One Guns n' Roses ticket cost me almost the same amt as all four PJ Fenway and Wrigley Shows

nalyd61

It's totally nostalgic for me. I think I was 14 when Headbangers ball had Welcome to the jungle on a midnight as a new video. Me and my buddy sat there blown a way. Growing up in Maine- never had a chance to see them. Maybe they came but I was off to college.

rgambs

bootlegger10 said:

Guns n Roses is one of the great all time bands. They helped usher out the shitty 80's music. I am not so excited to see this GNR band but would have paid a ton to see them early 90's.

They have so many great songs. Can go from Welcome to the Jungle to Patience.

No, no, no, that's ridiculous. Radiohead, Nirvana, PJ, REM,

halv said:

rgambs said:

Sounds like a just punishment for going to see one of the lamest bands ever. Is Bret Michaels opening for them??

Without knowing the age of people replying I really think someones love/like of GN'R comes down to how old you were when Appetite For Destruction came out. I was 15 and it's hard to overstate how hard this album knocked everyone on their ass when it came out. in 1987 Madonna, Whitney Houston, George Michael, Michael Jackson....those kinds of artists ruled the charts and radio. A lot of really good rock albums came out as well (U2, REM, The Pixies, Midnight Oil) but no album or band seemed as dangerous as Guns N' Roses. They made the glam "metal" bands like Poison/Motley Crue look ridiculous. Yup, Axl's megalomania got out of control (hence bands like Nirvana making fun of them), but in '87 and '88 Guns ruled. It's a total nostalgia trip but I'm excited to see them again. I'll be in the nosebleeds but that's alright.

I was 2 when Appetite for Destruction came out. I don't have rose colored lenses through which to see them, and I don't see much difference between them and the bands they supposedly supplanted. What is the substantive difference? Glammy outfits, falsetto rock ballads with soaring (badass) guitar licks and superficial lyrics...sounds pretty hair bandish to me.
Nirvana, AIC, Blind Melon, RHCP, Radiohead, REM, Took, PJ, etc, those are the bands that brought a new sound and style to kill the hair bands.

I'm not saying GNR sucks, just that they are vastly overrated musically and culturally.

rummy

It may not seem like a long time but GNR was (really) big a few years before BAND'S like RHCP and Nirvana so AT THE TIME their sound seemed much different than that of Poison, Def Leppard, Warrant, etc.

Once you add bands like Radiohead and the Seattle foursome, The Gunners begin to sound less original.

EdsonNascimento

rgambs said:

bootlegger10 said:

Guns n Roses is one of the great all time bands. They helped usher out the shitty 80's music. I am not so excited to see this GNR band but would have paid a ton to see them early 90's.

They have so many great songs. Can go from Welcome to the Jungle to Patience.

No, no, no, that's ridiculous. Radiohead, Nirvana, PJ, REM,

halv said:

rgambs said:

Sounds like a just punishment for going to see one of the lamest bands ever. Is Bret Michaels opening for them??

Without knowing the age of people replying I really think someones love/like of GN'R comes down to how old you were when Appetite For Destruction came out. I was 15 and it's hard to overstate how hard this album knocked everyone on their ass when it came out. in 1987 Madonna, Whitney Houston, George Michael, Michael Jackson....those kinds of artists ruled the charts and radio. A lot of really good rock albums came out as well (U2, REM, The Pixies, Midnight Oil) but no album or band seemed as dangerous as Guns N' Roses. They made the glam "metal" bands like Poison/Motley Crue look ridiculous. Yup, Axl's megalomania got out of control (hence bands like Nirvana making fun of them), but in '87 and '88 Guns ruled. It's a total nostalgia trip but I'm excited to see them again. I'll be in the nosebleeds but that's alright.

I was 2 when Appetite for Destruction came out. I don't have rose colored lenses through which to see them, and I don't see much difference between them and the bands they supposedly supplanted. What is the substantive difference? Glammy outfits, falsetto rock ballads with soaring (badass) guitar licks and superficial lyrics...sounds pretty hair bandish to me.
Nirvana, AIC, Blind Melon, RHCP, Radiohead, REM, Took, PJ, etc, those are the bands that brought a new sound and style to kill the hair bands.

I'm not saying GNR sucks, just that they are vastly overrated musically and culturally.

You obviously haven't listened to GnR. I mean Blimd Melon? Ha ha ha ha ha.

FoxyRedLa

I love threads like this. Cracks me up that others think they can tell me what I like/should like.

cp3iverson

Shannon Hoon got his start in the industry all because of Axl Rose. Not just singing on the Illusion albums either. Axl pulled a lot of strings.

Theyre not for everyone but they're important. Jeez they were bigger than PJ and Nirvana during the grunge explosion. More popular. They were mega-huge. Just understand that at one time they were seen as the next Stones. Probably the last dangerous huge band. Good and bad The singer is bipolar and sometimes an ego manic and the guitar player was an epic heroin addict. Something had to give. Exciting that theyre back.

Merkin Baller

That's a lot of money for a concert ticket, but I get it.

If GNR is your thing, and you can justify the expense, have fun. I'm not into them enough to consider this show, but they are a bad ass band, and this was a very improbable reunion. This is a big tour.

However, seeing what bands like GNR & Coldplay charge for mediocre seats at enormous football stadiums makes me appreciate what PJ charges and where they play a whole lot more.

Indifference

josevolution said:

To me it comes down to how badly I need to see a particular band , I'm paying $225 for a ticket in the 200 level for Radiohead @ MSG but I would not spend a dime for GnR ..

Exactly - I'll pay $225 to see GnR and not a dime to see Radiohead - I doubt I go with a free ticket.

Shakescky

cp3iverson said:

Probably the last dangerous huge band.

i absolutely agree. guns n' roses, a band that once was on top of the world and known as the baddest band around. i personally feel their style was different to a degree in sound compared to 'metal music for the housewife'. it is safe to say guns n' roses knocked out all those bands and wiped their faces on the mat.

i always personally thought another reason why their music was so strongly loved is that not only could they have some really bad ass songs, but even the ballads had their strong points to where i can assume macho men felt the song still rocked instead of being some filler tune for the ladies -- of course nothing wrong with it if that was such a situation at hand.

yes, i would say guns n' roses assisted in planting to seed in killing off what is considered "bad" 80's music, but the seattle scene that appeared later on is what ultimately crushed it. safe to say guns n' roses imploded for their own internal various reasons, and i wouldn't be surprised if use your illusion 1 and use your illusion 2 added to it slightly more for those who still live in the small bubble world of wanting a second helping of appetite for destruction.

hedonist

Oh Blind Melon! Already in love. Long time.

Ms FoxyRed, you shall be told. Repeatedly, if warranted

I really do get the other side of it.

Also know that gambo's got a damn good heart

RoleModelsinBlood31

EdsonNascimento said:

rgambs said:

bootlegger10 said:

Guns n Roses is one of the great all time bands. They helped usher out the shitty 80's music. I am not so excited to see this GNR band but would have paid a ton to see them early 90's.

They have so many great songs. Can go from Welcome to the Jungle to Patience.

No, no, no, that's ridiculous. Radiohead, Nirvana, PJ, REM,

halv said:

rgambs said:

Sounds like a just punishment for going to see one of the lamest bands ever. Is Bret Michaels opening for them??

Without knowing the age of people replying I really think someones love/like of GN'R comes down to how old you were when Appetite For Destruction came out. I was 15 and it's hard to overstate how hard this album knocked everyone on their ass when it came out. in 1987 Madonna, Whitney Houston, George Michael, Michael Jackson....those kinds of artists ruled the charts and radio. A lot of really good rock albums came out as well (U2, REM, The Pixies, Midnight Oil) but no album or band seemed as dangerous as Guns N' Roses. They made the glam "metal" bands like Poison/Motley Crue look ridiculous. Yup, Axl's megalomania got out of control (hence bands like Nirvana making fun of them), but in '87 and '88 Guns ruled. It's a total nostalgia trip but I'm excited to see them again. I'll be in the nosebleeds but that's alright.

I was 2 when Appetite for Destruction came out. I don't have rose colored lenses through which to see them, and I don't see much difference between them and the bands they supposedly supplanted. What is the substantive difference? Glammy outfits, falsetto rock ballads with soaring (badass) guitar licks and superficial lyrics...sounds pretty hair bandish to me.
Nirvana, AIC, Blind Melon, RHCP, Radiohead, REM, Took, PJ, etc, those are the bands that brought a new sound and style to kill the hair bands.

I'm not saying GNR sucks, just that they are vastly overrated musically and culturally.

You obviously haven't listened to GnR. I mean Blimd Melon? Ha ha ha ha ha.

Lol, I know right?!

FoxyRedLa said:

I love threads like this. Cracks me up that others think they can tell me what I like/should like.

Yep, agreed. Wth

josevolution

Indifference said:

josevolution said:

To me it comes down to how badly I need to see a particular band , I'm paying $225 for a ticket in the 200 level for Radiohead @ MSG but I would not spend a dime for GnR ..

Exactly - I'll pay $225 to see GnR and not a dime to see Radiohead - I doubt I go with a free ticket.

Ditto , it's all about individual taste !!

on2legs

I would argue that GnR didn't kill off the 80s hair bands, but rather they were the pinnacle of those bands. The last, brightest, flash before that era burned out and was supplanted by Nirvana, PJ and the rest.

EdsonNascimento

on2legs said:

I would argue that GnR didn't kill off the 80s hair bands, but rather they were the pinnacle of those bands. The last, brightest, flash before that era burned out and was supplanted by Nirvana, PJ and the rest.

Anyone who thinks GnR was a hair band hasn't a clue. They were a first ballot no doubt RnR HoF band. Is PJ? I think they are, but would not be shocked if it took a couple years. I would have been absolutely shocked if GnR hadn't gotten in first try. Could PJ sell out Century Link Field? Cmon. You may not like them. You may care about who and what Axl is, but in terms of RnR, they are at the pinnacle. The only thing they have in common with Poison is that they HAD hair. I mean to think Slash is a latter day glam rocker is hysterical.

faithful2you

We wouldn't have PJ without bands like GnR. Appetite for Destruction and Shout at the Devil changed the course of music in the mid to late 80s. It was bands like Poison and Warrant that killed 80s "hair bands" and allowed the shift to Grunge. I remember an interview with Bret Michaels saying he knew their run was over when he walked into the record company's main office and there was a wall size poster behind the front desk of AIC's Facelift album cover.

That being said. Appetite is one of the best rock albums of all time....and I still listen to November Rain.

on2legs

EdsonNascimento said:

on2legs said:

I would argue that GnR didn't kill off the 80s hair bands, but rather they were the pinnacle of those bands. The last, brightest, flash before that era burned out and was supplanted by Nirvana, PJ and the rest.

Anyone who thinks GnR was a hair band hasn't a clue. They were a first ballot no doubt RnR HoF band. Is PJ? I think they are, but would not be shocked if it took a couple years. I would have been absolutely shocked if GnR hadn't gotten in first try. Could PJ sell out Century Link Field? Cmon. You may not like them. You may care about who and what Axl is, but in terms of RnR, they are at the pinnacle. The only thing they have in common with Poison is that they HAD hair. I mean to think Slash is a latter day glam rocker is hysterical.

I'm not saying there weren't a quality band. They were great. But they are a hair band on steroids.

EdsonNascimento

on2legs said:

EdsonNascimento said:

on2legs said:

I would argue that GnR didn't kill off the 80s hair bands, but rather they were the pinnacle of those bands. The last, brightest, flash before that era burned out and was supplanted by Nirvana, PJ and the rest.

Anyone who thinks GnR was a hair band hasn't a clue. They were a first ballot no doubt RnR HoF band. Is PJ? I think they are, but would not be shocked if it took a couple years. I would have been absolutely shocked if GnR hadn't gotten in first try. Could PJ sell out Century Link Field? Cmon. You may not like them. You may care about who and what Axl is, but in terms of RnR, they are at the pinnacle. The only thing they have in common with Poison is that they HAD hair. I mean to think Slash is a latter day glam rocker is hysterical.

I'm not saying there weren't a quality band. They were great. But they are a hair band on steroids.

They're not, but if they were it would be Jack and Heroin not roids....

rgambs

I'm not trying to tell anyone what to like or dislike, I am just giving my opinion on a highly subjective topic.
Just because my opinion of them is negative doesn't mean I am trying to subvert your opinions lol.
Lighten up folks!

And what's wrong with Blind Melon? That's a very original band with much musical acumen and lyrics that make Axl's musings look as substantive as cabbage farts!

EdsonNascimento

rgambs said:

I'm not trying to tell anyone what to like or dislike, I am just giving my opinion on a highly subjective topic.
Just because my opinion of them is negative doesn't mean I am trying to subvert your opinions lol.
Lighten up folks!

And what's wrong with Blind Melon? That's a very original band with much musical acumen and lyrics that make Axl's musings look as substantive as cabbage farts!

Civil War vs No Rain? Umm yeah. Cabbage farts indeed.

Aside from Blind Melon being a complete joke, there's nothing wrong with them. As you said, to each his/her own.

buck502000

They guys will play 2-3 shows have a scuffle and cancel the rest of the shows - mark my words!!!