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

13468912

Comments

  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 12,074
    edited April 2016
    DewieCox said:

    A pretty good description of GnR.

    Funny, people want to rag on GnR, when you could basically offer identical descriptions of them and PJ...polarizing lead singers? Check....great unique rhythm guitarist setting the foundation for their lead counterpart with a bluesy/shreddy background? Check


    I can understand people slapping the hair band label if they've never really heard them, but they have much more in common with "grunge" than glam metal. If they were from Seattle instead of Sunset Strip, it wouldn't even be a debate.




    Polarizing lead singer and great unique rhythm guitar are not the characteristics being discussed.

    Falsetto lead singer, less than noteworthy bass and drums, shredding guitar work, superficial songs about rock n roll, partying, and fucking, and power ballads are the characteristics that I mentioned that tie them closely to their hair band heritage.

    Put any Nirvana song on Monster Ballads and it will fit like a 400lb person in an airline seat.
    Put any GNR song on Monster Ballads and it will fit like a glove, and probably be the best tune on the record.
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • RKCNDYRKCNDY Seattle, WAPosts: 31,011
    Here's my pick for a monster ballad:
    The joy of life comes from our encounters with new experiences, and hence there is no greater joy than to have an endlessly changing horizon, for each day to have a new and different sun.

    - Christopher McCandless
  • DewieCoxDewieCox Posts: 9,882
    rgambs said:

    DewieCox said:

    A pretty good description of GnR.

    Funny, people want to rag on GnR, when you could basically offer identical descriptions of them and PJ...polarizing lead singers? Check....great unique rhythm guitarist setting the foundation for their lead counterpart with a bluesy/shreddy background? Check


    I can understand people slapping the hair band label if they've never really heard them, but they have much more in common with "grunge" than glam metal. If they were from Seattle instead of Sunset Strip, it wouldn't even be a debate.



    Polarizing lead singer and great unique rhythm guitar are not the characteristics being discussed.

    Falsetto lead singer, less than noteworthy bass and drums, shredding guitar work, superficial songs about rock n roll, partying, and fucking, and power ballads are the characteristics that I mentioned that tie them closely to their hair band heritage.

    Put any Nirvana song on Monster Ballads and it will fit like a 400lb person in an airline seat.
    Put any GNR song on Monster Ballads and it will fit like a glove, and probably be the best tune on the record.


    Garbled mumbly lead singer, less than noteworthy bass and drums, shredding guitar work, superficial songs under the guise of "oh so tortured"

    I can't really think of any more GnR songs that would fit on Monster Ballads compared to PJ. Maybe a song or 2 apiece.



  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 12,074
    RKCNDY said:

    Here's my pick for a monster ballad:

    Hahaha how can you not hear that for what it is?
    It certainly isn't some new sound that makes anything obsolete.
    Motley Crue or Poison probably could have sued for plagiarism on this one lol
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • cp3iversoncp3iverson Posts: 5,342
    guilt by association maybe? Musically they dont have the happy party anthems that hairbands had. They always had a very dark undercurrent going on in everything. They were always interesting because they could have some really brutal lyrics and then have really socially conscious songs.

    Theyre pure rock n roll to me. The IDGAF attitude at its purest. The danger is always there and most bands dont have that. To be playing NFL stadiums again 23 years later like nothing happened blows my mind.
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 12,074

    guilt by association maybe? Musically they dont have the happy party anthems that hairbands had. They always had a very dark undercurrent going on in everything. They were always interesting because they could have some really brutal lyrics and then have really socially conscious songs.

    Theyre pure rock n roll to me. The IDGAF attitude at its purest. The danger is always there and most bands dont have that. To be playing NFL stadiums again 23 years later like nothing happened blows my mind.

    "I used to do a little but a little wouldn't do it so a little got mo and mo
    DewieCox said:

    rgambs said:

    DewieCox said:

    A pretty good description of GnR.

    Funny, people want to rag on GnR, when you could basically offer identical descriptions of them and PJ...polarizing lead singers? Check....great unique rhythm guitarist setting the foundation for their lead counterpart with a bluesy/shreddy background? Check


    I can understand people slapping the hair band label if they've never really heard them, but they have much more in common with "grunge" than glam metal. If they were from Seattle instead of Sunset Strip, it wouldn't even be a debate.



    Polarizing lead singer and great unique rhythm guitar are not the characteristics being discussed.

    Falsetto lead singer, less than noteworthy bass and drums, shredding guitar work, superficial songs about rock n roll, partying, and fucking, and power ballads are the characteristics that I mentioned that tie them closely to their hair band heritage.

    Put any Nirvana song on Monster Ballads and it will fit like a 400lb person in an airline seat.
    Put any GNR song on Monster Ballads and it will fit like a glove, and probably be the best tune on the record.
    Garbled mumbly lead singer, less than noteworthy bass and drums, shredding guitar work, superficial songs under the guise of "oh so tortured"

    I can't really think of any more GnR songs that would fit on Monster Ballads compared to PJ. Maybe a song or 2 apiece.





    That is absolute bias. You are not listening with a single ounce of objectivity of you really feel that way.

    And am I reading it right that you think Black is a superficial song written under guise???
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • Amongst the AniAmongst the Ani @WobbiePosts: 7,755
    If Poison put out Used to love her they would not be a band shortly after that. It would not have gone over well. GNR doing it was fitting for that era and is exactly why they are not a hair band.
    Tom Brady & Donald Trump, BFF's
    Fuckus rules all
    Rob
    Seattle
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 12,074

    If Poison put out Used to love her they would not be a band shortly after that. It would not have gone over well. GNR doing it was fitting for that era and is exactly why they are not a hair band.

    Is it so different from songs like Girls Girls Girls, Cherry Pie, and Shout at the Devil?
    A little more direct, I'll give them that.
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • DewieCoxDewieCox Posts: 9,882
    rgambs said:

    That is absolute bias. You are not listening with a single ounce of objectivity of you really feel that way.

    And am I reading it right that you think Black is a superficial song written under guise???

    Bias? I'm on a PJ message board? Wouldn't my bias be the other direction?

    I love both bands and if I had to pick between the 2, it would be PJ.

    I don't think that about Black, but I could see how somebody that wasn't a fan would. I just think you're on a slippery slope when you start tossing out those accusations about a band as legit as GnR.

    After wading through 5 pages, I think it's pretty clear who is listening with objectivity.
  • PoncierPoncier Posts: 9,716
    Can't see Bret, CC, Bobby and Rikki coming up with something like this:

    This weekend we rock Portland
  • DewieCoxDewieCox Posts: 9,882
    rgambs said:

    Is it so different from songs like Girls Girls Girls, Cherry Pie, and Shout at the Devil?
    A little more direct, I'll give them that.

    I don't really hear a comparison with those songs and Used to Love Her. I'm basing it more on the studio version, but the GnR song sounds like Slash or Izzy fired up some simple strum along chords and they made a song out of it in a couple takes....basically just having fun during a down period in the studio.

  • NWOntarioNWOntario The 6ixPosts: 672
    I'll donate a kidney to see Axl and Slash on stage together. Relevant point: I only have one kidney.

    And if anyone can listen to Appetite for Destruction (like I'm doing now) and say it's not top-to-bottom one of the all-time great rock n' roll records they're probably way cooler than me.
    Minneapolis 1998/Jones Beach I & II, Montreal, and Toronto 2000/Buffalo, State College, Toronto, Montreal, and Hershey 2003/Boston I & II 2004/Thunder Bay, Kitchener, London, Hamilton, Montreal, Ottawa, and Toronto 2005/Toronto I & II 2006/The Vic and Lollapalooza 2007/Calgary and Toronto 2009/PJ20 I & II, Toronto I & II, Ottawa, Calgary, and Edmonton 2011/London, Chicago, Spokane, Calgary, Vancouver, and Seattle 2013/Ottawa and Toronto I & II 2016/Chicago I & II 2018
  • pjalive21pjalive21 St. Louis, MOPosts: 2,797
    edited April 2016
    Well this escalated quickly.....

    There is no way you can label GnR anything more than pure rock and roll at a time bands like Poison, Crue, and others were thriving with their style but it didn't have that "punch" and attitude that GnR brought to the table
    St. Louis-98,00,03,04,10,14
    Chicago-2007 (VIC)
    Boston 2-2006
    St. Pete-08
    EV Solo- St.Louis, Chicago
    Wrigley-2013
    Lexington-2016

    GIMME RED MOSQUITO AND LET ME DIE IN PEACE!!!!!
  • my2handsmy2hands Posts: 17,118
  • SuziemaySuziemay Posts: 11,146
    I don't know how Poison got dragged into the mix but since everyone's offering their 2 cents, I'm going to throw in there that Poison's Native Tongue is one of my favourite albums. It's not classic Poison, it's the only album where Richie Kotzen replaced CC DeVille and it was amazing.

    I'm not sure why there are people trying to convince other people that G N' R isn't all that. Who the F cares? Like them, don't like them, do whatever you like and others will do the same. We don't all have to love the same bands (except Pearl Jam, of course!).
  • Guns N Roses were my first love. I remember watching the MTV Live at the Ritz show as it aired on MTV & having my mind blown. Then in 1991 Pearl Jam came took the crown.

    Love both bands with Pearl Jam being my favorite.
  • mr_perfectmr_perfect Posts: 112
    this is getting pricey...already have wrigley/gnr seattle/and now the pemberton annoucement...
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 47,551
    edited April 2016
    rgambs said:

    If November Rain isn't a classic power ballad, then there is no such thing!

    Again, I am not saying GNR sucks, they can be very entertaining and some Slash licks are immortally good...
    But let's take the rose-tinted glasses off and be real about who and what they were, and how they fit into the musical landscape of their time.

    They were a BIG deal, and they were indeed seen as badass, not a glam band in any way, shape, or form. They were actually more seen as the anti-glam band when Appetite came out. I was about 12, and I remember all of us kids were going bananas for GnR precisely because we knew that they were something special, very new, way more raw in the mainstream scene than anyone else at the time. They were literally the band for people my age that removed us from that big hair crap and started half of us on the road to being skids during the late 80s/early 90s. :lol: So yeah, they were a BIG deal in the musical landscape, culturally, for young people of the day. At least as far as young people who were just getting out of the fucking Tiffany and Cindi Lauper years, GnR was cutting edge rock and something no one had really heard before. This isn't from wearing rose-coloured glasses. This is just fact, from someone who remembers how they were viewed at the time.
    Post edited by PJ_Soul on
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • coco buttercoco butter Posts: 1,330
    PJ_Soul said:

    rgambs said:

    If November Rain isn't a classic power ballad, then there is no such thing!

    Again, I am not saying GNR sucks, they can be very entertaining and some Slash licks are immortally good...
    But let's take the rose-tinted glasses off and be real about who and what they were, and how they fit into the musical landscape of their time.

    They were a BIG deal, and they were indeed seen as badass, not a glam band in any way, shape, or form. They were actually more seen as the anti-glam band when Appetite came out. I was about 12, and I remember all of us kids were going bananas for GnR precisely because we knew that they were something special, new, way more raw in the mainstream scene than anyone else at the time. They were literally the band for people my age at the time that removed us from that big hair crap and started half of us on the road to being skids during the late 80s/early 90s. :lol: So yeah, they were a BIG deal in the musical landscape, culturally, for young people of the day. At least as far as young people who were just getting out of the fucking Tiffany and Cindi Lauper years, GnR was cutting edge rock. This isn't from wearing rose-coloured glasses. This is just fact, from someone who remembers how they were viewed at the time.
    THIS I 100% AGREE^
    Do you know what it's like to fall in the mud and get kicked... in the head... with an iron boot? Of course you don't, no one does. It never happens. Sorry, Ted, that's a dumb question... skip that.
  • High Fidelity 2000High Fidelity 2000 New Mexico USAPosts: 4,341
    That is insane (the prices). I was never very into GnR, but it sucks that if you are, you get totally screwed if you want to go see them.

    The VIP tier stuff is ridiculous. It sucks when I see a band who I'd like to see (like Rush) take part in screwing their fans. "A ticket in the first 15 rows" etc is such a shitty thing to do for hundreds of dollars. We really are lucky being PJ fans in the fan club. I never whine about ticket prices to their shows, although it kind of stinks they don't charge LESS for the 3rd level/behind the stage nosebleed type seats, for the people who buy them. $100 to sit that far or have a bad view, same price as good seats, is kind of uncool, but at least they don't balance it out by making the best seats 3x as much.
    ABQ 93, Las Cruces 95, ABQ 98, Bridge School 10/30/99, Lubbock 00, ABQ 00, Denver 03, State College 03, San Diego 03, Vegas 03, PHX 03, D.C. 03, Camden 7/5/03, NYC 7/8/03 + 7/9/03, Vegas 06, San Francisco 7/15/06 + 7/16/06 + 7/18/06, Kansas City 10, EV:ABQ 11/6/12, Chicago 13, PHX 13, Denver 14--PJ24!, Telluride 16, Chicago 8/20/16

    New Mexico Pearl Jam Fans (New Mexico, USA) on Facebook!
  • Merkin BallerMerkin Baller Posts: 3,350
    edited April 2016
    rgambs said:

    If November Rain isn't a classic power ballad, then there is no such thing!

    Again, I am not saying GNR sucks, they can be very entertaining and some Slash licks are immortally good...
    But let's take the rose-tinted glasses off and be real about who and what they were, and how they fit into the musical landscape of their time.

    Honest question: if you weren't there for it, as it was happening, how would you have any sort of perspective for how they fit into the musical landscape of their time? How can you 'be real about who and what they were' if you weren't around to see how they compared to everything else on the radio in 1986?

    You're entitled to your opinion, as I'm entitled to mine, and if you think a band like Blind Melon had more influence on '90s alternative music than GNR, I feel like you're the one wearing the rose colored glasses. (Bear in mind, I'm a fan of Blind Melon too)

    (Fun fact: did you know Shannon Hoon was a backup singer for GNR before Blind Melon got their break? Maybe GNR were more influential on your music than you realize.)
    Post edited by Merkin Baller on

  • surforiasurforia PhillyPosts: 309
    Gn'R is f'cking awesome. If you think they are a monster ballad band, go listen to "It's So Easy," which could easily be on a Stooges album.
    9/28/96, 8/28/98, 8/29/98, 8/18/00, 10/8/00, 10/9/00, 4/28/03, 6/22/03, 7/8/03, 7/9/03, 10/2/04, 10/5/04, 10/1/05, 10/3/05, 5/28/06, 6/20/08, 6/25/08, 10/27/09, 10/30/09, 10/31/09, 5/18/10, 5/20/10, 5/21/10, 10/21/13, 10/22/13, 4/28/16, 4/29/16
  • surforiasurforia PhillyPosts: 309
    Another similarity - both PJ and Gn'R have mercurial singers that fired what-many-consider-to-be their best drummers.
    9/28/96, 8/28/98, 8/29/98, 8/18/00, 10/8/00, 10/9/00, 4/28/03, 6/22/03, 7/8/03, 7/9/03, 10/2/04, 10/5/04, 10/1/05, 10/3/05, 5/28/06, 6/20/08, 6/25/08, 10/27/09, 10/30/09, 10/31/09, 5/18/10, 5/20/10, 5/21/10, 10/21/13, 10/22/13, 4/28/16, 4/29/16
  • Drowned OutDrowned Out Posts: 6,040
    Really annoys me when people rag on hair metal. I don't defend GnR by saying they weren't that...there were great guitar rock bands in that era. Most people refuse to associate their personal favs with that label, but who cares? Tesla, Cinderella, GnR etc....not hair metal to those that like them, hair metal to those who don't. This is why these labels suck. Good music is good music. And I would take 'hair metal' over 90% of the airy sounding synth rock crap that dominates these days.

    That said...GnR was diverse as hell....I mean, seriously:


    That's not hair metal :lol:
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 47,551
    It's not even a slag on big hair bands coming from me. It's simply that classifying GnR that way is so totally inaccurate. To me, it's like calling Pearl Jam a pop band. I just like accurate classifications, lol.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • my2handsmy2hands Posts: 17,118
  • ZodZod Posts: 6,173
    I don't know if it helps anyone but the CITI presale code is 546616 (use visa checkout to checkout, not the regular way).

    For some reason the very front section (in the wings) tickets are $100 cheaper then the next ones. I know it's a bit if a side view when your seats are almost inline with the front of the stage.. but I'd rather sit there than another 2 sections over. Whatever reason for the Seattle show the seats in the first section are $150, then the next sections are all $250.

    It felt like better tickets for less money. Now I need to resell my $250 tickets (hopefully ticketmaster grant my request to get those ones refunded).
  • cp3iversoncp3iverson Posts: 5,342
    They are the next step onward from Aerosmith which came from the Stones. Just a great mix of all styles of rock.

    I like this discussion. Axl and Slash can be suck pricks but they were the duo of their time. The attitude has stood the tests of time. They were defiant and reckless to a fault.

    Estranged is brilliant.
  • mwplummwplum Posts: 1,342
    Hey Zod where are your $250 ones? Not GA are they? I really wish I had been aware of the Citi presale when it went on given that it sounds like people were pulling GA's
    1992-07-21 Vancouver
    1993-9-4 Vancouver
    1996-9-16 Seattle
    1998-7-19 Vancouver, 7-21 Seattle, Memorial Stadium
    2000-11-6 Seattle
    2001-10-22 Seattle
    2002 -12-09 Seattle
    2009-8-17 Manchester, 9-25 Vancouver
    2011-6-16 Seattle (EV), 9-3/4 PJ20, 9-25 Vancouver
    2012-6-27 Amsterdam (#2!)
    2013-11-29 Portland, 12-4 Vancouver, 12-6 Seattle
    2014-AUS - 1-26 Sydney, 1-31 Adelaide, 2-11/12 EV Sydney State Theatre, 2-13 EV Opera House
    2014 - USA - Memphis, Detroit, MOLINE, St. Paul, MILWAUKEE, Denver, 25/26 Bridge School
    2016 - Lexington, Philly x 2, MSG x 2, Quebec City, Ottawa, Toronto x 2, Pemberton, Fenway x 2, Wrigley x 2
    2018 - Seattle x 2, Missoula, Fenway x 2
  • PoncierPoncier Posts: 9,716
    Zod said:



    For some reason the very front section (in the wings) tickets are $100 cheaper then the next ones. I know it's a bit if a side view when your seats are almost inline with the front of the stage.. but I'd rather sit there than another 2 sections over. Whatever reason for the Seattle show the seats in the first section are $150, then the next sections are all $250.

    .

    Not the case in Foxboro, those seats are $280.00 here unfortunately. (I would have bitten on them probably for $150)
    This weekend we rock Portland
Sign In or Register to comment.