of the 90's. He deserved a mention. 

I love STP....and Weiland, but no way he is top 10-15 frontmen of all time rock.  Just no, top 50 probably.

He did deserve a mention though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bono said:

Times have drastically changed in terms of this though. My Dad actually likes my music, I liked my Dad's music and can totally appreciate my grandparents music. Can you honestly sit there and say it's just a  generational thing now as compared to back in the day. Theres a massive difference. Todays' music in the mainstream is pretty fucking awful for the most part and when performances like Kendrick Lamar's are labelled as great that's a pretty sad sign of where the state of mainstream music is today. The standards of performance are so fucking low anymore. There's a reason why only the "nostalgia" acts sell massive tours. It's all about performance. Anyone think Kendrick Lamar is doinga  wrold wide arena tour selling it out on his own? Nope. Why? Because the performance is fucking terrible and nobody really enjoys it.  I'm not old enough that I should be jaded about it today's mainstream music. People in their mid 30s when I was in high school were still digging the mainstream music scene. Not so much these days. The music industry has been in decline since the late 90s. Right out of high school I noticed it happening. To ignore this is just being blind.  This isn't a matter of just getting old and not "getting" the younger generation. It's a pretty obvious case of complete lack of quality in terms of product and performances. 

I see you do the same thing in the wrestling thread though, when it's one thing then ok fair enough, but when nothing current is any good, part of it has to be you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Apollo said:

Wasn't that almost 30 years ago? And wasn't it the first year they had a metal/rock combination award?

Metallica has gone on to win I think  a bunch of Grammy awards. They've gotten over it.  Been almost 30 years, perhaps you can let your anger go as well?

And why wouldn't pop princesses be involved in an awards show that honors and gives awards to the most popular music? 

Posers? Who are the posers? People who don't love metal?

Weidland wasn't big enough of a cross over music star to warrant a tribute song. Maybe at a Golden Gods or Hard Rock awards show. But if the Grammys did song tributes to every musician who died then the show would be six hours long. 

1.  Metallica > Jethro Tull.  no anger, just a fact.

2.  Pop princesses suck

3.  Weiland won 2 Grammys, one with STP and one with VR.  Not taking anything away from Lemmy, cause he's great......but I believe that puts Weiland ahead of him in the Grammy count.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, smoking guns said:

Scott is considered one of the greatest frontmen ever. Top 10-15 all time in Rock. I like Lemmy, but Motörhead was not mainstream at ALL!!!  STP are one of THE bands of the 90's. He deserved a mention. 

Not in my household.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...