BigT06: The Kid: BigT06:When talking about bands that are from the same era, I would limit that list to bands going through the same start up period as each other. That way there is a direct comparison to what market demand was, what the band had to do to "make it" and what impact the band had on music. When talking about the talent of the band, break them down and look at their talent individually. Each instrument. Then look at them collectively as a band, how they play together, how they write together, how much longevity their music has, etc. based on those paramiters, GnR can hang with any band. how bout this, rather than argue about GnR's legitimacy, tell me who, in the same era is a better band? I will listen to your suggestions, and you do me a favor. Watch a simple documentary about GnR, hell, watch the Behind The Music. If you fell like they are not a worthy or influential band after doing some back research, I will respect your opinion. So that's my schooling... issuing you homework. lolOk based on Talent are you saying GnR can hang with bands like Led Zeppelin, The Who, Rolling Stones, Lynyrd Skynyrd, Cream, Rush, & Aerosmith to name a few??? Cmon...I wanna hear you say it..lol As a former professional musician (guitar player and singer) I can assure you, that yes, the musicians in GnR can play their respective instruments at the very highest level. If you wanna look at the top 1/4 of 1% of players in the world and say that if Slash isn't as good as Clapton, then I can't be right, then this isn't a point I have any desire of discussing further. I can go back and forth with you about who is the greatest guitar player that ever lived, the best bassist, drummer, etc... but that isn't even the point. The point was, GnR are an extremely talented band that deserve to be in the HOF based on their merit. Not based on the fact that the HOF has made poor selections in the past.
The Kid: BigT06:When talking about bands that are from the same era, I would limit that list to bands going through the same start up period as each other. That way there is a direct comparison to what market demand was, what the band had to do to "make it" and what impact the band had on music. When talking about the talent of the band, break them down and look at their talent individually. Each instrument. Then look at them collectively as a band, how they play together, how they write together, how much longevity their music has, etc. based on those paramiters, GnR can hang with any band. how bout this, rather than argue about GnR's legitimacy, tell me who, in the same era is a better band? I will listen to your suggestions, and you do me a favor. Watch a simple documentary about GnR, hell, watch the Behind The Music. If you fell like they are not a worthy or influential band after doing some back research, I will respect your opinion. So that's my schooling... issuing you homework. lolOk based on Talent are you saying GnR can hang with bands like Led Zeppelin, The Who, Rolling Stones, Lynyrd Skynyrd, Cream, Rush, & Aerosmith to name a few??? Cmon...I wanna hear you say it..lol
BigT06:When talking about bands that are from the same era, I would limit that list to bands going through the same start up period as each other. That way there is a direct comparison to what market demand was, what the band had to do to "make it" and what impact the band had on music. When talking about the talent of the band, break them down and look at their talent individually. Each instrument. Then look at them collectively as a band, how they play together, how they write together, how much longevity their music has, etc. based on those paramiters, GnR can hang with any band. how bout this, rather than argue about GnR's legitimacy, tell me who, in the same era is a better band? I will listen to your suggestions, and you do me a favor. Watch a simple documentary about GnR, hell, watch the Behind The Music. If you fell like they are not a worthy or influential band after doing some back research, I will respect your opinion. So that's my schooling... issuing you homework. lol
The Kid: BigT06: The Kid: BigT06:When talking about bands that are from the same era, I would limit that list to bands going through the same start up period as each other. That way there is a direct comparison to what market demand was, what the band had to do to "make it" and what impact the band had on music. When talking about the talent of the band, break them down and look at their talent individually. Each instrument. Then look at them collectively as a band, how they play together, how they write together, how much longevity their music has, etc. based on those paramiters, GnR can hang with any band. how bout this, rather than argue about GnR's legitimacy, tell me who, in the same era is a better band? I will listen to your suggestions, and you do me a favor. Watch a simple documentary about GnR, hell, watch the Behind The Music. If you fell like they are not a worthy or influential band after doing some back research, I will respect your opinion. So that's my schooling... issuing you homework. lolOk based on Talent are you saying GnR can hang with bands like Led Zeppelin, The Who, Rolling Stones, Lynyrd Skynyrd, Cream, Rush, & Aerosmith to name a few??? Cmon...I wanna hear you say it..lol As a former professional musician (guitar player and singer) I can assure you, that yes, the musicians in GnR can play their respective instruments at the very highest level. If you wanna look at the top 1/4 of 1% of players in the world and say that if Slash isn't as good as Clapton, then I can't be right, then this isn't a point I have any desire of discussing further. I can go back and forth with you about who is the greatest guitar player that ever lived, the best bassist, drummer, etc... but that isn't even the point. The point was, GnR are an extremely talented band that deserve to be in the HOF based on their merit. Not based on the fact that the HOF has made poor selections in the past.Well we can agree to disagree then,,Music being an artform I would have to admit that points of view can be extremely subjective..and yea SLash although being the best musician in the GnR lineup is nowhere near the talent of Eric Clapton. IMO,, No hard feelings Todd. (edit) Please let me know If you and or your band have ever produced a record/single and or done any session work on an record/ single Id love to hear it....
The Kid:I recently read that Axl Rose is snubbing his induction into the Rock n Roll hall of fame with Guns and Roses.. I guess he's still pretty bitter and refusing to go on stage with the previous bandmates.. IMO Im surprised the band is even being inducted. I dont know what the criteria is, but it seems to be where they let everyone in these days.. Not gonna say Guns and Roses wernt good but Rock n Roll hall of fame good,, Hmmm idk thats a stretch for me.
The Sniper:R&R HOF induction criteria seems to have no rhyme or reason whatsoever, based on some of the names who arent in there vs acts who were never even classified as rock who have made it.
The Sniper: That being said, I agree with GN'R's induction 100%. For those of us who were around when they broke, they were an absolute game changer in terms of what rock could & should be, and what it needed desperately at the time to get back to. Axl snubbing the induction just highlights what kept this band from absolutely ruling the universe for decades - Axl. In that man's world, there is nothing but Axl and everything in the world should be ABOUT Axl. Sad, sad, sad....
kuzi16: The Sniper:R&R HOF induction criteria seems to have no rhyme or reason whatsoever, based on some of the names who arent in there vs acts who were never even classified as rock who have made it. agreed 100% im not a huge KISS fan but i do understand that they have had something like 23 or 24 albums in a row that went platinum (or better), and they basically invented GLAM and the huge over-the-top show. how are they not in the HoF? seriously? The Sniper: That being said, I agree with GN'R's induction 100%. For those of us who were around when they broke, they were an absolute game changer in terms of what rock could & should be, and what it needed desperately at the time to get back to. Axl snubbing the induction just highlights what kept this band from absolutely ruling the universe for decades - Axl. In that man's world, there is nothing but Axl and everything in the world should be ABOUT Axl. Sad, sad, sad.... agreed 100% on that as well. Appetite for Destruction was a game changer. the songs that the album spawned still are staples on any rock station: Welcome to the Jungle, Mr. Brownstone, Paradise City, Sweet Child o' Mine, its so easy, night train. the album was 18X platinum. the second album had songs like Patience and Used to Love Her, not to mention a great cover of Aerosmith's Mama Kin. next was the Use your illusion combo with songs like Live and Let Die, Dont cry, Civil War, Yesterdays, Knocking on Heavens door, Estranged, You Could be Mine, and the epic November Rain. even their last studio album, The Spaghetti Indecent, went to #4 on the charts and not a single song on there was written by GnR. they brought back straight up rock and roll in a time when dance music and "Pop Metal" was in style. if it wasnt for that, bands like the Black Crows may not have ever seen the popularity that they did. we can sit here all day and say they arent as good as Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, The Who, etc... but really, few bands are. but all of those bands influenced music in such a way to bring rock to the spotlight. GnR did just that. they should be in there even if they are "no Led Zeppelin"
kuzi16: The Sniper:R&R HOF induction criteria seems to have no rhyme or reason whatsoever, based on some of the names who arent in there vs acts who were never even classified as rock who have made it. agreed 100% im not a huge KISS fan but i do understand that they have had something like 23 or 24 albums in a row that went platinum (or better), and they basically invented GLAM and the huge over-the-top show. how are they not in the HoF? seriously? The Sniper: That being said, I agree with GN'R's induction 100%. For those of us who were around when they broke, they were an absolute game changer in terms of what rock could & should be, and what it needed desperately at the time to get back to. Axl snubbing the induction just highlights what kept this band from absolutely ruling the universe for decades - Axl. In that man's world, there is nothing but Axl and everything in the world should be ABOUT Axl. Sad, sad, sad.... we can sit here all day and say they arent as good as Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, The Who, etc...
The Kid:GNR may have had a great debut album but You guys make it sound like Rock N roll was on its last leg till GNR hit the stage,,There were many bands kickin azz and continued to do so for the next 10 years, Something that GnR failed to do,, what would of been if the band had some longevity well, will never know..And suggesting that GNR had anything to do with the success of the Black Crowes is ridiculous
The Sniper: The Kid:GNR may have had a great debut album but You guys make it sound like Rock N roll was on its last leg till GNR hit the stage,,There were many bands kickin azz and continued to do so for the next 10 years, Something that GnR failed to do,, what would of been if the band had some longevity well, will never know..And suggesting that GNR had anything to do with the success of the Black Crowes is ridiculousGlad you recanted brother. LOL As for R&R being on its last leg, here's what I remember about that time frame... - GNR showed that you didnt need to wear spandex and tease your hair up to the moon like a woman in order to get a record deal and kick azz onstage. Denim worked just fine. It wasnt about what they looked like - to steal a line from a criminally underrated Aerosmith album, GNR "let the music do the talking." Those were all elements that were SORELY lacking in the rock scene at the time. - GNR was the first rock band in a long time that made music with an eye on creating kickass tunes that they loved, instead of music that would get them on the radio and sell albums. Requisite two love ballads 99% of the bands on the scene put on their albums specifically to attract females? I DONT THINK SO! Requisite arena anthem that would give the crowd something to automatically sing along to during concerts? I DONT THINK SO! GNR made snarling rock that they loved. If the public loved it, great. If they didnt, so what? was their attitude. Consider this quote from the late Jani Lane from Warrant - "I could kill myself for writing 'Cherry Pie'!". Its a sentiment a lot of bands out there share when discussing their catalog from that era. Ive never heard a single member of GNR make any statement about that regarding a single one of their songs... pretty telling.
kuzi16:Speaking of jimi hendrix he wasnt in the spotlight for 10 years. he didnt have a single #1 hit. he had fewer overall hits than GnR. but hendrix deserves to be in the rock hall simply because he put Guitar based rock on the front burner again. not saying Jimi and GnR are the same but your criteria for what "should make it" would have excluded Hendrix as well. Arguably, slash is at least close to the same level as Hendrix as far as Guitar talent. Its just that Hendrix did it 20 years earlier and in a slightly different style.
