Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I love the song and the aggression in Axl's vocals. OMG was always a bit of a mystery for me, always wondered how/when it was written and what went through Axl's mind during that time. For me, the somewhat muddy/unusual production only makes it more interesting to listen to. Glad this one exists!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think people over-analyze it massively.

It's a poor song.  Regardless of sound or genre.  It was a terrible comeback song and the first in a long line of decisions by Rose that ensured the failure of NuGuns.

It's not that people 'weren't ready for that sound'.  It just wasn't good enough.

 

It's staggering that he valued that song enough to actually record it in the first place, then release it as a the introduction to the new band - and then seemingly re-record it with Buckethead and Ron later on.

 

I know some like it on here, but we are all big fans of Rose.  It's a combination of vocal delivery, relatable verse lyrics and lack of material that gets it praised here.  The song itself is poor filler and got exactly the public response it warranted.

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sweersa said:

The lyrics are the most powerful aspect of that song, and Bucket's parts on the newer version. 

I hope Axl's singing on Zodiac 13 are similar. 

Agree, the verse lyrics are interesting, and given what we know about Axl very personal.

The song is pretty bad though.

I've said all along, if a shitty band like Sun 41, Good Charlotte, Green Day etc put OMG and Scraped on one of their records, they would likely be the weakest tracks - let alone GNR.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Pele said:

I think people over-analyze it massively.

It's a poor song.  Regardless of sound or genre.  It was a terrible comeback song and the first in a long line of decisions by Rose that ensured the failure of NuGuns.

It's not that people 'weren't ready for that sound'.  It just wasn't good enough.

 

It's staggering that he valued that song enough to actually record it in the first place, then release it as a the introduction to the new band - and then seemingly re-record it with Buckethead and Ron later on.

 

I know some like it on here, but we are all big fans of Rose.  It's a combination of vocal delivery, relatable verse lyrics and lack of material that gets it praised here.  The song itself is poor filler and got exactly the public response it warranted.

 

Well I'd disagree massively. I don't think it's a poor song whatsoever. That's just my personal opinion though. 

It was more that people 'didn't want that sound' rather than 'weren't ready for it'. If they'd done something identical to their previous sound, people would probably have liked it, as people don't like change or variety much. It'll be the same if (big if) they ever release anything else. If it doesn't sound like AFD there will be a conservative element of 'classic rock fans' that won't even give it the time of day. 

I agree that it is probably over-analysed due to lack of material though! Alongside everything else! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, allwaystired said:

Well I'd disagree massively. I don't think it's a poor song whatsoever. That's just my personal opinion though. 

It was more that people 'didn't want that sound' rather than 'weren't ready for it'. If they'd done something identical to their previous sound, people would probably have liked it, as people don't like change or variety much. It'll be the same if (big if) they ever release anything else. If it doesn't sound like AFD there will be a conservative element of 'classic rock fans' that won't even give it the time of day. 

I agree that it is probably over-analysed due to lack of material though! Alongside everything else! 

I don't think it's anything to do with the sound.  It's not overly experimental anyway, it's not like it was something nobody had ever heard before.

It just goes nowhere and the chorus is woeful,

Great songs can be progressive and experimental - but underneath that sound there needs to be a good song at the core.  Something that would sound good played on a n acoustic guitar unaccompanied.  Imagine someone picking up an acoustic and playing OMG in a bar....

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Pele said:

I don't think it's anything to do with the sound.  It's not overly experimental anyway, it's not like it was something nobody had ever heard before.

It just goes nowhere and the chorus is woeful,

Great songs can be progressive and experimental - but underneath that sound there needs to be a good song at the core.  Something that would sound good played on a n acoustic guitar unaccompanied.  Imagine someone picking up an acoustic and playing OMG in a bar....

 

 

Well maybe not.....but it wasn't what people wanted from GNR. Because they just want the past repeated. 

I'd fundamentally disagree on every level that a song can only be great if it can be played on an acoustic guitar! That sort of proves my point really in that people don't want that sort of sound from GNR. They only want things that can be played on guitars. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, allwaystired said:

Well maybe not.....but it wasn't what people wanted from GNR. Because they just want the past repeated. 

I'd fundamentally disagree on every level that a song can only be great if it can be played on an acoustic guitar! That sort of proves my point really in that people don't want that sort of sound from GNR. They only want things that can be played on guitars. 

On a personal level, I didn't want the past repeated at all.  I like some of ChiDem.  OMG is just a catastrophe of a song and the general public reacted accordingly.

In regards to your second point, maybe you're right.  It's a hard question to answer as it's all very subjective, but can you think of an example of a great song (that is pretty unanimously thought of as 'great') that wouldn't be good played stripped down acoustically?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Pele said:

On a personal level, I didn't want the past repeated at all.  I like some of ChiDem.  OMG is just a catastrophe of a song and the general public reacted accordingly.

In regards to your second point, maybe you're right.  It's a hard question to answer as it's all very subjective, but can you think of an example of a great song (that is pretty unanimously thought of as 'great') that wouldn't be good played stripped down acoustically?

I think that's probably just your personal view though - lots of others genuinely love it (myself included). 'My World' is an example of a GNR song I really don't like that, in which they tried something different. But I think that's probably just MY personal taste as a lot seem to like that. I wouldn't like to go so far as to call it a "catastrophe" though, simply because I don't like it. 

I suppose on the second point, it depends what you're into! A lot of dance/hip-hop/jazz music couldn't be played on an acoustic guitar for instance and there will be people that listen to music in those genres that unanimously think of certain songs as 'great'. It is very subjective though on what you regard as 'great'. If you take it to mean 'universally popular on a mainstream level', then you might well be right. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, allwaystired said:

I think that's probably just your personal view though - lots of others genuinely love it (myself included). 'My World' is an example of a GNR song I really don't like that, in which they tried something different. But I think that's probably just MY personal taste as a lot seem to like that. I wouldn't like to go so far as to call it a "catastrophe" though, simply because I don't like it. 

I suppose on the second point, it depends what you're into! A lot of dance/hip-hop/jazz music couldn't be played on an acoustic guitar for instance and there will be people that listen to music in those genres that unanimously think of certain songs as 'great'. It is very subjective though on what you regard as 'great'. If you take it to mean 'universally popular on a mainstream level', then you might well be right. 

You're right, it is personal view and way too subjective.

My World - they tried something different, but there is just no real song there, behind all the studio work.

OMG sound wise was nothing out of the ordinary.  Behind the music, it was the most basic of songs, with a non-descript chorus.  I don't think it was the sound that surprised people, it was just how utterly average the song was.

He likely had Madagascar done at around that time which people would have enjoyed.  Launching the new band with OMG just set the whole this up for failure.  He later went on to say it was only a demo.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Pele said:

You're right, it is personal view and way too subjective.

My World - they tried something different, but there is just no real song there, behind all the studio work.

OMG sound wise was nothing out of the ordinary.  Behind the music, it was the most basic of songs, with a non-descript chorus.  I don't think it was the sound that surprised people, it was just how utterly average the song was.

He likely had Madagascar done at around that time which people would have enjoyed.  Launching the new band with OMG just set the whole this up for failure.  He later went on to say it was only a demo.

 

 

Yeah, it is a strange song for a comeback, for sure, when you think what else they had. My memory of it though is that it didn't even receive much attention at all, either positive or negative. It sort of just slipped into a film largely unnoticed....and I wonder if this was some sort of intentional ploy to be low-key about it. Test the waters almost. I think saying OMG set him up for failure is probably giving the song too much credit - there were many other things I'd lay on the table for that one! 

I think I'd take them trying different things that don't necessarily always work over some dull-rehashing of the past. I feel that way about all the bands I like really - I'd rather they made some stuff that didn't quite come out right than a lesser imitation of something they'd done well previously.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

OMG could easily be stripped down to an acoustic arrangement. There's even acoustic guitar layers in the slow parts. Obviously, you can try to slow it all down like they did with You're Crazy. 

The problem with the song, IMO, is the lack of identifiable guitars and the awful drum mix with a barely noticeable snare sound. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, allwaystired said:

Yeah, it is a strange song for a comeback, for sure, when you think what else they had. My memory of it though is that it didn't even receive much attention at all, either positive or negative. It sort of just slipped into a film largely unnoticed....and I wonder if this was some sort of intentional ploy to be low-key about it. Test the waters almost. I think saying OMG set him up for failure is probably giving the song too much credit - there were many other things I'd lay on the table for that one! 

I think I'd take them trying different things that don't necessarily always work over some dull-rehashing of the past. I feel that way about all the bands I like really - I'd rather they made some stuff that didn't quite come out right than a lesser imitation of something they'd done well previously.  

The attention/reviews it did get were negative.  I think it didn't get wider attention because it was just a completely uninteresting song.  A lot of people had forgotten about Guns, and one listen to this validated that.

Which was a shame, because he had The Blues, Madagascar, Better, State of Grace, Sorry etc to come.

4 minutes ago, Voodoochild said:

OMG could easily be stripped down to an acoustic arrangement. There's even acoustic guitar layers in the slow parts. Obviously, you can try to slow it all down like they did with You're Crazy. 

The problem with the song, IMO, is the lack of identifiable guitars and the awful drum mix with a barely noticeable snare sound. 

It could be and it would highlight how further how utterly average (to put it kindly) the song is. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Pele said:

It could be and it would highlight how further how utterly average (to put it kindly) the song is. 

But that's just your opinion. 

I don't mesure the song by its appeal to the mass audience, much less reviews. But even if you put it in the current perspective, I think it's a "cult classic" much like several of Illusions songs like Don't Damn Me. Most reviewers didn't care for songs like Locomotive either. Not comparing those songs in quality, but just the attention/reviews they got. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Voodoochild said:

But that's just your opinion. 

I don't mesure the song by its appeal to the mass audience, much less reviews. But even if you put it in the current perspective, I think it's a "cult classic" much like several of Illusions songs like Don't Damn Me. Most reviewers didn't care for songs like Locomotive either. Not comparing those songs in quality, but just the attention/reviews they got. 

Mass appeal isn't a great indicator, when when the comeback song from the biggest rock band in the world is given that response, and seemingly 60/40 poor response by actual Axl fans (myself included) it's safe to say it's pretty average.

What do you think of Riad and the Bedouins and Scraped, out of interest.

Edited by Pele
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Pele said:

Mass appeal isn't a great indicator, when when the comeback song from the biggest rock band in the world is given that response, and seemingly 60/40 poor response by actual Axl fans (myself included) it's safe to say it's pretty average.

What do you think of Riad and the Bedouins and Scraped, out of interest.

I love Riad, it's my personal favorite since its debut live. Scraped is a cool song in the instrumental. 

I understand what you mean about the comeback song and I agree. I think Axl tried to alienate his own fan base and tried to reach another target audience. But I dont think OMG sounded like other stuff that came out before or during that time. IMO, there's just a small hint of the stuff like NIN and Ministry were putting out.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...