Jump to content

How do you rank GN'R compared to other bands?


adnan

Recommended Posts

I think that a lot of us list GN'R as one of our favorite bands, but not as the most talented or "best". In the midst of speaking so much about other bands who are more talented, we seem to forget that GN'R are actually an immensely talented band who made GREAT music on the UYI albums. I am unbelievably thrilled that Axl and Co. didn't just continue making loud versions of Rolling Stones influenced songs, and took a new direction, took influences of Queen, Elton John, and several Punk bands and incorporated it into two absolutely brilliant albums that showcase the real talent this band had/has. To me, I get pissed off when people listen to Appetite and go "This is good for an 80's metal band", GN'R's talent is really on show only in superb songs like "Locomotive", "Coma", "Civil War", "Estranged", "November Rain" and even the best metal song they put out "Perfect Crime", and the absolutely brilliant and underrated "14 Years".

So, I would like to know how you guys rank GN'R based ONLY on musical talent compared to other bands in history? I would say they would land about 7th on the list in my opinion of all bands in history.

1. Queen

2. The Rolling Stones

3. The Beatles

4. The Eagles

5. Led Zeppelin

6. The Smiths

7. Guns N' Roses.

EDIT: Mods, please leave this in My World as it is a comparison and will get more neutral responses here than elsewhere.

Edited by adnan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Based on talent, they're not that competant with their playing. All it really is is power chords and riffs. I've heard sloppy live stuff stuff too. Good for an 80s rock band.

Rush, Naked City, Faith No More, Mr Bungle, Frank Zappa, Miles Davis > Guns N Roses

Link to comment
Share on other sites

depends what u consider talent, i consider Public Image Limited to be the most talented band i've ever encountered that did as much for the progression of popular music as say, the beatles but i wouldn't say, in terms of muscianmanship, they could do all that hotdog buckethead shit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest katie

weak in talent, they never changed, they were very good at the musical side, and axl could write amazing music

but they never evolved, and there are better than them at what they do

Link to comment
Share on other sites

weak in talent, they never changed, they were very good at the musical side, and axl could write amazing music

but they never evolved, and there are better than them at what they do

Its so easy to Estranged is not the sound of evolving then?

That's exactly what I was going to say. A band goes from sleaze rock to epic ballads like November Rain and Estranged and you say they never changed or evolved?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

weak in talent, they never changed, they were very good at the musical side, and axl could write amazing music

but they never evolved, and there are better than them at what they do

Its so easy to Estranged is not the sound of evolving then?

It's not like it's a positive progression though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'd rank them pretty low musicianship wise- because they really didn't have much imagination in their song topics or song progressions...

perhaps the miles davis all star band/quintet was the most talented band in history- john coltrane and through the whole post-bop modern jazz era...

as far as rock goes musicianship wise i have to tip my cap to rush or perhaps cream, and led zeppelin up there as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest katie

weak in talent, they never changed, they were very good at the musical side, and axl could write amazing music

but they never evolved, and there are better than them at what they do

Its so easy to Estranged is not the sound of evolving then?

It's not like it's a positive progression though.

exactly, it's still the same genre...all be estranged a good move etc. there are no risks and nothing excitingly new

Link to comment
Share on other sites

weak in talent, they never changed, they were very good at the musical side, and axl could write amazing music

but they never evolved, and there are better than them at what they do

Its so easy to Estranged is not the sound of evolving then?

It's not like it's a positive progression though.

exactly, it's still the same genre...all be estranged a good move etc. there are no risks and nothing excitingly new

I think from going from AFD style sleazey rockers to epic piano ballads like November Rain is a risk.

And commercially it was a positive progression. You can't argue that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest katie

weak in talent, they never changed, they were very good at the musical side, and axl could write amazing music

but they never evolved, and there are better than them at what they do

Its so easy to Estranged is not the sound of evolving then?

It's not like it's a positive progression though.

exactly, it's still the same genre...all be estranged a good move etc. there are no risks and nothing excitingly new

I think from going from AFD style sleazey rockers to epic piano ballads like November Rain is a risk.

And commercially it was a positive progression. You can't argue that.

comercially certainly not...more money in the pocket....but i just don't think they ever really moved on, they just went a little forward then back again

which is boring

but we are supposed to be disgusing talent...enough of this diversion i say! i feel as if i have hijacked a thread and theft has never suited me

Edited by katie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did you guys read my original post before responding?

In response to some of the comments, AFD is not a great album musically, the UYI's are VERY good musically, the riffs are good, solos excellent, and musicianship in lyrics and structure EVIDENT!

GN'R evolved, much to the better to be honest. AFD is just a sleaze rock album, a good one, but nothing GREAT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many would reverse your opinion, saying AFD was solid. On the other hand, the UYIs were directionless, scattered, filler-containing pretentious noodling.

Dont get me started on the Incident?

I'm not saying the Illusions are more of a solid album. I'm just saying Guns N' Roses did progress and change. I didn't say it was for the better though. But you can't say they didn't evolve.

You can't include TSI? into this conversation as that was a covers album and would obviously show no progression on original material.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many would reverse your opinion, saying AFD was solid. On the other hand, the UYIs were directionless, scattered, filler-containing pretentious noodling.

Dont get me started on the Incident?

I'm not saying the Illusions are more of a solid album. I'm just saying Guns N' Roses did progress and change. I didn't say it was for the better though. But you can't say they didn't evolve.

You can't include TSI? into this conversation as that was a covers album and would obviously show no progression on original material.

I know, but it was the heat of the moment. Is all forgiven?????

Link to comment
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...