tbaugerud Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 My friend and I always have the same discussion: which band is better? Guns or Metallica?I say to him, listen, I wouldn't ideally compare the two because of their different styles but if I must I'd say Guns are faaar better than Metallica. He says no no no. Metallica have 10 songs better than all of Guns' big ones. I TOTALLY disagree.What's your takes on the subject guys? Metallica and GnR are kinda "enemies" between some sets of fans, but don't I have a point in stating: "They really are too different to compare?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveysham Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 i think guns covered more range of types of song whereas metallica kept it heavier. but at least there isnt as much politics within the metallica group. however i personally find a guns n roses show better to watch. but thats a personal preferance Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EccoTides Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 (edited) I used to be really, really into Metallica... St. Anger completely destroyed my enthusiasm for the band, so much so that I can't even take the old stuff seriously. Honestly, they're not that great of a band. "And Justice For All" remains a true classic though, it's fantastic.Guns, as limited as their output was, were blessed by having much better and more creative songwriters in Izzy, Axl, and Slash. Edited October 16, 2005 by EccoTides Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axl-rocks Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 I think Guns n Roses are better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AxlisOld Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 (edited) Pre-Load Metallica>Guns Sorry guys, its true. But in my eyes the 2 greatest rock albums of all time are Ride the Lightning and Appetite for Destruction..:edit:. btw St Anger blows, I felt ripped off even though I downloaded it. GO BACK TO ALCOHOL, JAMES...ITS YOUR FRIEND. Edited October 16, 2005 by AxlisOld Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnrindia Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 gnr rulz metallica Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
where's izzy? Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 To me this is how it is Metallica= Kings of ThrashGNR= Kings of Everything ElseMeat Loaf= King of Rock Opera What? Meat Loaf rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockstar81 Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 (edited) Metallica is a heavy-metal band, Guns N' Roses is a Classic-Rock band. It's like comparing Iron Maiden and Queen. Apples and Oranges.It's different. It's not the same kind of music, not the same audience, not the same musical approach. . Personally, I don't like Metal or Heavy-metal, it's just not my kind of thing. I think the immense majority of GN'R fans are basically more Rock fans than Metal-Heads. Edited October 16, 2005 by rockstar81 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSandman Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 Metallica is the best band on the planet. Bin my favo band since 11 years back they really own GNR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSandman Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 Metallica is a heavy-metal band, Guns N' Roses is a Classic-Rock band. It's like comparing Iron Maiden and Queen. Apples and Oranges.It's different. It's not the same kind of music, not the same audience, not the same musical approach. . Personally, I don't like Metal or Heavy-metal, it's just not my kind of thing. I think the immense majority of GN'R fans are basically more Rock fans than Metal-Heads.<{POST_SNAPBACK}>Actually its not Heavy Metal its Thrash Metal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ERIN_EVERLY Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 I love Guns but Metallica are better Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnrlies Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 I cant believe this question is even ever debated..the only reason metallica ever get a look in, is cos there are so many soggy oily nerds who think that they are cool if the put the black album up at top volume,If you compare the bands critically, as well as entertainment factor, GNR are sooooo much better.Most people who dont have any affiliation specifically with metallica or metal (i.e. they are just a rock or music fan in general) will think that GNR is better. Axl Rose is the best frontman in the history of rock n roll (ok thats steppin out there, but I think he is, and hes certainly 1000 times better than hetfield). Aside from that you have one of the best guitarists of our time (slash of course). Slash ripps hammet to shreds. Hammet might be faster, but hes boring as batshit. He has no class when he plays, and he is the typical geek that picked up the guitar one day and figured out how to play it. Metallica are sooo god damn lame, along with the rest of the metal genre. Theres no class in it whatsoever. Metallica will go down as unmemorable and simply one of those bands that managed to get fans at the time, but you would wonder why you ever thought they were as cool as you did. Take a look at just the general things that james says on stage, like the oi chants etc. I mean i got a lot of their bootlegs, and he is like a dumb fuck who has an iq of 10 herding his brainless followers. Compare this to the class of axl - simply no comparison.Songwriting capabilities of guns is a world away from metallica. In guns you had at least 3 brilliant songwriters in the form of izzy, slash and axl. They all had ability and wrote some pretty brilliant songs. Metallica lacks this depth in songwriting talent with pretty much only lars and james at the head of songwriting, and well after st anger I think its fair to say theyve lost all talent. Look at the complexity of songs like estranged, and coma, november rain etc. Its just far more mature writing. Most metallica songs are simply a repetitive riff with some over the top scaled solo at the end. One is probably metallicas best song, and its probably my fav. metal song, but its def not in the ballpark of any of the former mentioned gnr songs. Lyrically metallica are woefull. I think the songwriting process they use is the cause of this. Axl is likely to come up with something he is emotional towards, write a poem, or at least a lyrical foundation, and then write the song around the meaning, whereas metallica just try to write the fattest riff they can find, and then get some lame vocal melody and look up the dictionary to find some words the syllbalically fit in.Live shows for guns were way better. They were just a tight unit, and they were rock n roll. they managed to be cliche without being cliche. To know what I mean by this, when you look at guns n roses, you go - "Now thats a rock band" - they adhere to all the things that you need to do to be classified as this, but they dont look stupid doing it, unlike metallica and vitually everyother metal band from that era. Thats why GNR stand out amongst all those other bandsAlbum wise, well if you ask me metallica have only 5 albums worth consideringkill em all is shitand the black album is crapmaster of puppets, ride the lightning and justice for all dont rate up against appetite and illusions 1 and 2 (even with all the illusion fillers)No comparison.Unlike others, im not gonna put this down to opinion. This is solid fact. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoon87 Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 gnrlies: Thubms up! great post.honestly, i can't stand Metallica, except Fade to black... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Manson Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 I cant believe this question is even ever debated..the only reason metallica ever get a look in, is cos there are so many soggy oily nerds who think that they are cool if the put the black album up at top volume,If you compare the bands critically, as well as entertainment factor, GNR are sooooo much better.Most people who dont have any affiliation specifically with metallica or metal (i.e. they are just a rock or music fan in general) will think that GNR is better. Axl Rose is the best frontman in the history of rock n roll (ok thats steppin out there, but I think he is, and hes certainly 1000 times better than hetfield). Aside from that you have one of the best guitarists of our time (slash of course). Slash ripps hammet to shreds. Hammet might be faster, but hes boring as batshit. He has no class when he plays, and he is the typical geek that picked up the guitar one day and figured out how to play it. Metallica are sooo god damn lame, along with the rest of the metal genre. Theres no class in it whatsoever. Metallica will go down as unmemorable and simply one of those bands that managed to get fans at the time, but you would wonder why you ever thought they were as cool as you did. Take a look at just the general things that james says on stage, like the oi chants etc. I mean i got a lot of their bootlegs, and he is like a dumb fuck who has an iq of 10 herding his brainless followers. Compare this to the class of axl - simply no comparison.Songwriting capabilities of guns is a world away from metallica. In guns you had at least 3 brilliant songwriters in the form of izzy, slash and axl. They all had ability and wrote some pretty brilliant songs. Metallica lacks this depth in songwriting talent with pretty much only lars and james at the head of songwriting, and well after st anger I think its fair to say theyve lost all talent. Look at the complexity of songs like estranged, and coma, november rain etc. Its just far more mature writing. Most metallica songs are simply a repetitive riff with some over the top scaled solo at the end. One is probably metallicas best song, and its probably my fav. metal song, but its def not in the ballpark of any of the former mentioned gnr songs. Lyrically metallica are woefull. I think the songwriting process they use is the cause of this. Axl is likely to come up with something he is emotional towards, write a poem, or at least a lyrical foundation, and then write the song around the meaning, whereas metallica just try to write the fattest riff they can find, and then get some lame vocal melody and look up the dictionary to find some words the syllbalically fit in.Live shows for guns were way better. They were just a tight unit, and they were rock n roll. they managed to be cliche without being cliche. To know what I mean by this, when you look at guns n roses, you go - "Now thats a rock band" - they adhere to all the things that you need to do to be classified as this, but they dont look stupid doing it, unlike metallica and vitually everyother metal band from that era. Thats why GNR stand out amongst all those other bandsAlbum wise, well if you ask me metallica have only 5 albums worth consideringkill em all is shitand the black album is crapmaster of puppets, ride the lightning and justice for all dont rate up against appetite and illusions 1 and 2 (even with all the illusion fillers)No comparison.Unlike others, im not gonna put this down to opinion. This is solid fact.<{POST_SNAPBACK}>Do You Kiss Axls Ass With That Mouth?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santana Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 Songwriting capabilities of guns is a world away from metallica. In guns you had at least 3 brilliant songwriters in the form of izzy, slash and axl. They all had ability and wrote some pretty brilliant songs. Metallica lacks this depth in songwriting talent with pretty much only lars and james at the head of songwriting, and well after st anger I think its fair to say theyve lost all talent. Look at the complexity of songs like estranged, and coma, november rain etc. Its just far more mature writing. Most metallica songs are simply a repetitive riff with some over the top scaled solo at the end. One is probably metallicas best song, and its probably my fav. metal song, but its def not in the ballpark of any of the former mentioned gnr songs.That is probably the biggest piece of bullshit I've ever read. Metallica less complex than GNR?Four HorsemenRide The LightningCall of Ktulu-the entire Master of Puppets album--the entire ...And Justice for All album- I love GNR, always have, always will. But Metallica tops them anyday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Twisted Metal Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 Metallica owns gnr guys. Metallica kicks ass! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fridayfan13 Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 metallica have a couple of good tracks, but comparing them to gnr? youve got to be really fucking high to even consider that metallica is worthy of comparison. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slash7 Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 gnr lies fantastic post!!! Guns fuck metallica!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnrlies Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 (edited) Songwriting capabilities of guns is a world away from metallica. In guns you had at least 3 brilliant songwriters in the form of izzy, slash and axl. They all had ability and wrote some pretty brilliant songs. Metallica lacks this depth in songwriting talent with pretty much only lars and james at the head of songwriting, and well after st anger I think its fair to say theyve lost all talent. Look at the complexity of songs like estranged, and coma, november rain etc. Its just far more mature writing. Most metallica songs are simply a repetitive riff with some over the top scaled solo at the end. One is probably metallicas best song, and its probably my fav. metal song, but its def not in the ballpark of any of the former mentioned gnr songs.That is probably the biggest piece of bullshit I've ever read. Metallica less complex than GNR?Four HorsemenRide The LightningCall of Ktulu-the entire Master of Puppets album--the entire ...And Justice for All album- I love GNR, always have, always will. But Metallica tops them anyday.<{POST_SNAPBACK}>define complex?How many notes you can possibly fit into a single bar? Come on man, thats just shit. Thats why buckethead is crap. Complexity takes into a wider range of maturity and artistic values.Estranged is years ahead of anything from metallica...And irrespective of that, GNR just have the ability to write bloody good songs (not necessarily complex or whatever). I mean appetitie for destruction would have more pop value than the entire best of metallica.I mean sweet child o mine, thats classic stuff. But the thing is thats not a one off.Far out, metallica is so gay. Edited October 16, 2005 by gnrlies Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cold_as_ice Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 I don't have anything against Metallica. But from an objectiv point of view...everybody would say Guns n' Roses.Maybe he (your friend) thinks that Metallica is a better band because they're still together after many years and they are still going on tours and selling new albums...GN'R are far bettet...and nothing else matters... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
November_rain Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 GNR are my fav band ever and in my opinion they are better than Metallica. But I also like Metallica, not all of their work but I like them in general. I don´t think they are shit like other people say ,they´re simply different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSandman Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 (edited) I cant believe this question is even ever debated..the only reason metallica ever get a look in, is cos there are so many soggy oily nerds who think that they are cool if the put the black album up at top volume,If you compare the bands critically, as well as entertainment factor, GNR are sooooo much better.Most people who dont have any affiliation specifically with metallica or metal (i.e. they are just a rock or music fan in general) will think that GNR is better. Axl Rose is the best frontman in the history of rock n roll (ok thats steppin out there, but I think he is, and hes certainly 1000 times better than hetfield). Aside from that you have one of the best guitarists of our time (slash of course). Slash ripps hammet to shreds. Hammet might be faster, but hes boring as batshit. He has no class when he plays, and he is the typical geek that picked up the guitar one day and figured out how to play it. Metallica are sooo god damn lame, along with the rest of the metal genre. Theres no class in it whatsoever. Metallica will go down as unmemorable and simply one of those bands that managed to get fans at the time, but you would wonder why you ever thought they were as cool as you did. Take a look at just the general things that james says on stage, like the oi chants etc. I mean i got a lot of their bootlegs, and he is like a dumb fuck who has an iq of 10 herding his brainless followers. Compare this to the class of axl - simply no comparison.Songwriting capabilities of guns is a world away from metallica. In guns you had at least 3 brilliant songwriters in the form of izzy, slash and axl. They all had ability and wrote some pretty brilliant songs. Metallica lacks this depth in songwriting talent with pretty much only lars and james at the head of songwriting, and well after st anger I think its fair to say theyve lost all talent. Look at the complexity of songs like estranged, and coma, november rain etc. Its just far more mature writing. Most metallica songs are simply a repetitive riff with some over the top scaled solo at the end. One is probably metallicas best song, and its probably my fav. metal song, but its def not in the ballpark of any of the former mentioned gnr songs. Lyrically metallica are woefull. I think the songwriting process they use is the cause of this. Axl is likely to come up with something he is emotional towards, write a poem, or at least a lyrical foundation, and then write the song around the meaning, whereas metallica just try to write the fattest riff they can find, and then get some lame vocal melody and look up the dictionary to find some words the syllbalically fit in.Live shows for guns were way better. They were just a tight unit, and they were rock n roll. they managed to be cliche without being cliche. To know what I mean by this, when you look at guns n roses, you go - "Now thats a rock band" - they adhere to all the things that you need to do to be classified as this, but they dont look stupid doing it, unlike metallica and vitually everyother metal band from that era. Thats why GNR stand out amongst all those other bandsAlbum wise, well if you ask me metallica have only 5 albums worth consideringkill em all is shitand the black album is crapmaster of puppets, ride the lightning and justice for all dont rate up against appetite and illusions 1 and 2 (even with all the illusion fillers)No comparison.<{POST_SNAPBACK}>So very true. I especially agree with the part about the songwriting talent.<{POST_SNAPBACK}>Probobly the most stupid post Ive ever seen. So if gnr are so great how does it come that they havent done anything for the last 12 years. And metallica is just getting bigger and bigger.James Hetfield never cancel shows or leave shows and start riots because of some stupid reason hes always there to be the greatest front man ever. GNR only have Slash and Rose the others are in the back ground man have you ever seen Duff do a bass solo no. And how many times do Axl Sing good live well like 30% of the shows between 91-93. Metallica are loyal to their fans, thats something Axl never bin. Its much cooler to have a front man that Play guitar and Sing.oh and this one is for you Edited October 16, 2005 by MrSandman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ssiscool Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 my worldSS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveysham Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 metallica are loyal to their fans so aslong as they are gettin money from them. the only band thats loyal to their fans is iron maiden. But anywho james hettfield doesnt start riots he just blames them on other people ie fred durst, axl rose ect ect. honestly hettfield is worried more about his image than anything else. ill credit him for being a musician but he manipulates the way fans think and its too common in metal these days. they create this whole "sell out" thing to have a non existant causew to fight against. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sjakalen Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 Guns N Roses have front figures like Axl n Slash. Metalica has a gang of idiots. And Guns music is alot better.Its stupid to even compare Metalicca with Guns N Roses. 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.