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

145791012

Comments

  • buck502000buck502000 Birthplace of GIBSON guitar Posts: 8,951
  • RKCNDYRKCNDY Seattle, WA Posts: 31,013
    PJ_Soul said:

    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.

    but...but...they play Just Breathe on the 'Adult Contemporary' station!
    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
  • ZodZod Posts: 9,943
    mwplum said:

    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

    My $250's are in section 108 (which is about 2.5 sections away from the stage). Not bad tickets but not as good as the section 106 tickets. I didn't get on the CITI thing right away at all. It was something I noticed last light (hours after it started). Had the page bookmarked and clicked on it. Saw there was a presale, googled the code. The CITI tickets aren't going fast at all, but it would of been awesome to get GA had I thought of it right away. The loophole around not actually needing a CITI card was pretty easy.

    The CITI presale puts the fan club presale to shame. Maybe it's because no one else thought of paying with visa checkout.. but there's alot of tickets tickets available and they've been there since last night.. no ones buying them.
  • GM151575GM151575 Freehold, NJ Posts: 340
    Zod said:

    mwplum said:

    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

    My $250's are in section 108 (which is about 2.5 sections away from the stage). Not bad tickets but not as good as the section 106 tickets. I didn't get on the CITI thing right away at all. It was something I noticed last light (hours after it started). Had the page bookmarked and clicked on it. Saw there was a presale, googled the code. The CITI tickets aren't going fast at all, but it would of been awesome to get GA had I thought of it right away. The loophole around not actually needing a CITI card was pretty easy.

    The CITI presale puts the fan club presale to shame. Maybe it's because no one else thought of paying with visa checkout.. but there's alot of tickets tickets available and they've been there since last night.. no ones buying them.
    It works even with not using a citi card?
  • edwhoedwho Posts: 811
    Here's a link to a good gnr fan forum. There's a thread up front concerning presales.
    http://www.heretodaygonetohell.com/board/index.php?PHPSESSID=db471fbb8643f39b9f24af15e280976d&board=2.0

    Three Fish

    July 1996 San Francisco

    June 1999 Chicago

  • I saw Guns n' Roses in 1992 in their heyday. Terrible, terrible, terrible -band came on stage two hours late, took five minutes between each song to lower grand pianos onto the stage or some other bull which killed any momentum. Axl Rose was so far up his own behind it was hard to believe. I wouldn't go to see them again if you paid me.
  • FoxyRedLaFoxyRedLa Lauren / MI Posts: 4,810
    dankind said:

    "They taught us how to love!"

    https://youtu.be/pNCiXKpO94g

    Yes! Damn Yankees now we're talkin!!! :smiley:
    Oh please let it rain today.
    Those that can be trusted can change their mind.
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 13,576
    Suziemay said:

    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!).

    It's just a musical discussion, it's not some imperative to abandon them.
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 13,576


    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.)
    It's called objectivity. Hindsight is very nice for seeing things as they WERE without the bias that is inherited from experiencing how they were PERCEIVED at the time.
    They were definitely a step in the right direction, and a huge influence on the music scene that was coming, but they weren't that scene, they were the last glorious blast of the old scene.
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • DewieCoxDewieCox Posts: 11,411
    edited April 2016
    rgambs 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.

    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.)
    It's called objectivity. Hindsight is very nice for seeing things as they WERE without the bias that is inherited from experiencing how they were PERCEIVED at the time.
    They were definitely a step in the right direction, and a huge influence on the music scene that was coming, but they weren't that scene, they were the last glorious blast of the old scene.
    No, it's really not and youve shown an insane amount of bias to even try to to declare that.

    I was 5-10 years old during GnR's heyday so I don't really have that nostalgic connection from that time period. I have listened to their music and grown to appreciate it in my own time and I just don't hear the comparisons you're trying to make. They're just not there. From the music, to the lyrical content, to their image....it's much closer to 90s bands than the hair/glam metal guys. Sure, it had some 80s flair to it, but so did a lot of the other guys that are now early 90s alt rock heroes.
    Post edited by DewieCox on
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 13,576
    DewieCox said:

    rgambs 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.

    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.)
    It's called objectivity. Hindsight is very nice for seeing things as they WERE without the bias that is inherited from experiencing how they were PERCEIVED at the time.
    They were definitely a step in the right direction, and a huge influence on the music scene that was coming, but they weren't that scene, they were the last glorious blast of the old scene.
    No, it's really not and youve shown an insane amount of bias to even try to to declare that.

    I was 5-10 years old during GnR's heyday so I don't really have that nostalgic connection from that time period. I have listened to their music and grown to appreciate it in my own time and I just don't hear the comparisons you're trying to make. They're just not there. From the music, to the lyrical content, to their image....it's much closer to 90s bands than the hair/glam metal guys. Sure, it had some 80s flair to it, but so did a lot of the other guys that are now early 90s alt rock heroes.
    I have articulated many things which are more similar to "hair" than "grunge", but the only argument that has been posed to articulate the difference between GNR and the hair bands is that they were more raw.
    That is a quantitative argument, not qualitative.
    What quality does GNR have that is different from the hair bands?
    As an example, Radiohead abandoned the hard rock power guitar cliche for haunting melodies and a stripped down style. Nirvana abandoned the excessive party ethos for a more ascetic rock ethic, and they stripped the formula down to a 3 man distortion machine.
    Those are qualitative differences, saying GNR was rawer and more explosive is a quantitative difference. They shared the dangerous, party hard, rock n roll mentality, with the classic hair band components (screeching vocals and guitar leads).
    To say they were heavier, drawer, more dangerous, etc only makes them the best hair band, it doesn't set them apart.

    I don't hate GNR, I don't see why we can't have a discussion about their music without people getting so butthurt.
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • Merkin BallerMerkin Baller Posts: 10,387
    rgambs said:

    DewieCox said:

    rgambs 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.

    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.)
    It's called objectivity. Hindsight is very nice for seeing things as they WERE without the bias that is inherited from experiencing how they were PERCEIVED at the time.
    They were definitely a step in the right direction, and a huge influence on the music scene that was coming, but they weren't that scene, they were the last glorious blast of the old scene.
    No, it's really not and youve shown an insane amount of bias to even try to to declare that.

    I was 5-10 years old during GnR's heyday so I don't really have that nostalgic connection from that time period. I have listened to their music and grown to appreciate it in my own time and I just don't hear the comparisons you're trying to make. They're just not there. From the music, to the lyrical content, to their image....it's much closer to 90s bands than the hair/glam metal guys. Sure, it had some 80s flair to it, but so did a lot of the other guys that are now early 90s alt rock heroes.
    I have articulated many things which are more similar to "hair" than "grunge", but the only argument that has been posed to articulate the difference between GNR and the hair bands is that they were more raw.
    That is a quantitative argument, not qualitative.
    What quality does GNR have that is different from the hair bands?
    As an example, Radiohead abandoned the hard rock power guitar cliche for haunting melodies and a stripped down style. Nirvana abandoned the excessive party ethos for a more ascetic rock ethic, and they stripped the formula down to a 3 man distortion machine.
    Those are qualitative differences, saying GNR was rawer and more explosive is a quantitative difference. They shared the dangerous, party hard, rock n roll mentality, with the classic hair band components (screeching vocals and guitar leads).
    To say they were heavier, drawer, more dangerous, etc only makes them the best hair band, it doesn't set them apart.

    I don't hate GNR, I don't see why we can't have a discussion about their music without people getting so butthurt.
    Once again, yo
    rgambs 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.

    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.)
    It's called objectivity. Hindsight is very nice for seeing things as they WERE without the bias that is inherited from experiencing how they were PERCEIVED at the time.
    They were definitely a step in the right direction, and a huge influence on the music scene that was coming, but they weren't that scene, they were the last glorious blast of the old scene.
    So somehow you have a better perspective on something because you WEREN'T there to see it as opposed to those that were?

    Sure, makes perfect sense.

    FYI, I'm not even that big of a GNR fan, but to classify them as 'just another hair band' is laughable.
  • rustneversleepsrustneversleeps The Motel of Lost Companions Posts: 2,209
    you aren't having a discussion. you are matter-of-factly talking about something you know nothing about.
  • DewieCoxDewieCox Posts: 11,411
    You've mentioned the things they have in common with hair metal and those comparisons have been rejected across the board. Bottom line, when most of us listen to the music we don't hear the musical comparisons you're making. About every band is subject to the times when it comes to their image.

    The lyrical content and their offstage behavior isn't all that different from bands like AIC or Nirvana or PJ. If you think those 90s guys weren't partying their asses off, then your naivety is alarming. Axl was writing about the negatives of the junkie lifestyle and had a lot of political lyrics and much darker themes than the bands you're trying to compare to, He wasn't writing Girls,Girls, Girls...he was writing My Michelle.

    Nobody is getting butthurt, but it can be annoying when you lay out facts and they're dismissed by someone that claims to want an open discussion.
  • rustneversleepsrustneversleeps The Motel of Lost Companions Posts: 2,209
    dude never heard my michelle
  • my2handsmy2hands Posts: 17,117

    you aren't having a discussion. you are matter-of-factly talking about something you know nothing about.

  • BentleyspopBentleyspop Craft Beer Brewery, Colorado Posts: 10,524
    edited April 2016
    Funny that people on a PEARL JAM fan board are discussing /arguing rock band vs hair band and GnR vs Poison.

    Carry on

    :lol:
    Post edited by Bentleyspop on
  • my2handsmy2hands Posts: 17,117
    I tell you what... No matter what you think... This era of Music / rock and roll needs an Appetite for Destruction album desperately
  • EnterThanmanEnterThanman London, ON Posts: 1,057
    The entire GnR tour is a cash grab, so can't be surprised. But ya, PJ prices are very reasonable compared to a lot of acts of their size.
    The member formerly known as Scratched Vinyl
  • wall232wall232 New York Posts: 1,346
    my2hands said:

    I tell you what... No matter what you think... This era of Music / rock and roll needs an Appetite for Destruction album desperately

    I've been waiting for some band to come even close, sadly I don't see it happening anytime soon.
    NYPJ
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 13,576
    edited April 2016

    you aren't having a discussion. you are matter-of-factly talking about something you know nothing about.

    It would be a discussion if people would counter my points rather than just dismissing my analysis.
    So if I am so wrong, articulate for me exactly how I am wrong. I know nothing, you know everything, but somehow I am the one who is actually analysing the music and you are just being dismissive.
    Post edited by rgambs on
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 13,576
    DewieCox said:

    You've mentioned the things they have in common with hair metal and those comparisons have been rejected across the board. Bottom line, when most of us listen to the music we don't hear the musical comparisons you're making. About every band is subject to the times when it comes to their image.

    The lyrical content and their offstage behavior isn't all that different from bands like AIC or Nirvana or PJ. If you think those 90s guys weren't partying their asses off, then your naivety is alarming. Axl was writing about the negatives of the junkie lifestyle and had a lot of political lyrics and much darker themes than the bands you're trying to compare to, He wasn't writing Girls,Girls, Girls...he was writing My Michelle.

    Nobody is getting butthurt, but it can be annoying when you lay out facts and they're dismissed by someone that claims to want an open discussion.

    So they don't fall into the hair band tropes of high falsetto singing, screeching powerful guitar solos, unremarkable (comparatively) rhythm section and a party image/ frequent song theme???

    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • rustneversleepsrustneversleeps The Motel of Lost Companions Posts: 2,209
    rgambs said:

    you aren't having a discussion. you are matter-of-factly talking about something you know nothing about.

    It would be a discussion if people would counter my points rather than just dismissing my analysis.
    So if I am so wrong, articulate for me exactly how I am wrong. I know nothing, you know everything, but somehow I am the one who is actually analysing the music and you are just being dismissive.
    i know nothing... and plenty have countered your points in this thread. have you read it? i wont discuss guns with someone that thinks they know everything about them, even though you were a 2 year old when they broke out. enjoy your pearl jam shows.

  • pearlgirl52pearlgirl52 At a Pearl Jam show, hopefully. Posts: 653
    So this thread has turned into a debate about if GNFNR is a hair band or not? Oh boy. To each his/her own I guess. If you want to spend a ton of money to see them, good for you. I'll probably see them, won't be spending thousands of dollars though. Hopefully they make it and all the diehards will finally get their chance. Slash has still got it, Duff's still got it. Everyone will find out if Axl still has it. I think Myles Kennedy does a much better job today than Axl does though if you aren't set on the original lineup. Guy's got serious pipes. Who cares what I think though.
  • DewieCoxDewieCox Posts: 11,411
    rgambs said:

    DewieCox said:

    You've mentioned the things they have in common with hair metal and those comparisons have been rejected across the board. Bottom line, when most of us listen to the music we don't hear the musical comparisons you're making. About every band is subject to the times when it comes to their image.

    The lyrical content and their offstage behavior isn't all that different from bands like AIC or Nirvana or PJ. If you think those 90s guys weren't partying their asses off, then your naivety is alarming. Axl was writing about the negatives of the junkie lifestyle and had a lot of political lyrics and much darker themes than the bands you're trying to compare to, He wasn't writing Girls,Girls, Girls...he was writing My Michelle.

    Nobody is getting butthurt, but it can be annoying when you lay out facts and they're dismissed by someone that claims to want an open discussion.

    So they don't fall into the hair band tropes of high falsetto singing, screeching powerful guitar solos, unremarkable (comparatively) rhythm section and a party image/ frequent song theme???

    No....Do Soundgarden and Jane's Addiction?

    I don't hear a rhythm section any less remarkable than say, Ament/Abbeuzzese, Grohl/Novoselic, or the AIC guys....there aren't many rhythm sections as identifiable as Adler and Duff. To call them unremarkable is an insult basically every rock rhythm section short of moon/Entwistlw and JPJ/Bonham. They aren't as technically proficient as a lot of guys, but they stay out of the way while adding some personality to the music. They're an all time well respected rhythm section.

    Again, I already made my point with my last post, but I can't think of a GnR song that celebrates the party rock and roll lifestyle. No question, they partied their asses off and some songs were written from that, but seldom/never was it from a positive viewpoint.
  • jerparker20jerparker20 St. Paul, MN Posts: 2,399
    rgambs said:

    DewieCox said:

    You've mentioned the things they have in common with hair metal and those comparisons have been rejected across the board. Bottom line, when most of us listen to the music we don't hear the musical comparisons you're making. About every band is subject to the times when it comes to their image.

    The lyrical content and their offstage behavior isn't all that different from bands like AIC or Nirvana or PJ. If you think those 90s guys weren't partying their asses off, then your naivety is alarming. Axl was writing about the negatives of the junkie lifestyle and had a lot of political lyrics and much darker themes than the bands you're trying to compare to, He wasn't writing Girls,Girls, Girls...he was writing My Michelle.

    Nobody is getting butthurt, but it can be annoying when you lay out facts and they're dismissed by someone that claims to want an open discussion.

    So they don't fall into the hair band tropes of high falsetto singing, screeching powerful guitar solos, unremarkable (comparatively) rhythm section and a party image/ frequent song theme???

    Dude. Why are you so hell bent on trying to classify music into silos? Who cares if GNR is a "hair band" hard rock, or whatever. They made some kick ass music during their run and lots of people loved it and still do. So does it matter if they where this type of band or that type of band? If you want to use your logic, PJ, Radiohead, and Tool could be classifield as "arena rock" since they only play arenas and large festivals thus placing them in the same category of music as Journey, Def Leppard and KISS. And at the end of the day; who cares what it's called. Just like all others forms of art there's stuff you like and stuff you don't.

    As for the impact of Appetite and GNR, for me it opened up a whole new world of music. I was 11 when it came out. An aunt who was maybe 20-21 at the time found my stashed dubbed copy of Appetite while visiting. (I grew up in a very religious household in a small rural town so GNR was clearly the work of the devil and thus banished from the home so I had to stash my copy I got from a friend's older brother inside of the box spring of my bed.) She then introduced me to Zepplin, Sabbath, and Metallica. I then discovered the Misfits and punk. That album opened up a lot of musically doors for me.
  • rustneversleepsrustneversleeps The Motel of Lost Companions Posts: 2,209

    So this thread has turned into a debate about if GNFNR is a hair band or not? Oh boy. To each his/her own I guess. If you want to spend a ton of money to see them, good for you. I'll probably see them, won't be spending thousands of dollars though. Hopefully they make it and all the diehards will finally get their chance. Slash has still got it, Duff's still got it. Everyone will find out if Axl still has it. I think Myles Kennedy does a much better job today than Axl does though if you aren't set on the original lineup. Guy's got serious pipes. Who cares what I think though.

    i care...
  • coco buttercoco butter Posts: 1,434
    edited April 2016
    God I love this thread. It makes me want to light up a Marb Red and start drinking some Jack Daniels Whisky straight out of a bottle at a Firestone dealership with Paradise City cranked in the background!
    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.
  • rustneversleepsrustneversleeps The Motel of Lost Companions Posts: 2,209

    God I love this thread. It makes me want to light up a Marb Red and start drinking some Jack Daniels Whisky straight out of bottle at a Firestone dealership with Paradise City cranked in the background!

    smoke em if ya got em!
  • coco buttercoco butter Posts: 1,434

    God I love this thread. It makes me want to light up a Marb Red and start drinking some Jack Daniels Whisky straight out of bottle at a Firestone dealership with Paradise City cranked in the background!

    smoke em if ya got em!
    I do need an oil change!
    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.
Sign In or Register to comment.