mingsubu Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 It would be so made fun of if these two bands toured together. Two bad vocalists. With that said, I'd rather hear Neil's out of breath voice than mickey mouse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rovim Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 not worthy to share a stage with Gn'R imho 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimiRose Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 22 hours ago, Free Bird said: But it’s not only the name. To me there’s a difference in styles between GNR and Mötley. To you yes, but not to 99% of public. Both came out of sunset strip in the 80s, both play hard rock, both have singers that can't sing anymore, both have members of crossover fame (slash and tommy lee) the bands are basically the same set up 2 guitar bass drum vocal. Obviously to those of us who can pick different subgenres within genres, they have different sounds, but they both fall under 'rock' or 'classic rock' the same way van halen sound nothing like GnR but come from same area and play the same genre, so of course they are lumped in together. Metallica and GnR toured because people think they're basically the same and they are literally different genres whereas GnR and Motley arent. Today you'll see a classic rock playlist contain nirvana (grunge) metallica (metal) Acdc, rolling stones, the doors, gnr motley etc. You can argue the two that sound most alike out of those are gnr and motley. Today people only care about names. Names equal $$$$££££ and thats all they care about. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rovim Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 42 minutes ago, JimiRose said: To you yes, but not to 99% of public. Both came out of sunset strip in the 80s, both play hard rock, both have singers that can't sing anymore, both have members of crossover fame (slash and tommy lee) the bands are basically the same set up 2 guitar bass drum vocal. Obviously to those of us who can pick different subgenres within genres, they have different sounds, but they both fall under 'rock' or 'classic rock' the same way van halen sound nothing like GnR but come from same area and play the same genre, so of course they are lumped in together. Metallica and GnR toured because people think they're basically the same and they are literally different genres whereas GnR and Motley arent. Today you'll see a classic rock playlist contain nirvana (grunge) metallica (metal) Acdc, rolling stones, the doors, gnr motley etc. You can argue the two that sound most alike out of those are gnr and motley. Today people only care about names. Names equal $$$$££££ and thats all they care about. Gn'R created and released AFD, a masterpiece of hard rock. you're comparing that to anything MC did musically? 99% of the public? says who? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon Comstock Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 1 hour ago, JimiRose said: To you yes, but not to 99% of public. Both came out of sunset strip in the 80s, both play hard rock, both have singers that can't sing anymore, both have members of crossover fame (slash and tommy lee) the bands are basically the same set up 2 guitar bass drum vocal. Obviously to those of us who can pick different subgenres within genres, they have different sounds, but they both fall under 'rock' or 'classic rock' the same way van halen sound nothing like GnR but come from same area and play the same genre, so of course they are lumped in together. Metallica and GnR toured because people think they're basically the same and they are literally different genres whereas GnR and Motley arent. Today you'll see a classic rock playlist contain nirvana (grunge) metallica (metal) Acdc, rolling stones, the doors, gnr motley etc. You can argue the two that sound most alike out of those are gnr and motley. Today people only care about names. Names equal $$$$££££ and thats all they care about. I really don't know how some people can't grasp this. Yes, GNR is a better band and was more 'hard rock' whereas Motley was more 'glam'. But they definitely share a large group of casual fans and the general public still lumps them into the same '80s sunset strip rock' category. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon Comstock Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 On 3/29/2024 at 5:28 AM, DoMw94 said: Yeah but the GN'R of 2006 was a very different beast. You'd never see the current band opening for anyone, including the Stones No band is too big to open for the Stones. If they asked GNR to open a show or two, do you really think they'd decline? I'm not so sure... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RnRHOFGNR Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 21 minutes ago, Gordon Comstock said: No band is too big to open for the Stones. If they asked GNR to open a show or two, do you really think they'd decline? I'm not so sure... I agree. All rock bands would jump at the chance to open for the stones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangerInThisTown Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 (edited) 15 hours ago, Free Bird said: But GNR is way more than Anything Goes. They arised from that scene but they grown out quickly. There were still some elements in their songs on Appetite but that was already a bit slower, bluesier, less metal and not as polished as the rest of the hairmetal scene. That was only the years before AFD came out though. AFD ushered in an entire new era of "hair metal" it goes on for about 5 more years after that point, and when the album exploded, and all hair-metal bands adapted that bluesier GNR sound you described. They were all putting out hard rock like GNR, all the way until about 1992, trying to cash in on their popularity. Those million copycat bands, aswell as bands like Poison and Motley who shifted their style more to GNR with their albums. I think that whole term refers more to how the people putting the music out LOOKED - which is obviously retarded when you try to describe music with it, like we are trying, which makes the entire conversation flawed, since the term stems from people who didn't think it through and just wanted a dumb name to put on the scene. Edited March 31 by StrangerInThisTown Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiwiguns Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 (edited) Its not the 90s anymore and its not about glam rock, hard rook or if GN’R or Motley share a similar fan base or not... It's about making money and keeping that money in your own pocket. Guns don't need to co headline a tour with anyone. They are selling tickets and making money all by themselves. The reason why bands co headline today, is to ensure they increase the profit revenue for themselves. If you wouldn't normally sell out a venue by yourself, It makes business sense to join with another party to increase the ticket sales, to increase the revenue and split the profits. Touring is the main source of revenue for artists and the music industry today, replacing making money from album sales. If you look at it from this perspective, you can understand why GNR and their people turned this opportunity down... Edited March 31 by kiwiguns 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangerInThisTown Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 (edited) 1 hour ago, Rovim said: Gn'R created and released AFD, a masterpiece of hard rock. you're comparing that to anything MC did musically? 99% of the public? says who? You need someone to "say" something for you that is like..so extremely obvious to anyone? That the publics perception of GNR and Motley are largely the same lol? They are lumped in together by the public all day and night what are you on about. Edited March 31 by StrangerInThisTown 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rovim Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 4 minutes ago, StrangerInThisTown said: You need someone to "say" something for you that is like..so extremely obvious? That the publics perception of GNR and Motley are largely the same lol? They are lumped in together by the public all day and night what are you on about. I don't think that every listener that knows the music of both bands lumps them together. I'd say a lot of people don't. maybe image wise if you didn't hear too many songs from the catalogs. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangerInThisTown Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Rovim said: I don't think that every listener that knows the music of both bands lumps them together. I'd say a lot of people don't. maybe image wise if you didn't hear too many songs from the catalogs. Isn't that what "the public" refers to - people who are vaguely familiar with the big hits, maybe watched the WTTJ video or Kickstart My Heart. There is literally no difference to anyone except for people who know Motleys first couple albums instead of Dr. Feelgood (which was their biggest album). Because by that point they were truly putting out the exact same genre of music. Wasn't there even a rumour that Slash wrote the Dr. Feelgood riff and gave it to Nikki? Edited March 31 by StrangerInThisTown Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Bird Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 25 minutes ago, StrangerInThisTown said: That was only the years before AFD came out though. AFD ushered in an entire new era of "hair metal" it goes on for about 5 more years after that point, and when the album exploded, and all hair-metal bands adapted that bluesier GNR sound you described. They were all putting out hard rock like GNR, all the way until about 1992, trying to cash in on their popularity. Those million copycat bands, aswell as bands like Poison and Motley who shifted their style more to GNR with their albums. I think that whole term refers more to how the people putting the music out LOOKED - which is obviously retarded when you try to describe music with it, like we are trying, which makes the entire conversation flawed, since the term stems from people who didn't think it through and just wanted a dumb name to put on the scene. But them ( the Glam metal bands) adapting GNR‘s style doesn’t make GNR one of them. And when they did GNR matured with UYI. GNR doesn’t become a glam metal band just because there are people who think it’s s glam metal. In the same way they don’t are a metal band just because some people without knowledge say they are. 99 percent say they are? Well, 99 percent are wrong then. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rovim Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 8 minutes ago, StrangerInThisTown said: Isn't that what "the public" refers to - people who are vaguely familiar with the big hits, maybe watched the WTTJ video or Kickstart My Heart. There is literally no difference to anyone except for people who know Motleys first couple albums instead of Dr. Feelgood (which was their biggest album). Because by that point they were truly putting out the exact same genre of music. Wasn't there even a rumour that Slash wrote the Dr. Feelgood riff and gave it to Nikki? literally no difference if you've got shit in your ears imo 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangerInThisTown Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Rovim said: literally no difference if you've got shit in your ears imo Literally couldn't disagree more because: the only difference might be the topic of the lyrics and/or the look of the members, which is what sways peoples perception big time. Not the music in itself, it's ALL blues based hard rock, all the visual bullshit aside that people want to take into account. I'd even go so far to say that Dr. Feelgood is a straight up attempt to copy the success of AFD in that sense. Edited March 31 by StrangerInThisTown 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rovim Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 Just now, StrangerInThisTown said: Literally couldn't disagree more because: the only difference might be the topic of the lyrics and/or the look of the members, which is what sways peoples perception big time. Not the music in itself, it's ALL blues based hard rock, all the visual bullshit aside that people want to take into account. no, it's...it's the music itself. agree to disagree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangerInThisTown Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Rovim said: no, it's...it's the music itself. agree to disagree. If you have such a detailed sense of separation of music that is all blues based hard rock, you are far out from what the public perceives, which makes it then understandable that you found it hard to believe they lump them in together. Edited March 31 by StrangerInThisTown Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rovim Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 1 minute ago, StrangerInThisTown said: If you have such a detailed sense of separation of music that is all blues based hard rock, you are far out from what the public perceives, which makes it then understandable that you found it hard to believe they lump them in together. you don't understand, maybe someone else can explain or read my views about it again in my previous posts for your enjoyment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangerInThisTown Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 2 minutes ago, Rovim said: you don't understand, maybe someone else can explain or read my views about it again in my previous posts for your enjoyment. Well pardon me if I don't understand, if all I have to work with here are one sentence replies or detailed assessments such as "literally no difference if you've got shit in your ears" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rovim Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 Just now, StrangerInThisTown said: Well pardon me if I don't understand, if all I have to work with here are one sentence replies or detailed assessments such as "literally no difference if you've got shit in your ears" I don't care right now, sorry that you've got shit in your ears. MC didn't do what Gn'R did musically. a lot of people think that AFD is unique sounding to Gn'R. MC didn't sound like WTTJ. you even hear the hits like SCOM and PC and it's clear it's not Poison, MC, or Whitesnake unless... shit in the ears imho Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangerInThisTown Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 24 minutes ago, Free Bird said: But them ( the Glam metal bands) adapting GNR‘s style doesn’t make GNR one of them. And when they did GNR matured with UYI. GNR doesn’t become a glam metal band just because there are people who think it’s s glam metal. In the same way they don’t are a metal band just because some people without knowledge say they are. 99 percent say they are? Well, 99 percent are wrong then. I think what happened was GNR didn't fit in by the point of 1987 as you said, and then, the entire scene changed into THEM, making them (involuntarily) part of it (or the publics perception of it). GNR stopped being glam sometime after the WTTJ video. If you don't look glam, you aren't glam anymore, no matter what your music sounds like. And in reverse when you're glam with your look but you put out the same music as GNR, people still call you glam metal. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangerInThisTown Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 5 minutes ago, Rovim said: I don't care right now, sorry that you've got shit in your ears. MC didn't do what Gn'R did musically. a lot of people think that AFD is unique sounding to Gn'R. MC didn't sound like WTTJ. you even hear the hits like SCOM and PC and it's clear it's not Poison, MC, or Whitesnake unless... shit in the ears imho That's..because those are huge hits that everyone knows. Not because the music genre is any different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rovim Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 2 minutes ago, StrangerInThisTown said: That's..because those are huge hits that everyone knows. Not because the music genre is any different. another attempt, and this time slower just cause you seem to not understand: a genre is a wide definition. you can be very different in the same genre. AFD is hard rock. MC did hard rock and looked kinda from the same scene for a while, but it ends there, cause Gn'R's music was unique and very different to what MC did. please don't reply to this post or I will self destruct. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangerInThisTown Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 (edited) 2 hours ago, Rovim said: AFD is hard rock. MC did hard rock Thank you. Enough said, honestly. Edited March 31 by StrangerInThisTown 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoMw94 Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 (edited) 14 hours ago, Gordon Comstock said: No band is too big to open for the Stones. If they asked GNR to open a show or two, do you really think they'd decline? I'm not so sure... Honestly, I think they would decline. They'd never get asked anyway though so it's a moot point Edited April 1 by DoMw94 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.