Their peers

[goodtimes8inity]

For "brand name" recognition, Guns N' Roses is number one.  People will be wearing the  Guns N' Roses logo for centuries to come.

[Tom2112]

On 12/25/2021 at 7:21 AM, WhazUp said:

Unfortunately I think while GNR could have been on that tier possibly and potentially, they cannot compete with any of those bands in terms of the same league of legendary.  GNR are a huge band still, but compared to Sabbath, Queen, and Zeppelin they are akin to a small theatre band IMO

 

Especially Zeppelin, don't get me wrong I love GNR to death but Led Zeppelin is just on another level of legendary completely and I think Axl and Slash themselves would admit such

Small theatre act in comparison to Queen, Sabbath and Zeppelin?? Sorry that's utter shite.

I know gnr have released fuck all but they are absolutely huge regardless, they made themselves legendary with one record and the rest of their legend is down to them being a complete rock n roll story where they get to the top and implode.

GNR are as big/famous as any of the those even without the back catalogue to back it up.

[lame ass security]

Spinal Tap

[ShadowOfTheWave]

4 hours ago, Tom2112 said:

Small theatre act in comparison to Queen, Sabbath and Zeppelin?? Sorry that's utter shite.

I know gnr have released fuck all but they are absolutely huge regardless, they made themselves legendary with one record and the rest of their legend is down to them being a complete rock n roll story where they get to the top and implode.

GNR are as big/famous as any of the those even without the back catalogue to back it up.

Sabbath is nowhere near as big culturally as GNR/Queen/Zeppelin.

Edited December 29, 2021 by ShadowOfTheWave

[WhazUp]

43 minutes ago, Tom2112 said:

Small theatre act in comparison to Queen, Sabbath and Zeppelin?? Sorry that's utter shite.

I know gnr have released fuck all but they are absolutely huge regardless, they made themselves legendary with one record and the rest of their legend is down to them being a complete rock n roll story where they get to the top and implode.

GNR are as big/famous as any of the those even without the back catalogue to back it up.

I think that when it comes to musical peers, historical significance, iconic, etc. I think of it in 3 tiers:

The "untouchables" - The Beatles, Elvis, The Rolling Stones, etc.

The legendary acts that came in the late '60s and early '70s that shaped hard rock that gave GNR the ability to do their thing:  Zeppelin, Floyd, Sabbath, Queen, Elton John

And the third tier below that, being the iconic bands that will always be remembered, but to me are just a tad below the first 2 in terms of legendary status:  Metallica, GNR, Nirvana, etc.

 

But of course, asking this question on here is like asking "Beatles versus Stones" on a Beatles page lol so I am not expecting it to be met with full agreement here, just it is my observations taking the entire history and context of rock music and its influences, into account

Edited December 28, 2021 by WhazUp

[martinb33]

Metallica, maybe Aerosmith. These are slightly "bigger" anyway.

Beatles, Floyd, Zepp, Stones, Queen play in the major leagues. Even Sabbath, Purple, Maiden, AC/DC are on another level, even though the latter are not as mainstream as GN'R (except ACDC).

I'm surprised so much mention of Nirvana, it doesn't participate at all here, IMO.

[MYWIFEMYLIFE]

3 hours ago, BillConnor_1982 said:

They don’t have any peers because no one else milks their fans to this extent 

tallica and maiden are the masters of that game

[MYWIFEMYLIFE]

Anyone remember Freddie Mercury Tribute concert where nearly everyone was in? And still some people can talk shit about or try to underestimate GNR?

They were once the biggest and untouchable in every sense. Then the fucked it up. But, they're still at the top with some 3-4 bands.

[Tom2112]

1 hour ago, MYWIFEMYLIFE said:

tallica and maiden are the masters of that game

Yeah... Metallica/Maiden are the worst... Continually bringing out new material, touring, doing interviews, releasing HQ live video content. So glad gnr have such high respect for us that they only tour and charge well beyond what they are worth.

[Tom2112]

3 hours ago, ShadowOfTheWave said:

Sabbath is no where near as big culturally as GNR/Queen/Zeppelin.

Not in album/ticket sales but their influence alone bumps them up a few tiers

[BillConnor_1982]

5 hours ago, MYWIFEMYLIFE said:

tallica and maiden are the masters of that game

I mean, at least their product has a little more substance to it other than a toy truck and children’s books, and they stilL put out new music, although it’s not that great

[mystery]

On 12/28/2021 at 6:16 PM, martinb33 said:

Metallica, maybe Aerosmith. These are slightly "bigger" anyway.

Beatles, Floyd, Zepp, Stones, Queen play in the major leagues. Even Sabbath, Purple, Maiden, AC/DC are on another level, even though the latter are not as mainstream as GN'R (except ACDC).

I'm surprised so much mention of Nirvana, it doesn't participate at all here, IMO.

Nirvana had such a brief run as an active band that it's hard to really place them that high. Kurt Cobain's death really elevated them to a legendary status.

By late 1993-early 94 mainstream interest was waning a bit with Nirvana. Part of it was by design with In Utero which didn't hit nearly as big as Nevermind. Pearl Jam was arguably more popular than Nirvana by that point.

Edited January 3, 2022 by mystery

[GNRfanx6]

4 hours ago, mystery said:

Nirvana had such a brief run as an active band that it's hard to really place them that high. Kurt Cobain's death really elevated them to a legendary status.

By late 1993-early 94 mainstream interest was waning a bit with Nirvana. Part of it was by design with In Utero which didn't hit nearly as big as Nevermind. Pearl Jam was arguably more popular than Nirvana by that point.

That is so true. If Nirvana fans were more honest with themselves I think they would realize is that one of the only reasons nirvana became so huge for this long was because of the death. Imagine a new nirvana album that comes out in 1998. It would have been garbage. That band is a perfect example of right place right time. I'm gunna get flamed for this comment lmfao =]

[thunderram]

On 12/26/2021 at 9:34 AM, t-p-d-a said:

The next Level is Legends like Led Zeppelin, Nirvana, Queen, The Beatles...
 

Nirvana has less original material than GN'R.

They were a great band for the grunge era, but not on the level of GN'R, Van Halen or Metallica.

If not for the tragic death of Cobain, they'd never have been immortalized the same way.

Furthermore, as far as Dave Grohl goes, his career has been better off w/o Nirvana. Had Cobain not passed and he remained in that band, it's highly doubtful he's known the same way today. He surely wouldn't have been singing and playing guitar in that band, and his song writing credits were very limited.

[EvanG]

3 hours ago, thunderram said:

Nirvana has less original material than GN'R.

They were a great band for the grunge era, but not on the level of GN'R, Van Halen or Metallica.

If not for the tragic death of Cobain, they'd never have been immortalized the same way.

Furthermore, as far as Dave Grohl goes, his career has been better off w/o Nirvana. Had Cobain not passed and he remained in that band, it's highly doubtful he's known the same way today. He surely wouldn't have been singing and playing guitar in that band, and his song writing credits were very limited.

That's kinda a given for anyone who dies young and at the height of their success. For some reason people are drawn to tragic stories. He became legendary after his death.

Had Kurt not died, Nirvana would have probably broken up anyway. He didn't want to play in that band anymore, he had already written a letter to Krist and Dave where he basically fired them. 

But if they had continued, it probably would have been without Dave because there was tension between them and Dave was already working on his own music. Most Foo Fighters songs from the first record had already been written while being in Nirvana.

If they had kept the band going somehow, with another drummer, I think they could have been where Pearl Jam is now if their music output would have been strong enough. 

Edited January 3, 2022 by EvanG

[DurhamGirl]

As a newish fan of GnR and as a consequence have just recently researched them and their early years, in my opinion, it goes without saying that are and will be viewed as top tier legendary.  Just watch and listen to the Jungle video or observe how young people are being drawn to them now.

[mystery]

On 1/3/2022 at 8:23 AM, EvanG said:

That's kinda a given for anyone who dies young and at the height of their success. For some reason people are drawn to tragic stories. He became legendary after his death.

Had Kurt not died, Nirvana would have probably broken up anyway. He didn't want to play in that band anymore, he had already written a letter to Krist and Dave where he basically fired them. 

But if they had continued, it probably would have been without Dave because there was tension between them and Dave was already working on his own music. Most Foo Fighters songs from the first record had already been written while being in Nirvana.

If they had kept the band going somehow, with another drummer, I think they could have been where Pearl Jam is now if their music output would have been strong enough. 

Wasn't part of Kurt's deal that he got more of the songwriting royalties from Dave and Krist? Dave says Kurt was actually happy he was starting to write songs. The only song with full vocals and writing by Dave I believe is Marigold.

I always thought if Kurt managed to get clean and kept the band going he should have went the Pearl Jam route of no music videos and minimal interviews for a few years. Pearl Jam actively tried to shed the massive popularity they had.

I also really wonder what the state of Kurt Cobain's voice would be had he lived. He was already suffering vocal problems which stopped their tour in 1994 and I can't imagine his style of singing combined with his lifestyle would hold up.

 

 

[Homefuck]

It's a hard nut to crack since there's also a cultural aspect to it. Van Halen is for example (to the common man) kind of only known for "jump" in sweden, whilst as far as I know they are/where huge in the US. Also, Aerosmith didn't become big in (at least large parts of) europe until their second wave during the 80's and 90's.

So everybody's going to have a different perception regarding this matter (or any matter for that matter) based on their cultural (and other) biases. This with the exception of beatles being at the top of the ladder. Some would say that the Rolling stones belong there with them, but I don't agree (most probably because I'm biased :)).

Edited January 6, 2022 by Homefuck

[EvanG]

On 1/5/2022 at 5:43 AM, mystery said:

Wasn't part of Kurt's deal that he got more of the songwriting royalties from Dave and Krist? Dave says Kurt was actually happy he was starting to write songs. The only song with full vocals and writing by Dave I believe is Marigold.

I always thought if Kurt managed to get clean and kept the band going he should have went the Pearl Jam route of no music videos and minimal interviews for a few years. Pearl Jam actively tried to shed the massive popularity they had.

I also really wonder what the state of Kurt Cobain's voice would be had he lived. He was already suffering vocal problems which stopped their tour in 1994 and I can't imagine his style of singing combined with his lifestyle would hold up.

 

 

Yeah, he said that in an interview, but who knows if he meant that? The guy was a walking contradiction. Maybe he was just humouring Dave. There was some change in songwriting royalties, which didn't help the tension in the band obviously.

I think he blew out his voice on purpose during that 1994 tour because that was the only way to get out of it. He was unhappy and very addicted at that point and really wanted to get away from everything and touring was the last thing he wanted to do.

[mystery]

2 hours ago, EvanG said:

Yeah, he said that in an interview, but who knows if he meant that? The guy was a walking contradiction. Maybe he was just humouring Dave. There was some change in songwriting royalties, which didn't help the tension in the band obviously.

I think he blew out his voice on purpose during that 1994 tour because that was the only way to get out of it. He was unhappy and very addicted at that point and really wanted to get away from everything and touring was the last thing he wanted to do.

I think his voice just wasn't meant for long term use. If he was alive today it'd be criticized just like Axl. Read that Doug Goldstein called Axl after Kurt died out of concern and talked with him for a few hours.

[EvanG]

12 minutes ago, mystery said:

I think his voice just wasn't meant for long term use. If he was alive today it'd be criticized just like Axl. Read that Doug Goldstein called Axl after Kurt died out of concern and talked with him for a few hours.

That's impossible to say when someone dies so young. It has to do with genetics as well. Some singers sound like crap when they get older, some still sound the same as before. Who knows how Cobain's voice would have held up?

[mystery]

1 minute ago, EvanG said:

That's impossible to say when someone dies so young. It has to do with genetics as well. Some singers sound like crap when they get older, some still sound the same as before. Who knows how Cobain's voice would have held up?

I don't think Kurt had much proper vocal training and it sounded like he was shredding his voice. Axl at the end of the UYI tour sounded pretty good and there was no indication that it would change as much as it did in the years after.

Just can't see Kurt in his mid-late 30s singing with the same harshness in his voice. Even Eddie Vedder and Chris Cornell who were his peers had their voices decline a bit as the years went on. Drugs also would have done no favors for Kurt and his voice.

[EvanG]

3 minutes ago, mystery said:

I don't think Kurt had much proper vocal training and it sounded like he was shredding his voice. Axl at the end of the UYI tour sounded pretty good and there was no indication that it would change as much as it did in the years after.

Just can't see Kurt in his mid-late 30s singing with the same harshness in his voice. Even Eddie Vedder and Chris Cornell who were his peers had their voices decline a bit as the years went on. Drugs also would have done no favors for Kurt and his voice.

If you told me in the 80's that Jon Bon Jovi would have lost a lot of power in his voice by his 50's and that Steven Tyler still sounds close to how he did when he was younger, I wouldn't have believed you either. Of course it depends on your lifestyle, but who is to say how Cobain's voice would have sounded if he cleaned up and was still singing today at 54 years of age?

[Gordon Comstock]

15 minutes ago, mystery said:

Axl at the end of the UYI tour sounded pretty good and there was no indication that it would change as much as it did in the years after.

 

Axl's voice by the end of the UYI tour had thinned out dramatically. It was far more strained than it was in '91 or '92. He still sounded good, but there was every indication that his voice would continue to change in the following years. His voice changed on every GNR album. You can hear what's basically the early "CD voice" on Anxious Disease and Gilby's cover of Dead Flowers.

[mystery]

22 minutes ago, Gordon Comstock said:

 

Axl's voice by the end of the UYI tour had thinned out dramatically. It was far more strained than it was in '91 or '92. He still sounded good, but there was every indication that his voice would continue to change in the following years. His voice changed on every GNR album. You can hear what's basically the early "CD voice" on Anxious Disease and Gilby's cover of Dead Flowers.

That's true but I don't think it was as easy to tell as a casual follower. It's easy to access Dead Flowers and Anxious Disease today online but most people wouldn't have heard Axl again until 2002 or Live Era if they could spot the re-recorded stuff.

I just don't see Kurt Cobain maintaining his voice which always sounded a bit rough live. He blew it out during that European tour in 1994 and it was absolutely shot at the last Nirvana show they ever did.

Said before that Nirvana benefits massively from the success of Nevermind and Kurt dying at 27 and staying that way in people's minds. They also have a cool logo that lots of younger people wear similar to Guns. I say this as someone who likes Nirvana.