Poll

Which album do you prefer?

AC/DC - Back in Black
Guns N' Roses - Appetite for Destruction

Voting closes: April 19, 2027, 06:54:10 PM

Author Topic: Battle of the 80s Rock LP's Volume 2: Back in Black vs Appetite for Destruction  (Read 2566 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online pg1067

  • Posts: 9837
  • Gender: Male
No, revisionist history is suggesting that they were not considered by many to be part of the hair rock scene when they clearly were.

Yup.  At least where I was.

Yup….and there were a ton of people in 1980 who categorized AC/DC as “heavy metal”….doesn’t mean they were correct.

Whether they were or weren't "correct" (something that is impossible when it comes to an opinion) isn't the point.  The point is that this is how they were viewed at the time.
"There's a bass solo in a song called Metropolis where I do a bass solo."  John Myung

Offline El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28282
  • Bad Craziness
Even if one doesn't consider GnR hair metal, which is debatable, the pushback here is against the idea that somehow GnR was this refreshing change away from it. That's like saying Mr. Pibb is a nice respite from your usual Dr. Pepper. Yeah, it may taste a little different, and the ingredients aren't the same, but it's still a whole lot more similar than different. At best GnR is a very small step in the evolutionary process away from hair metal. 
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline hefdaddy42

  • Et in Arcadia Ego
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 47776
  • Gender: Male
  • Postwhore Emeritus
I don't know.  I experienced the rise of GnR in real time, as well, and I for one never associated them with the other hair metal bands.  I mean, they were out at the same time, but that was it.

There was something a little scary about them.  I was never scared of anyone in Poison or Winger.
Hef is right on all things. Except for when I disagree with him. In which case he's probably still right.

Offline ZirconBlue

  • Posts: 2343
  • Gender: Male
As a big fan of hair metal at the time, G'N'R seemed like something very different to me when Appetite came out.

Online pg1067

  • Posts: 9837
  • Gender: Male
Even if one doesn't consider GnR hair metal, which is debatable, the pushback here is against the idea that somehow GnR was this refreshing change away from it. That's like saying Mr. Pibb is a nice respite from your usual Dr. Pepper. Yeah, it may taste a little different, and the ingredients aren't the same, but it's still a whole lot more similar than different. At best GnR is a very small step in the evolutionary process away from hair metal.

Yeah, but can you really compare the two?  Pibb didn't even bother get his doctorate!

 :biggrin:
"There's a bass solo in a song called Metropolis where I do a bass solo."  John Myung

Offline KevShmev

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 39402
  • Gender: Male
No, revisionist history is suggesting that they were not considered by many to be part of the hair rock scene when they clearly were.

Yup.  At least where I was.

Yup….and there were a ton of people in 1980 who categorized AC/DC as “heavy metal”….doesn’t mean they were correct.

Whether they were or weren't "correct" (something that is impossible when it comes to an opinion) isn't the point.  The point is that this is how they were viewed at the time.

Exactly.  It's laughable now to think of AC/DC as heavy metal, but that is what many considered them back then.  Hell, Rush and Blue Oyster Cult were called metal by some in the 70's, which sounds even more hilarious.

Even if one doesn't consider GnR hair metal, which is debatable, the pushback here is against the idea that somehow GnR was this refreshing change away from it. That's like saying Mr. Pibb is a nice respite from your usual Dr. Pepper. Yeah, it may taste a little different, and the ingredients aren't the same, but it's still a whole lot more similar than different. At best GnR is a very small step in the evolutionary process away from hair metal.

Post of the thread.  :tup :tup

Shut it down, mods. :P :P

Offline jammindude

  • Posts: 13560
  • Gender: Male
    • The Jammin Dude Show
As a big fan of hair metal at the time, G'N'R seemed like something very different to me when Appetite came out.

+1

And no insults have been traded. I disagree with those who feel differently, but any “barbs” have been lighthearted ribbing…at least for my part.

Love you all.
"Better the pride that resides in a citizen of the world.
Than the pride that divides when a colorful rag is unfurled." - Neil Peart

The Jammin Dude Show - https://www.youtube.com/user/jammindude

Offline KevShmev

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 39402
  • Gender: Male
Yep, it's all good. I love a friendly music disagreement, as they can be fun to trade different opinions and viewpoints.  No harm done on my end.  :hat :hat

Online TAC

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 62019
  • Gender: Male
  • Arthritic Metal Horns
Even if one doesn't consider GnR hair metal, which is debatable, the pushback here is against the idea that somehow GnR was this refreshing change away from it. That's like saying Mr. Pibb is a nice respite from your usual Dr. Pepper. Yeah, it may taste a little different, and the ingredients aren't the same, but it's still a whole lot more similar than different. At best GnR is a very small step in the evolutionary process away from hair metal.

Well, since I'm doing the pushback, I'll take this.

I never said it was a refreshing change. In reality, Appetite was released before the hair metal explosion. So they weren't really a small step in the evolutionary process away from it either. They kind of predated it actually.

I know Slippery When Wet and Night Songs were released in 1986, but the real Hair Metal bandwagon jumping didn't really start until late 87/early 88. Appetite was released in July '87.

I'm just saying that they were independent of hair metal.



  And these bands almost always had the token totally 80's-sounding monster ballad,

Monster ballads have been around since the 70's. Dream On, Still In Love With You, Beth...
would have thought the same thing but seeing the OP was TAC i immediately thought Maiden or DT related
Winger Theater Forums................or WTF.  ;D
You know that a mark of a great song is if TAC hates it with a special passion.

Online TAC

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 62019
  • Gender: Male
  • Arthritic Metal Horns
OK, anyway..

Kev, what's your next fucked up battle? Hurry before WildRanger beats you to it.
would have thought the same thing but seeing the OP was TAC i immediately thought Maiden or DT related
Winger Theater Forums................or WTF.  ;D
You know that a mark of a great song is if TAC hates it with a special passion.

Offline KevShmev

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 39402
  • Gender: Male
Get ready for the epic Wham! vs solo George Michael clash!!

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 35852
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2014!
Even if one doesn't consider GnR hair metal, which is debatable, the pushback here is against the idea that somehow GnR was this refreshing change away from it. That's like saying Mr. Pibb is a nice respite from your usual Dr. Pepper. Yeah, it may taste a little different, and the ingredients aren't the same, but it's still a whole lot more similar than different. At best GnR is a very small step in the evolutionary process away from hair metal.

Well, since I'm doing the pushback, I'll take this.

I never said it was a refreshing change. In reality, Appetite was released before the hair metal explosion. So they weren't really a small step in the evolutionary process away from it either. They kind of predated it actually.

I know Slippery When Wet and Night Songs were released in 1986, but the real Hair Metal bandwagon jumping didn't really start until late 87/early 88. Appetite was released in July '87.

I'm just saying that they were independent of hair metal.


As someone who started to lose interest in the LA rock of the late '80's when this became a thing:



There WAS something different about G'n'R.   El Barto is right: they weren't a radical departure from what came before, but they were different.  They were far more late 70's "Sick As A Dog" Aerosmith than they were early 70's glam.    Kind of like when the cocaine took over the New York disco scene. 

Offline ZirconBlue

  • Posts: 2343
  • Gender: Male


Well, since I'm doing the pushback, I'll take this.

I never said it was a refreshing change. In reality, Appetite was released before the hair metal explosion. So they weren't really a small step in the evolutionary process away from it either. They kind of predated it actually.

I know Slippery When Wet and Night Songs were released in 1986, but the real Hair Metal bandwagon jumping didn't really start until late 87/early 88. Appetite was released in July '87.

I'm just saying that they were independent of hair metal.



I guess it was the late 80s when record labels were signing any band with makeup and big hair, but the style had been going on for a while.  Ratt, Motley Crue, Quiet Riot, etc. all broke big well before then.  The Wiki article has it divided into a "First Wave" 1981-1986 and a "Second Wave" from 1986-1991, the latter of which lines up with what you are talking about.


I still remember Casey Kasem announcing Ratt's "Round and Round" on American Top 40.  It was kind surreal.

Offline Melphina

  • Posts: 354
I strongly disagree with the assertion that GnR was only a 'very small step' away from hair metal. There is almost nothing hair metal about GnR other than the way they looked very early on (for example, Welcome to the Jungle's video, when they had the big hair in their early days). And the music wasn't glammy at all, it was dirty, filthy rock and roll with some real edge to it and heavy metal vibes at times. You're Crazy is a ripper. Lyrics were pretty coarse, too. Melodically they were able to also juggle sweet melodies and aggressive yet catchy parts like My Michelle or Out Ta Get Me. I think that album has it all, can't say that for a lot of bands at that time in my opinion.

Online pg1067

  • Posts: 9837
  • Gender: Male
And no insults have been traded. I disagree with those who feel differently, but any “barbs” have been lighthearted ribbing…at least for my part.

Love you all.

Yep, it's all good. I love a friendly music disagreement, as they can be fun to trade different opinions and viewpoints.  No harm done on my end.  :hat :hat

Ditto.


There WAS something different about G'n'R.   El Barto is right: they weren't a radical departure from what came before, but they were different. 

They were dirtier and more distasteful.  :-)
"There's a bass solo in a song called Metropolis where I do a bass solo."  John Myung