Guns N Roses Reunion?

S.D. wrote:

It's all SUBJECTIVE.

Whether GNR sucks or GNR rules?  Subjective.  Whether Zep were geniuses, overrated ripoffs or Gods?  Subjective.  Whether this and most all topics are completely pointless because it's just a bunch of people rattling off their subjective opinions?  That is also subjective.  

Yes, Shawn of Fire, Temple of Blood, myself, everyone who has posted here, we all know that. I don't understand what people think the point of a forum like this is for? To discuss opinions on music. If we didn't, then someone would post a topic, like about a GNR reunion being official or rumored or whatever, and we'd all view it and never reply and that would be boring OR we'd view it and all reply with "Agreed, a reunion is official and/or rumored and GNR once existed as a band and then did not but now might again. Thank you."

But you brought up something, that most topics are completely pointless. Certainly, in the grand scheme of life, yes. Anything we discuss here is pointless. But in the grand scheme of life, this forum is pointless...so I don't get why you not only post here but are an admin? Seems pointless.

I've read thousands of posts on the internet this year by people who seem to be under the shared delusion their subjective opinions are actually objective facts. Either that or they're just too f*cking stupid to know the difference. Probably a combination of both.

If I say "Pink Floyd is one of my favorite bands of all-time" and then someone asks "Why?". Do I spend time answering that question? I don't have to justify that to anyone, that's the way I feel, me explaining why I feel that way about Pink Floyd isn't going to make THEM feel the same way, nothing could. They either get it or they don't...and even if they do get it, it's not going to be in the exact same way that I do. So any descriptions I happen to share are essentially a waste of my time and their time, right? Wouldn't the time be better spent for that person to listen to some Pink Floyd and draw their own conclusions?

I'm just burnout out on the internet and social media in general I guess. I feel like I'm drowning in a sea of opinions and perspectives and it just feels like a lot of surface noise.

Quote :

Shawn Of Fire wrote:

You don't think AfD was a great hard rock album?  

No. I think it's an OK hard rock album that got old really, really fast. I fail to see what elevates them to the level they seem to be resting in.

Can you recommend some hard rock albums that are better than AfD front-to-back for me?

Because I haven't found many.  I've already heard much of LZ and Aerosmith's stuff.

Temple of Blood wrote:

Quote :

Shawn Of Fire wrote:

You don't think AfD was a great hard rock album?  

No. I think it's an OK hard rock album that got old really, really fast. I fail to see what elevates them to the level they seem to be resting in.

Can you recommend some hard rock albums that are better than AfD front-to-back for me?

Nope. Because chances are what I would name you have already heard and have an opinion on.

And it's a 99.9% chance his opinion would be negative anyway.

Quote :

Shawn Of Fire wrote:

Can you recommend some hard rock albums that are better than AfD front-to-back for me?

Nope. Because chances are what I would name you have already heard and have an opinion on.

To me that is just evidence that AfD is not merely "OK".

I have a feeling you would list stuff with great vocals but weak guitars/drumming.  Like Steelheart or King Kobra or something.

I hear so many people say Guns were overrated but the question is ... compared to who?

When I say a new band/album is overrated I'm happy to suggest albums in similar styles that I think blow it away.

S.D. wrote:

And it's a 99.9% chance his opinion would be negative anyway.

So what? That's totally irrelevant.

His suggestions would provide contrast to help me understand where he's coming from.

Temple of Blood wrote:

Quote :

Shawn Of Fire wrote:

Can you recommend some hard rock albums that are better than AfD front-to-back for me?

Nope. Because chances are what I would name you have already heard and have an opinion on.

To me that is just evidence that AfD is not merely "OK".

Well then, that's you. I could name a ton of albums I think are better albums. But they're by bands I've already seen you pick apart so I am not going to waste my time. I think AfD is "OK"...but just barely. Every time GnR comes on the radio, I change the station. Every time I happen to see a video or something, I change the channel. I roll my eyes when I see the CD on the shelves. I think it got about 1000x more attention than it deserved.

But that's just me.

I never understood the hype for this band ever!! Why do people think this band is good?? The singer is terrible, their image is terrible! I am just in amazement at how this band is so big and has been so mundane

ZombieHavoc wrote:

Yes, Shawn of Fire, Temple of Blood, myself, everyone who has posted here, we all know that. I don't understand what people think the point of a forum like this is for? To discuss opinions on music. If we didn't, then someone would post a topic, like about a GNR reunion being official or rumored or whatever, and we'd all view it and never reply and that would be boring OR we'd view it and all reply with "Agreed, a reunion is official and/or rumored and GNR once existed as a band and then did not but now might again. Thank you."

The thing is where's the point in saying "This band sucks, i never liked them, i hate them, i hope they fail, i hope nobody buys tickets"?
I mean i'm far from being PC or p*ssy and in my younger days i behaved exactly that same way but you have to realize that "this sucks, i hate it" posts aren't good for a discussion because it only leads to fans defending what they like before people who hate them and it never ends because both groups won't accept any arguments because everybody already made their mind up and formed their oppinion.
I see topics i have no interest in, i might click on them, read them to see some oppinions but i won't post because i have nothing of interest or positive to say and what would be the point to, i don't know for example barge into a discussion about Led Zeppelin and stating my oppinion that "they are by far the most overrated band of all time because they stole music, lyrics, entire songs and acted as if they wrote it and were so f*cked up on drugs they couldn't even put a good show live together" - it would only piss of the fans of the band and lead to a negative discussion, maybe a downright "war" and who would like that?
I know i wouldn't.

Ever post is subjective, every oppinion is just an oppinion but i think it just makes no sense to "destroy" a positive topic with a negative "i hate them"-post.

I'm actually amazed this is a discussion in a forum mainly made up of people aged 35-50 because the behaviour is more common on forums occupied by teenagers.

GnR these days is like the Kardashian family of rock. They get cameras pointed at them for nothing. Every move they make gets people talking "reunion"!! If we look at the 15 year history of this board, we would see SO many examples of people WANTING a reunion, only to bag on it AFTER it happens because the album was bad or the shows were bad or it wasn't what they wanted FROM the reunion. That's why I said in another thread that reunions are stupid. We clamor for them, then we shit on them. I'm just going to start shitting on them when they're announced and wait for everyone else to catch up.

ShadowAngel wrote:

I'm actually amazed this is a discussion in a forum mainly made up of people aged 35-50 because the behaviour is more common on forums occupied by teenagers.

I don't know dude, this forum is pretty damned civil, even when people are talking about things they hate and others are defending them.

On other metal forums, opinions someone disagrees with are often met with over-the-top (and likely exclusive to the internet) and unwarranted hostility. A made-up example that mirrors stuff I see on other metal boards:

-Guy: "I hate Reign in Blood, it's so overrated. Sepultura is so much better than Slayer."
-Dude: "You HATE Reign in Blood?! Get f***ed! You SUCK and your opinions on music are now meaningless as far as I'm concerned. Please die!"

So...I really have never seen anyone here do that kind of stuff, but have plenty of other times elsewhere.

Shawn Of Fire wrote:

If we look at the 15 year history of this board, we would see SO many examples of people WANTING a reunion, only to bag on it AFTER it happens because the album was bad or the shows were bad or it wasn't what they wanted FROM the reunion. That's why I said in another thread that reunions are stupid. We clamor for them, then we shit on them. I'm just going to start shitting on them when they're announced and wait for everyone else to catch up.

It's exactly the same thing with new albums from veteran bands. Do you hate them too?

As far as I'm concerned, AFD is right up there with AC/DC's Back In Black album. It's one of the best of all time! Both albums are overplayed on the radio, but they are timeless nonetheless!

Lurideath wrote:

I never understood the hype for this band ever!! Why do people think this band is good?? The singer is terrible, their image is terrible! I am just in amazement at how this band is so big and has been so mundane

Well, you could say the same of AC/DC...
Their image is kinda dumb with the school boy uniform and the singer's NY cabby hat.  Also, Brian Johnson is not considered a good singer... neither was Bon Scott. Gritty hard rock doesn't require polished technical singers.

Wow,lots of salt here! My two cents: I hated GNR when they debuted back in the day, but I respect other peoples opinions. For example, I hate peas. My daughter loves them. She loves the Disney channel. I hate it. But I value people for who they are not their entertainment choices....

Troublezone wrote:

Lurideath wrote:

I never understood the hype for this band ever!! Why do people think this band is good?? The singer is terrible, their image is terrible! I am just in amazement at how this band is so big and has been so mundane

Well, you could say the same of AC/DC...
Their image is kinda dumb with the school boy uniform and the singer's NY cabby hat.  Also, Brian Johnson is not considered a good singer... neither was Bon Scott. Gritty hard rock doesn't require polished technical singers.

but for some reason those type of singers sound great with that type of music.Could you imagine Sinatra or Harry Connick Jr singing to Slayer with their normal voices? Maybe it would sound like bad Misfits or something!

Boris2008 wrote:

John Madden wrote:

Wow,lots of salt here! My two cents: I hated GNR when they debuted back in the day, but I respect other peoples opinions. For example, I hate peas. My daughter loves them. She loves the Disney channel. I hate it. But I value people for who they are not their entertainment choices....

You HATE Peas?! Get f***ed! You SUCK and your opinions on high protein vegetables (that are actually, botanically fruit)  are now meaningless as far as I'm concerned. Please die!

Exactly.

hopefully this is like chinese democracy - takes forever to materialize and then goes fizzz....

I guess its soon time for Motley Crue to announce their reunion too....

Temple of Blood wrote:

Shawn Of Fire wrote:

If we look at the 15 year history of this board, we would see SO many examples of people WANTING a reunion, only to bag on it AFTER it happens because the album was bad or the shows were bad or it wasn't what they wanted FROM the reunion. That's why I said in another thread that reunions are stupid. We clamor for them, then we shit on them. I'm just going to start shitting on them when they're announced and wait for everyone else to catch up.

It's exactly the same thing with new albums from veteran bands.  Do you hate them too?

Not if they're good.

G n R 'Appetite for Destruction' came out when I was 17, and the music scene, at least the metal scene was drowning in the sea of mediocrity, formulaic. By then the scene was over run by pop metal bands and second tier thrash metal bands. Love them or hate them, the band came on as breathe of fresh air.

They seemed real, they were heavy enough to appeal to fans of harder rock but not so heavy it scared future school moms that loved Poison, could also embrace them.

Not many metal bands or albums that could that.

I personally think the band will sound great, I have a few boots of the current version of G n R and I thought Axl sounded great and other shows, well less then great.

I personally it will cool and it won't last long at all.

Sentinel's 2 Pennies:

Guns 'n Roses are a polarizing band (much like Kiss, AC/DC, Metallica) that doesn't have many fans living in the middle ground. There are some there, like me, who are lukewarm to the "reunion" and could not and would not afford to go see a concert. But, I will support the band by picking up the inevitable CD/DVD release to see and hear these guys play together again.

I put reunion in quotation marks b/c it is not a full original line up getting back together. That is not an opinion, it's a fact. 3 out of 5 original members is not 5 out of 5 original members.

I have been a member here since 2007 (and a lurker for a few months before joining) and I love this board. I value all posters input, whether negative in a positive thread or vice versa. Without that, we would not have a forum, we would have an electronic bulletin board. There would be no discussion, only a posting of information and likes and dislikes. Compared to some other forums I have visited, this place is extremely civil and tolerant. I could never understand how others (on other forums) could attack with such vitriol and hate another's Race or Religion simply b/c they don't like your "favorite" band /artist. Thankfully no one here is like that.

Yes, all opinions are subjective. We all know that, but sometimes it needs to be stated.

We all love and hold our music dear to us. It has gotten us through some dark times in our lives and has been a "Religion" to us. For those of us that stood with our friends in our denim and leather battle jackets at the mall on Saturday afternoons and took shit for it and for how we looked- you understand. Hard Rock and Heavy Metal music (and all its offshoots) has always been the underground and outcast so we perceive an attack on our fave bands/ artists as an attack on us. So, we circle the wagons and we act accordingly.

We are all pretty like minded (or else we wouldn't be here) but when someone posts a dissenting opine or simply that they don't like something, we have to remember that "beauty is in the ear of the listener" here. The things that we see and hear that endear us to a band/ artist might very well be the same things that make another's stomach turn and the bile rise in their throat.

The media and MTV are, imho, the ones to blame for the lofty air the highly successful bands float on. A lot of people don't like GnR b/c of Axl. or Metallica b/c of Lars, or Kiss b/c of Gene. I get it. And, as wrong as it may or may not be to be that way, I am guilty of it too.

So, apologies for the long read, but I just had a lot I wanted to comment on. Thanks.