Here Today... Gone To Hell!

Oh shame on you people...cant find a better (front)man than Vedder in the 90's? :rant:


Vote off your least favorite

Trent Reznor - NIN
Zach de la Rocha - RATM
Layne Staley - Alice in Chains
Mike Patton - FNM
Phil Anselmo - Pantera

Get Anselmo out already!

Happy New Year!!!

No! [Happy New Year]

Layne Staley - Alice in Chains

Mike Patton

Mike Patton

Mike Patton - FNM

Zach.

 :o where are all these Patton votes coming from   :nervous:

Damn, I can't believe that I have to vote for Phil again!

Zdlr

Edit: I cant spell

I wanted to ask the same question. It looks like we'll rid of every good frontman...

Zach

Phil Anselmo - Pantera

 ;D

to knock him off


I also can't believe Mike Patton (Faith no more) made it this long

-  BP

Zack


I can believe Mike Patton (Faith No More / Mr. Bungle / Fantomas / Moonraker / Tomahawk / Weird Little Boy / Lovage / Naked City / Dillinger Escape Plan / Peeping Tom / John Zorn-Elegy / Bjork / Melvins-Fantomas Big Band / Rhazel / Xecutioners) made it this long - he deserves the credit

wheni look at that list remaining i get sad

no one left on that list deserves to be the best frontman of the 90's


mike patton

i listened to some faith no more and i just dont hear what everyone else is hearing

Mike Patton

 :rant:  Mike Patton is the best guy on this list (since Jonathan Davis didn't make it)

Zack De La Rocha ... it's getting harder to vote.  I love all these guys.

I agree with D but I vote off Zack

Judging by the amount of votes each one has received so far, seems like one certain frontman is a very possible winner.

Trent Reznor - NIN

i swear i think people were accidentally voting for their favs

there just isnt anyway this shit left could defeat both cobain and vedder

why isnt chris cornell,jonathan davis,steven tyler,jon bon jovi, scott weiland, anthony kiedis,shannon hoon, or just anyone on this list?

if trent reznor *who i dont think is technically a front man* wins, im gonna shit.

i think most people dont really know what the hell a frontman is

judging by whats left on this list, im damn near sure of it :rant: :rant: :rant: :rant: :rant:

No fucking way dude. There are plenty of good 90's frontmen that weren't on that list but Jonathan Davis, Bon Jovi, Steven Tyler sure ain't among them. And, honestly, despite what MTV has people believe, in my eyes,  Layne Staley was leagues above Cobain and Vedder combined. You cannot attribute the major musical vocal styles of the 90's to Vedder, because Staley had just as big of an influence, if not more, since AIC was one of the biggest bands to define the metal scene as well.

ZDLR

Phil Anselmo - Pantera

I agree, Layne Staley was definitely MUCH better than cobain and vedder.  No contest. 
Also, Bon Jovi?  Oh please!  if he's in the 80s frontman survivor, I'd be willing to accept that, but he certainly has no place in the 90s.  By that time, he and his hair were both gone from the relevant music scene.
Didn't Cornell win the first survivor?

layne staley isnt better than cobain or vedder

a lot of u are sympathetic cause he died and wasnt over played like cobain or vedder


who was the biggest band of the late 90's early 2000's?

Creed were and who did scott rip off pretty much? eddie vedder

for fucks sake scott weiland even use to imitate eddie vedder.


a lot of this is prejudice and people just disliking someone,

u mean to tell me the shit left on this list are better than THE frontman of the 90's outside of axl *kurt cobain* and then a very close 2nd in eddie vedder

talkin about bon jovi, fuck u still got sebastian bach on that list and he couldnt hold Jon's mic stand.

dont make me remind u people the only and i repeat ONLY pop metal, hair band to survive and thrive in the grunge/hiphop era.

i think it was bon jovi, so to say they werent relevant and they werent shit is ridiculous

many have tried but no one could kill or stop bon jovi

those are the facts!

I disagree that Eddie Vedder is the best frontman of the 90's. People may copy him, but that alone doesn't make him great. He is good, but not the best. I like a frontman with a little more attitude and charisma.

Personally, I don't think any of those names are good enough to be the best of the 90's. There are some names that I like such as Layne and Phil, but I don't think they are quite good enough to be the best.

I'm not gicing him credit because he was underplayed, I'm giving him credit because he was more talented. As far as death goes, that's just rediculous to say. He died a very quiet, lonely death, after the legacy of AIC was already established. If people didn't like him, they wouldn't say they did simply out of pity.




I'm trying to see a point here. If you think Scott Stapp is such a good indicator of who was the best frontman, why didn't you include him in that list you just mentioned? Limp Bizkit was pretty fucking big as well, along with Blink, Metallica, Blur, etc. But you don't mention those. Why's that?




Yes, except their influence isn't as apparent because it isn't shoved down your throat every time you turn on the TV.



Bon Jovi will never be taken seriously because they are basically Poison with a better marketing team.  Bon Jovi should take tips from Eddie Vedder: If you don't have any vocal talent, just mumble alot and make your videos a tad darker. People will think you're mysterious.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Personally, I don't want anyone killing jon bon jovi, because then people WILL be sympathetic and turn him into an icon a la Kurt Cobain.  I have enough stomach problems, thank you, I don't need more by being confronted with some stupid bon jovi tragedy.  The music world would be better off without Mr. Breck Girl.


I couldn't agree more.   :yes: : ok: :yes:

Jon Bon Jovi is great, although i believe his absence from this list is due to people prefering his 80s material.  Throughout Bon Jovi's career they've shown they can do pop-rock tunes better than nearly anyone, all that's presented in the main to the public is Livin' On A Prayer, Keep The Faith, Always or whatever their latest songs are now as good as they are the entire of the These Days album is far superior to those songs it's probably their most mature record and is outstanding.  Now to compare them to Poison is stupid, i love Poison but Bon Jovi are totally different fine they had dodgy hair and clothes but who didn't in the 80s, the only other thing they have in common is the ability to write great pop-rock tunes.  Eddie Vedder is another great frontman with his own style and as for Scott Stapp i hate the guy i hear the similarities vocally but overall they are quite different.  I don't have many problems with the list anyway there are some notable absences but i also remember the rules of frontmen only participating in one of these survivors, so Jon Bon Jovi will be in the 80s one, unfortunately Steven Tyler probably will to [save him for the 70s! he was so much better then], as mentioned Cornell won the other one which also had Weiland & Kiedis in so that's why they aren't in this.  As for saying Sebastian Bach could n't hold Jon's mic stand i hope that's because you have an extremely high opinon of Jon and not a low one of Bach, personally as a frontman i prefer Bach, what Jon has goin' in his favour is the fact that he has got so much more material throughout his career.

Captain O -   sounds like you were actually around then...  for I couldn't agree more. If you werent, then you have some good insight.

Tied-Up as well

Lets see....   I was in High School for the lower 90's & I chose Alice in Fuckin' Chains for my fix. Pissed all over the jovi cheese scene thank god.
Weiland broke through with his own style..... I can contest to that.

-BP

-BP

im through arguing with u people

without lookin id almost guarantee none of u who bash could name 5 songs that werent hits by bon jovi and to judge a band by hits is ridiculous

so argument over

u all can have your shitty list

there is a reason cobain and vedder were shoved down everyone's throats

they were the best

without kurt cobain u probably wouldnt have had all those 'other' bands


he opened it up for everyone

O Jon... you are so hot. I love you . Your hair is so warm & fluffy. O jon, You seem to have the power to reinvent yourself over n over. O Jon, you really push the limits of modern music.  O my bossoms thank you.... O Jon ....  O O ... you will always be 1988 Cheese to me

I couldn't have said better. My thoughts exactly, point to point.  : ok:

Layne Staley


Haha, you just have a shit taste in music, get over it.

BTW I wonder if Creed was ever that big outside the US anyway?

the person who said bon jovi were poison with a better marketing team has forever lost any credibility he ever had music wise, cause anyone with a musical IQ of over 10 knows better than that shit.? that just proves my point that most of u talk out of your ass without knowing a fuckin thing about the band u are talkin about.

bon jovi out sold faith no more and alice in chains 4 to 1............................ 4 million to 1 that is :hihi:

only difference is, i am proud of the bands i support and will defend them to the end regardless of what people think

unlike some of u on the board who just fall in line, bandwagon and try to like whats cool

fuck whats cool, i like what i like

to me faith no more and alice in chains are horrible fuckin bands

thats my opinion just like some of u think the bands i like are horrible.

it doesnt make me right, doesnt make u right

and anyone who would try to argue that their taste in something as subjective as music is better than someone elses is pretty lame.

there is no right or wrong answer when it comes to music, cause music is all about the individual and how a certain song moves or affects them

my arguments are people arent being objective on this

cobain isnt cool anymore but how can anyone argue his importance?

vedder isnt cool anymore but this isnt *your FAVORITE frontman of the 90's* its who was the best

u people are electing your favorite and this isnt what this is.

now looking at that list, can anyone honestly say, that the people left on that list were the BEST frontmen?

no fuckin way!!

now u may not like the frontman but u cannot take away from their impact or what they did.


no one can rationalize to me why those people are still on that list over cobain and vedder

I'd say to an extent it is who is your favourite, it's who you think is best who you enjoyed based on talent and generally who you think is best you will probably like most, now i don't like Cobain but one of the reasons is i don't think he is that good.  Now on your logic i should vote for him because 'impact' wise he probably had more than anyone on the list i constantly see people walking round with their Cobain T-Shirts his populairty is massive he has got a wide fan base he's been influential to many bands but i think he sucked he wasn't good and i am not voting for him on the basis of a lot of people liking someone i think is crap.  I can't believe you even brought up the record sales and how Bon Jovi outsold Faith No More & Alice In Chains, like i said i love Bon Jovi but the sales are based on their catchy rock songs and like it or not Jon Bon Jovi's looks.  They have the advantage that people like you and me who appreciate their music like them, girls like him like they like Robbie Williams and the tunes have the commercial edge that means they sell.  They are on the fringe of being good without being a pop band, Faith No More & Alice In Chains musically are far different and sales are irrelevant.  If it's all about sales then why don't we ditch the survivor and just give the award to the frontman who has sold the most records in the 90s.

To many Faith No more are considered a one-hit wonder, to their fans they were a godsend

I think Faith No More were happy not to be a multi-hit wonder - their acclaim has been better since Angel Dust

I feel sorry for the people who don't understand what Patton is, but then again the world will never do that.

Mike Patton Vs. Jon Bon Jovi is a topic I never thought would come up because I believe they aren't in the same league or should be mentioned in the same sentence.  But I guess people tend to believe in their idols, mine happens to be Patton over all.

D speaks a lot of truth

thank u


the record sells thing was a joke ive been wanting to put in for a long time, the 4-1.... 4 million to  that is

anyway

im not an eddie vedder fan, i like 4 or 5 songs but i can understand what he did, i can watch him and think "WOW"!

so im not biased when it comes to cobain or vedder cause im not a die hard fan of either but no one can tell me that sebastian bach should remain on that list over vedder and cobain.

Layne Staley im sorry i just never got into alice in chains, just never liked them same with faith no more, i just dont hear what everyone else hears.

i have very diverse musical tastes but i just dont like either of those bands

frontmen to me means recongizable, a signature look,sound just everything

someone that is universal and just holds an audience in their palm

but when in this position ill stick to my answer that wins for me the 80's,90's and 21st century
that is Prince

u people vote for Trent Reznor, what the fuck does he do on stage? hell id take marilyn manson, he is an honest to God frontman

the guy that when u walk into the building their is no doubt who "the man" is. none of those guys left on the list i think deserves such a prestigious honor

of course i didnt think cornell deserved the 21st century either so who knows? honestly

Anthony Kiedis shouldve won the 90's

he had the biggest selling albums, he actually closed the 90s bigger than he started the 90's which no other frontman can claim, he is a monster onstage with his dancing,headbanging and just his vibe and energy are second to none.

so objectively looking at it, anthony kiedis should win and he wasnt even on the fuckin list!

 

agreed... ? ?

plus AIC worked alot harder. ? Nirvana vs AIC = ?you have a more talanted band that wrote there songs absolutely not off of any Nirvana influence... ?that would be impossible by time.

Cantrell still makes IMO some of the best records out there that are not promoted. Maybe its why Jimi Hendrix's band has decided to play with him = because he is so original & evolving. = thats how Layne Staley growled through such songs = the songs actually meant something. ?Everyone one of them.

With that being said... ?I was a bon jovi fan before a AIC fan.... ? ?but reality bites.

-BP

so if u were a bon jovi fan why did u stop liking them?

cause it was uncool right?

i had a friend like that in high school, one month we are trading bon jovi tapes and he loves them

next month grunge is huge and he is wearing flannel and worshipping vedder and cobain saying bon jovi sucks

that is the worse kind of music fan to me.

i love bon jovi i also love prince, i also love nirvana,rhcp,megadeth,dwight yoakam,2pac,motley crue

just cause it might not be the IN thing or cool doesnt mean i stop liking it

cause the music speaks to me now just as it did years ago when i first discovered it

and ill never stop liking a band just cause they arent considered cool anymore

i believe in loyatly to bands i love regardless of what others think

D, you contradict yourself with every post and keep pushing yourself farther and farther into a corner.

Tell me, who resorted to mentioning the following?
-Band's record sales
-The fact that Creed were the "biggest band"
-Bon Jovi were big, survived and thrived in the ninetees.
-That Anthony Keidis had the "biggest selling albums"
-That "there is a reason cobain and vedder were shoved down everyone's throats...they were the best"

I think that would be you. So far, all of your arguments had a mention of some sort of commercial success. You may like poser bands but if you say you don't "try to like whats cool", maybe you should stop resorting to mentioning their success as a way of defending them. Moving on...





Sounds good, which makes a whole lot of sense, considering you were the one who started talking smack, complaining that the list didn't agree with your point of view,  and calling those artists "shit". I think you're forgetting the fact that just a few posts before, you were the one who said:

and
and

It seemed to me you mentioned the word "subjectivity" earlier on...or by "subjectivity", did you mean "the right to call some bands 'shit' while bluntly repeating to people that noone can be better than Cobain?" Makes sense.

In conclusion, if you like Bon Jovi, great (just don't play it around me). If you come on here and start calling other band's shit, you're going to get called on it. If you call Alice In Chains and FNM shit while liking Bon Jovi, you are especially going to get called on it. Once you get called on it, don't start with the "everything is subjective, noone is wrong, noone is right" routine.

u obviously attended the micheal moore school of taking posts out of context and arranging them to prove your arguments

i said kiedis sold the most records, was more successful at the end of a decade plus his stage presence energy vibe dancing etc etc

yeah i really dig popular bands

last time i checked bon jovi, creed, prince were really in style and cool to like ::) :-*

i was speakin to the people who use to love a band but once a new era of music was ushered in and that band was no longer cool or relevant, they stopped being fans in favor of other groups.

after your ridiculous poison/bon jovi comparison i pretty much refuse to argue with u cause anyone who cant see the difference in bon jovi and poison definitely isnt someone i want to discuss anything with.


your poison argument would be acceptable if u liked poison and knew a great deal about both bands, but your argument was ridiculous cause u obviously dont know anything at all about bon jovi

i stated eddie vedder and cobain being THE frontman of the 90's

didnt say they were my favorite but look at what they did

historically speaking how can anyone argue the significance of those two frontmen, whether ulike them or not is irrelevant

hell i dont like them that much but i know they were light years more important than what is left on this list.

First off, outstanding record sales do not equate to a great musicial act. ?Case and point - N'Sync, Britney Spears, Backstreet Boys, etc etc. ?These acts sell records because they appeal to the audience that is out there buying most of the records -- ?teen age girls.

The same can be said of Bon Jovi back when they were selling millions of records. ?Back at the time of 'Slippery When Wet' -- I went to see Bon Jovi in concert. ?I was surrounded by teeny bopper girls with their hair aqua netted so high that you couldn't see past them. ?Yes... I was old enough at that point to not be a "teeny bopper" - but only just. ?I looked around for some of the true hard rocking crowd, they weren't there. ?

Then came the New Kids on the Block, and the teen age girls had new idols to scream for, and Bon Jovi's album sales died.

Album sales and commercial success do not make a great band... hell look at Milli Vanilli. ?Charismatic front men? ?Yes. ?Good singers? ?Apparently not, since they didn't even sing on the album. ?They still managed to sell lots of records.

D... I'm really glad that you like Bon Jovi. ?Good for you. ?Someone has to. ?Like Captain Obvious said, just keep them the hell away from me, unless you'd like me to vomit on you.

Personally, I look for talent in the musical acts I favor, not mainstream appeal. ?Mike Patton has talent. ?He was also very charismatic and lit up the stage. ?He definitely belongs on this list.

Layne Staley, unfortunately, I did not see on stage. ?I didn't even start appreciating AIC music until recently, when my hubby turned me on to them. ?I assumed they would suck as badly as the other Seattle bands (ie: ?Nirvana and Pearl Jam) and didn't give them a chance to show me otherwise. ?My loss on that one. ? :-[ ?But he still definitely belongs on this list. ?

As far as Trent Reznor is concerned, if you are gonna say that Kurt Cobain and Eddie Vedder deserve all this credit for being responsible for ushering in the grunge movement and changing the tides of music, then you can't deny the contribution that Trent Reznor has made to music, he is responsible for helping to usher in the Industrial sound and also responsible for changing what we listen to. ?His presence on this list is just as valid as Kurt Cobain's (former) presence and Eddie Vedder's (former) presence on this list.


As for this comment... since you claim musical taste is subjective, then my voting for my favorite is perfectly in line with who is best. ?Because it IS subjective, and I subjectively think that Eddie Vedder and Kurt Cobain sucked great big floppy donkey dicks.

And I also subjectively think, based on seeing him live, that Jon Bon Jovi is about as interesting a front man as Sebastian Bach's mic stand would be. ?

In the very beginning of all these threads (survivor threads) it says to VOTE OFF YOUR LEAST FAVORITE. ?That's what I'm doing each time. ? : ok:


PS:  this contridicts your whole "musical taste is subjective" argument. 

Bring on the final round - Reznor and Patton enough said

Um... did you forget where you are dude?  This is a GUNS N ROSES site.  Most of the people who post here understand loyalty pretty damn well after waiting for an album for 10 years.   ::)

What does Jon Bon Jovi and groupies have in common?















They both like to hang out with musicians.




AHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAhahah...................*ahem*....i'ts not funny is it?

And as for the discussion, how the heck did I rearrange anything?  There is nothing in my post that was taken out of context.

By the way, I just wanted to say that Tied-Up's long post above me is awesome. Actually, all of these posts are quite good.

If we talk about frontman, like we do, then one of the most important factors is the stage presence. Like Eddi Vedder is dead on the stage (I really like his voice, I have all PJ albums), Bach is no doubt one of the most energetic and greatest live performers of all time and he sings every note! Well, he doesn't have too much to say about the world (but when I saw him live he did rants), he wasn't in the spotlight in the late 90s, he didn't have the influence on kids like Cobain or Vedder had, but anyway, for me Bach is the ultimate frontman of the 90s! (Well, Axl is the best, but he's not on the list.)

phil

ZDLR

Since there has been some controversy lately on how people have interpretated these threads, thought I give my two cents then...

This thread is purely for fun. We are not discussing who the best frontman of all time is, why and/or who should be the best frontman of all time. If we went by what history, press, peers, critics consider best frontman of all time...the names Jagger, Plant, Mercury, Rose, Bono...will be everyone's choice and there wouldn't be any point in doing this. In every thread you can read the following : Please vote off your least favorite. It's my understanding, people are doing so without really paying attention to whatever impact such or such frontman caused on mainstream music. For some people, Mike Patton hasn't done fuck all and shouldn't be considered to be in the top 100 frontman, likewise for some people Eddie Vedder is an overrated singer/frontman who shouldn't even have made the list. That's cool, everybody is voting based on their personal preferences, which is ok with me.

I see what D's saying though. We have 5 frontmen left and none of them really had? huge impact in mainstream music as the likes of Cobain, Vedder, Gallagher...but, as said earlier, this is based on personal preferences and I like it better this way. It's not as predictible is would've been if we had chosen what we thought the best frontman should be based on recognition and popularity.

Anyway, I'll count the votes tomorrow.







 

D.. yo D .... yo yo

You asked me something about why I stopped liking BJ. You said that I thought they were 'uncool' at the time.
no no.....  It's because I was growing up & geting my ass out to live shows, collecting tapes, & really opening my ears up to talant. From 1990 to 1995, I studied & watched the talants of Jerry Garcia....  I traveled to see him loosing count at 17 times live. Now is that mainstream cool??  no its not....   So you can't play that game with me  : ok:  & guess what? at each 'Dead' show, I have never bought or worn a tye dye EVER  :rofl:

In the 1990's, I sought out to see talant that was different.

---------------------------------

with that being said, I liked bon jovi when I did like Poisen  ;D its a fact. & I completely understand the points about marketing in this thread. Jovi who lives in my state BTW, is a joke as far as being the REAL THING. He is performer before Artist. More of an actor before a starver.  I do live in this state you know.....
I don't mean to sound mean, but you are killing me. Next you will say that jovi stands up in a league with Led Zeppelin.
-BP

-BP

Absolutely.  But as you say below, some frontmen achieve a lot more influence than others, and that should be a factor too!  I realize the media deliberately made it uncool to like people like Bach in the 90's so it's just bum luck that his talent is always dismissed as too "80's". 

I'm with D about Cobain & Vedder.  There were only 5 or 6 songs I liked from them as a teenager in the early 90's, but I recognize their impact.  As for Trent Reznor,  sadly I have never seen NIN live, so I cant rate him on stage presence, but NIN had a huge impact on me in high school.  The lyrics, the music, everything.  When I think of the 90's, I will always include Trent Reznor.

---

Phil Anselmo

Mike Patton

well i love what we have done with this thread

i mean just voting off etc etc is too easy

why not argue about it u know?

makes the game more interesting

like i said im not a cobain or vedder fan

it would be different if i was a die hard fan of each band and criticized people's votes

but im not a big fan of either

and yes bi polar i may lose every bit of musical "credibility" but ill take a bon jovi album over a led zepplin album any day of the week

im not saying they are better, i just prefer bon jovi to led zepplin, rolling stones ,the beatles etc etc etc

im not sayin they are better i just like them more.

same way with GNR, id take the spaghetti incident over led zepplin IV

maybe i do have horrible taste in music :hihi: :hihi: :hihi: :hihi:

but its my taste

and i still say Prince owns any frontman on any of these lists!

Agreed, Led Zepplin are one of the many overated bands in the world, Bon Jovi own them, Led Zepplin seem to have this legendary status were nobody can knock them like they're sacred but they're not fine they're talented, fine they did some good songs but they ain't that special

Wow. It took us a while, but we finally got here ;D


OK, I suppose you're not totally lost.

 :no:? If not for Zeppelin ----- then Bon Jovi, Hard Blues Rock & metal would not have existed as it was marketed. I hope somebody picks me up on this statement cuzzz I don't have time? :)

Two bands more influential

Black Sabbath instead of Led Zeppelin
Motley Crue instead of Bon Jovi
Hard Blues was best defined on Danzig - Lucifuge

But we are talking about the 90's

These Days by Bon Giovanni
And No Quarter are hardly in the running


Innovation was caputered on Faith No More's Angel Dust which was light years ahead of it's time and many more albums incuding the so hated Nirvana Nevermind
The 90's were exciting times with a lot of undercurrent, I think most votes are going to the "pop at the top"-which in Johnny Rotten's words is "Borrrrrring"

Lets be honest, even New Order's singer and Andrew Eldrich of the Sisters Of Mercy, Bono and even Milli Vanilli could be considered for this list - 90's people - 90's!!!!!!

chili peppers cant get no love?

i thought they came out before faith no more and were doing what faith no more were doing years before

maybe im wrong

someone clarify please

skeletor and bi polar just told me that actually their favorite front man of the 90's was Jordan Knight :hihi: :hihi: :hihi: :hihi: :hihi: :hihi:

Chili Peppers were around in the early 80's and already had a couple albums under their belts before FNM's first album Introduce yourself, or their first proper album The Real Thing.  While the Peppers are primarily a funk/rap/rock band FNM switches through a variety of genres on thier albums ranging from metal/country/pop/rap/waltz just to name a few.  They have a very complex, unique sound and make extremelly ambitious albums.  The Real Thing is a good starting point, but not the best example of their talent.  Angel Dust is, I'd say.  King for a Day is also good to check out to see just how unique their sound is and how much Patton doesn't give a fuck for what sounds like normal singing.  He also changes his style with each album.  Listening to The Real Thing back to back with King for a Day...you'd swear that they were two different men.

  Their main single Epic does have that rap/rock sound to it, much like a Peppers song however that is pretty much the only one with that particular sound.   

Peppers on the other hand tend to stick to their tried and true radio friendly formula and rely on stage presence and catchy lyrics for their songs.  I love em both though.

I disagree. Joe McIntyre was much more influental.  :hihi:

Red Hot Chilli Peppers S/T came out in 1984
Faith No More - We Care Lot Lot came out in 1985
The first version called Faith No Man - started in 1981 and put out a 7" single

Both are from the same area and used to play shows together.

One was a decent band and the others were called Red Hot Chilli Peppers

One was a decent band and the others were called Red Hot Chilli Peppers

That added so much to the conversation.

I was just making the point that Faith No More [IMO] were far superior, Chilli Peppers i find to be more irritating Kiedis is way overated, and btw it added more to the conversation that your reply to it.

I went back to read...  & now I feel like an ass.
I meant to say the following:

 :no:  "If not for Zeppelin ----- then Bon Jovi, Hard Blues Rock & metal would not have existed as it was marketed. I hope somebody picks me up on this statement cuzzz I don't have time  :)"

at first I said "if not for Zeppelin & Bon Jovi the shitzz wouldnt have existed"  :-[

what I'm geting at is...... Jimmy Page invented hard rock, so he invented Bon Bon  :-*

now leave me alone - i'm trying to listen to Prince  ;D
D, you know i'm only fucking with ya. but jovi there was a reason why A man named Axl would get so offended by being called Bon Jovi & then make a point of it. Its because Axl was the real thing during that time & jovi was a performer.  boo fucking hooo

_bP = done = watching re-runs of 'Alley McBeal'

I agree - I can't think of a more innovative and fresh band than Faith No More in the 90's

Which is why I said from the start that Mike Patton is the best guy on this list!