Axl throwing tantrums with Tracii Guns

[Falcon]

Yep exactely. But what has the grunge era inspired exactely?

I can't tell you directly..

Well, I can.

The influence of that era was and still is the most impactful chain of events to happen to rock music since the punk movement in 1977.

Grunge changed the way bands were perceived, how radio was programmed, what bands were signed at what bands got dropped.

Grunge was to the Sunset Strip as what punk was to disco, what CBGB's was to Studio 54...

Simply put, it made bands that were considered cool uncool.

The personification of influence.

[mikegiuliana]

ZI was saying I don't know what bands today grunge has influeced.. I know the whole movement and how it changed the entire face of music at the time.. By 1994 I remember seeing greenday and the offspring all over the place.. You had your collective soul and candlebox then rage korn 311 and all those bands.. Foo fighters might have been insprired by nirvana

[Falcon]

ZI was saying I don't know what bands today grunge has influeced.. I know the whole movement and how it changed the entire face of music at the time..

Understood.

I was showing how inspiration/influence runs much deeper than meets the ear, some of the faithful here are either too young or to myopic (or both) to understand just how powerful that time was.

[RichardNixon]

While the emergence of the Seattle scene did hurt GN'R, I reject the idea that Nirvana "killed" Guns N' Roses. Lest revisionists have there way, remember that in '93, Nirvana were having trouble selling out arenas in the US, while Guns continued to play stadiums.

In the final analysis, I really think Guns N' Roses killed Guns N' Roses. While GN'R were uncool amongst the hipsters and their flock of sheep in the 90s, had GN'R released an album at any time after '94, it no doubt would have been a hit. Like Aerosmith and Van Halen (before the lead singer fiasco) Guns N' Roses could have weathered the alt. 90s.

[Falcon]

Guns N' Roses could have weathered the alt. 90s.

I agree, it's just too bad they didn't stay active.

[disease51883]

Falcon, although you're one of my favorite posters on here and I have no problem with your last couple posts in this thread, some of the earlier stuff is crazy. It's hard to explain, really. I think your main flaw is that your "music historian" schtick comes off trendy sometimes. If MTV, Fuse, Rolling Stone, Spin, and all the usual suspects lauched a grand scheme to push Blink 182 for the next 10 years as cultural icons, musical visionaries, and the originators of the "sing in a voice that sounds like someone's pinching your nose" scene that shook the world in the early 2000's, you'd be the first person to fall for it. And you'd probably even beat everyone else over the head with the words "seminal", "important", and "relevant" a few thousand times for good measure.

I like Nirvana though. Good band.

[Falcon]

Falcon, although you're one of my favorite posters on here and I have no problem with your last couple posts in this thread...

Thanks.

some of the earlier stuff is crazy. It's hard to explain, really.

Examples?

I think your main flaw is that your "music historian" schtick comes off trendy sometimes. If MTV, Fuse, Rolling Stone, Spin, and all the usual suspects lauched a grand scheme to push Blink 182 for the next 10 years as cultural icons, musical visionaries, and the originators of the "sing in a voice that sounds like someone's pinching your nose" scene that shook the world in the early 2000's, you'd be the first person to fall for it.

I only cite the punk and grunge movements in historical perspectives, you don't see me touting Rap/Eminem or Rap/Rock? and Linkin Park by any means, both shoved down our throats by "MTV, Fuse, Rolling Stone, Spin, and all the usual suspects" now do you?

So much for the "trendy" theory....

And you'd probably even beat everyone else over the head with the words "seminal", "important", and "relevant" a few thousand times for good measure.

And some still don't understand the difference between those words and "big" or "popular"..

I like Nirvana though. Good band.

Me too.

[Elrothiel]

Jeez... this has turned into another Gn'R vs Nirvana and Axl vs Kurt thing.

Can we please stop. It doesn't fucking matter!! OK!! 

All that matters is when Axl is going to release Chinese Democracy! That is all I care about! I couldn't care less about what HAS happened! I care about what is GOING to happen!

[ppbebe]

I reject the idea that Nirvana "killed" Guns N' Roses. In the final analysis, I really think Guns N' Roses killed Guns N' Roses.

I reject both ideas. GN'R is alive.
the one who killed oneself is Kurt. He is history.
He stopped his time early and hasn't advanced in anything since then. There's nothing cool about it.

Generational change necessarily takes place continually in living society/culture like Metabolism in living things.

[ppbebe]

Trend! vogue!

The influence of that era was and still is the most impactful chain of events to happen to rock music since the punk movement in 1977.

Simply put, it made bands that were considered cool uncool.

I can see the same thing, although on a smaller scale, happening right here in the GNR fandom.
That will make a great 'Chinese Democracy'. Hehe I bet Axl got his "music historian"  view as well.
Unfortunately while undergoing metabolic change alright, some of us are sorta like kurt in a sense.
'when your Great Wall rocks, you're out of time'

BTW My mama never told me that hair metal had been considered cool for once. 
I figured it out that for its dead serious attitude, GNR stood out among/against the uncool bands just parodying 'the (then) old wave'.

[disease51883]

Well, I have no interest in getting into a stereotypical HTGTH quote and retort war, but here are a couple examples:

You might want to take a look at Aerosmith back in the 70's, GNR did little to update the look or the image...

That one?s debatable. Silvertide is an un-updated version of the Aerosmith. GNR was a completely modern version, and I don?t think you ever give them enough credit for being as unique as they were. Think of a stereotypical late-?80s/early-?90s hard rock/hair metal band. Now add a complete psychopathic contradiction of a frontman. Now add strong classic rock influence. Now add strong punk influence. I know you?re not a fan of much after 1988, but move to the Use Your Illusion era. Add the long epic rockers. Add the piano-heavy ballads. And if you?ll humor me enough to include the new stuff, add the industrial, electronica, and orchestral influence. Now when you look at the entire picture, tell me one band that?s the same as GNR? Want me to tell you one band that's the same as, say, Nirvana? I'd go with the Pixies. GNR's a band that shows their influences. Almost every band does though. It's not fair to act like they're completely derivative.

A few come to mind; Dylan, Joplin, Morrison and Lydon to a lesser degree.

That downplays the GNR's influence. Axl's, in particular. While I don't disagree with Dylan or Lydon, popularity aside, to say that Axl was any less the voice of the late-80's than Joplin or Morrison was of their time is silly. And if he'd have died after GNR Lies, I'm sure you'd agree with me.

Famous? Yes, even moreso.

Important?  Not a chance in hell.

This horse is dead.

Important to who? The current shitty FM radio format? This is one of those occasions where you seem to put way too much importance in rock's current "chart-dominating" (*cough*) direction. And the "This horse is dead" type comment and smugish smilies don't help matters any. It's okay for people to disagree with you.

I only cite the punk and grunge movements in historical perspectives, you don't see me touting Rap/Eminem or Rap/Rock  and Linkin Park by any means, both shoved down our throats by "MTV, Fuse, Rolling Stone, Spin, and all the usual suspects" now do you?

So much for the "trendy" theory....

That raises an interesting point. Why don't you tout things such as the rap movement? In my opinion, it's been as ground-breaking and influential, or even more so, than the punk and grunge movements (particularly the grunge movement). Maybe it's just because rap doesn't appeal to you.

"Trendy" probably wasn't the best word I could have used. I was thinking of the scenester type folks that snub their noses at everything. The type of people that write for the aforementioned magazines. The type of people that think grunge was somehow more influential than rap. Fact-bending, history-rewriting, music fascists.

Half the time, I know I'm going to agree with your posts. The other half, I know I won't. But as interesting or well-worded as they're going to be, I also know they're going to be pretty much word for word what the average critic would say. "Voice of Reason" or not, it's okay to think outside the box once in awhile....

[Falcon]

That one?s debatable.

Sure it is, although the show/segment in question focused on AFD era GNR so I think the Aerosmith analogy is on the money.

.. to say that Axl was any less the voice of the late-80's than Joplin or Morrison was of their time is silly.

Hardly silly, but that's your opinion and I respect it.

Important to who? The current shitty FM radio format? This is one of those occasions where you seem to put way too much importance in rock's current "chart-dominating" (*cough*) direction.

I documented the impact of that era enough, if you see otherwise, fine.

And the "This horse is dead" type comment and smugish smilies don't help matters any. It's okay for people to disagree with you.

The "horse is dead" comment merely pointed out this thread was moving in a predictable direction that has been discussed more than once in the past.

And yes, it's okay for people to disagree with me.

That raises an interesting point. Why don't you tout things such as the rap movement? In my opinion, it's been as ground-breaking and influential, or even more so, than the punk and grunge movements (particularly the grunge movement).

I'm really not knowledgable as far as rap goes so my opinions on it are less than educated.? I'll leave those comparisons to people that have better insight on the genre.

Half the time, I know I'm going to agree with your posts. The other half, I know I won't. But as interesting or well-worded as they're going to be, I also know they're going to be pretty much word for word what the average critic would say.

Nice to hear you agree with me half the time, although I don't think you'll be confusing any of my opinions with David Fricke's anytime soon.

"Voice of Reason" or not, it's okay to think outside the box once in awhile....

Yes it is.

[Pandora]

This isn't the Bad Obsession section.

Topic locked.