Anyone else not understand ''glam/hair/ metal?? - Music Banter Music Banter

Go Back   Music Banter > The Music Forums > Rock & Metal
Register Blogging Today's Posts
Welcome to Music Banter Forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with over 70,000 other registered members. After you create your free account, you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 1,100,000 posts.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-13-2011, 03:31 PM   #101 (permalink)
Horribly Creative
 
Unknown Soldier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London, The Big Smoke
Posts: 8,265
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OccultHawk View Post
They thought they were like the next Led Zeppelin or something. At least that's how it seemed to me.
90% of all hair metal acts based themselves on Aerosmith with the other 10% of influence coming from the likes of Kiss, Alice Cooper and the British glam rock brigade of the 70`s.
Unknown Soldier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2011, 03:51 PM   #102 (permalink)
Mate, Spawn & Die
 
Janszoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: The Rapping Community
Posts: 24,593
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Unknown Soldier View Post
90% of all hair metal acts based themselves on Aerosmith with the other 10% of influence coming from the likes of Kiss, Alice Cooper and the British glam rock brigade of the 70`s.
Let's not forget about the Van Halen influence! Most of those hair metal band would've been lost if they didn't have David Lee Roth to imitate.
Janszoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2011, 03:57 PM   #103 (permalink)
Horribly Creative
 
Unknown Soldier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London, The Big Smoke
Posts: 8,265
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Janszoon View Post
Let's not forget about the Van Halen influence! Most of those hair metal band would've been lost if they didn't have David Lee Roth to imitate.
You`re right, completely forgot one of the most obvious influences there David Lee Roth prancing around in spandex has a lot to answer for.
Unknown Soldier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2011, 04:04 PM   #104 (permalink)
\/ GOD
 
Ska Lagos Jew Sun Ra's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Nowhere...
Posts: 2,179
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Batlord View Post
Curt Cobain specifically set out to make Nevermind simple. He wanted it to be like children's music. It was harsh music that was very accessible. If you want depth just for depth's sake, that just seems arbitrary.

And I love Zeppelin, but as deep Stairway to Heaven is, I'm sick and tired of it, but I've never gotten sick of Teen Spirit.
Stairway to Heaven is overrated. However, I was speaking of the sheer volume of depth in their catalog. Led Zeppelin have an infinitely larger, deeper, and more evolving catalog than Nirvana. Nirvana was a decent band, Zep was an AMAZING band.

My point was not what Kurt Cobain was trying to do. It was the fact that I was having an extremely overrated, incredibly shallow, repetitive "Catchy Chorus song" which the fullest extent of dynamic shift is a constant, unchanging, repetitive shifts between mumbling/clean guitar to screaming/distorted guitar. It's a one trick pony that marches in circles, and it's still to this day considered a landmark song for some reason.

It's just a really really awful song, to be frank, and shoved down our throats. As for the "children's music" thing, it's basically Cobain's way of essentially making mainstream music in hopes of cashing in(which ended up ****ing his brain because he was in denial of that), and still trying to sound cool about it.
__________________
Quote:
Terence Hill, as recently confirmed during an interview to an Italian TV talk-show, was offered the role but rejected it because he considered it "too violent". Dustin Hoffman and John Travolta declined the role for the same reason. When Al Pacino was considered for the role of John Rambo, he turned it down when his request that Rambo be more of a madman was rejected.
Al Pacino = God
Ska Lagos Jew Sun Ra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2011, 06:47 PM   #105 (permalink)
FUNky
 
Violent & Funky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Midland, MI
Posts: 2,482
Default

^^Yeah, I was shaking my head a lot while I read that post. I disagreed with almost everything you said...
__________________
http://www.last.fm/user/ohio0808

sometimes I don't thrill you
sometimes I think I'll kill you
just don't let me fuck up will you
'cause when I need a friend it's still you
Violent & Funky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2011, 10:11 PM   #106 (permalink)
IWP
A S T H E T I C
 
IWP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 532
Default

I agree with everything he said.
__________________
*insert witty remark here*
IWP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2011, 11:50 PM   #107 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Scotland
Posts: 4,483
Default

I agree with everything he said too.
James is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2011, 01:56 AM   #108 (permalink)
Horribly Creative
 
Unknown Soldier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London, The Big Smoke
Posts: 8,265
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skaligojurah View Post
Stairway to Heaven is overrated. However, I was speaking of the sheer volume of depth in their catalog. Led Zeppelin have an infinitely larger, deeper, and more evolving catalog than Nirvana. Nirvana was a decent band, Zep was an AMAZING band.
.
I think its unfair to compare Nirvana`s catalogue to that of Led Zeppelin as they only had 3 studio albums, so based on that Led Zeppelin are going to have more depth.

I think making a comparison between the two is very hard, but what they both have in common is that when they came out, both blew the competition away and both have some of the best rock albums ever recorded. Led Zeppelin with 5 classic albums and Nirvana with 2 classic albums.


The one thing about Nirvana is that they never had time to go downhill like Led Zeppelin did, Also Kurt Cobain didn`t have time to undertake a boring and bland solo career like Robert Plant did.
Unknown Soldier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2011, 03:42 AM   #109 (permalink)
one-balled nipple jockey
 
OccultHawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Dirty Souf Biatch
Posts: 22,033
Default

Quote:
The one thing about Nirvana is that they never had time to go downhill like Led Zeppelin did,
I actually feel like Bonham died just in time. I love In Through the Out Door.
OccultHawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2011, 11:29 AM   #110 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
Screen13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,388
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Unknown Soldier View Post

The one thing about Nirvana is that they never had time to go downhill like Led Zeppelin did, Also Kurt Cobain didn`t have time to undertake a boring and bland solo career like Robert Plant did.

To be fair, I still think that Cobain would have been interesting as a solo. Plant was always going to be a (Very classic, in my opinion) front man, and whatever he did was going to fall on who was backing him, so this left him with a great band plus a fine reunion with the ace guitarist (...Axl, if he ever wakes up, should get back with Slash ASAP) and a series of solo albums that fell short more than the last. Cobain, however, was a good musician who had more of an Indie ethic, and supported plenty of music that other stars would not have touched. I will stand by my thoughts that Cobain would have went back to the Indie world or acoustic. Maybe the energy of Nirvana would have faded away, but somehow he at least would have still have something interesting to offer his listeners.
Screen13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Similar Threads



© 2003-2024 Advameg, Inc.