what kind of rock music you like better and why?
I much prefer the 80s hair bands cause the music was a lot more fun, carefree, has more of an upbeat, high energy feel to it, the musicians and the vocal harmonies were also a lot better
I HATE grunge with a passion (with the exception of Pearl Jam and Smash-era Offspring) so I'm gonna go with 80s hair metal
But, seriously, and this is trying to be unbiased, 80s hair metal is more fun and upbeat like you said, and it's also more complex than grunge (hair metal may not be the most technical of music, but a grunge song literally sounds like a 4 minute jam session with riffs and lyrics made up on the spot), and if they were ever to make a movie based off 90s grunge it would be terrible because a movie about grunge bands just wouldn't be fun.
However, I wouldn't mind a 90s musical featuring music by Sugar Ray, Smash Mouth, Green Day, etc.
Guess you've never seen SINGLES.
Bite me, fanboy! -- Lobo
"and if they were ever to make a movie based off 90s grunge it would be terrible because a movie about grunge bands just wouldn't be fun. "
They already did.. It was called Singles (1992)
Jesus would support Universal Health Care
Grunge is what killed decent rock music.
I am not really into 80s rock. Late 60s and 70s for me, it was the most creative time.
Saying that the 80s stuff is enjoyable in its own way and there is still the musicianship to enjoy and rock performance was honed to a fine art by then. Personally though I find it too polished and formuliac. I will be getting baked June 15th and putting another dime in the jukebox baby. I have a nostalgia for that period. Its when I first got into rock.
Grunge is what killed decent rock music.
Grunge is what killed decent rock music
the music industry itself is fad driven, i can't say which is better, they both existed to generate profit.
shareGrunge killed itself. It was too depressing for even those making it to go on very sad to say. That kinda tells the tale.
80s
shareOh please.
Nirvana alone pisses on Bon Jovi, Poison, Motley Crue, Ratt, Twisted Sister, Warrant and all that hair band crap.
The main difference between Nirvana and the 80s bands was that Nirvana made music that mattered...the whole stupid hair band image and uselessness was destroyed the second Nirvana came on the scene. They single-handedly changed the course of music. When Nirvana came on the scene, the hair bands died and became irrelevant almost instantly. Bon Jovi never did that.
But hey, wear enough Spandex, bandanas and aquanet and you can distract from how bad the music was.
Soundgarden was better than any of those hair bands as well, and Pearl Jam, the most corporate of the grunge bands, still pissed all over Bon Jovi and Co.
That's an idiotic statement.
It's your opinion that the music Nirvana made mattered. It mattered to you. Doesn't mean it mattered to everyone. As for Nirvana killing that whole scene, yes, some of those hair bands were trash and didn't survive, but the same happened with many grunge bands.
Motley Crue and Poison aren't 2 of those bands. They still tour every year, and play to packed arenas all over the United States.
As for Bon Jovi, you're in over your head and have NO CLUE as to what you're talking about. Bon Jovi from 1984-1989 had that hair metal look, but their music was never about that. How many people do you know that don't know "Livin' on a Prayer", or "Wanted Dead Or Alive"? Bon Jovi, to this day, is still one of the biggest bands on the planet. The only band that could be considered bigger might be U2. Bon Jovi still releases a new album every 2-3 years, and the they're always either #1 or at worst, #2. They had the biggest concert tour of the year in 2006, 2008, and 2010. They've sold 130 million records, the better half of those being sold over the last decade.
Here's a couple of videos to wake you up to reality:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8iWJH732WGs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99P7sTMGe8o&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82nKXSptA3I
Well Dan, sorry...It is not an idiotic statement.
Nirvana did not just matter to me. They were an absolute generational focal point. They changed the entire axis of the music world.
Motley Crue and Poison are dead and crap. Just because they slide Vince Neil into leather pants when he is not almost killing people drunk driving, go out on tour and do Fiat commercials does not them good or relevant.
In over my head over Bon Jovi? LOL. I have plenty of clue what I am talking about.
Bon Jovi was hair metal and always has been....they wore coiffed, feathered mullets, spandex, scarves and bandanas and looked and were ridiculous.
So just because people know a song, it's a good song? Livin on a prayer is a lame upbeat ballad. Wanted Dead or Alive is a retarded attempt at a cool cowboy gunslinger image...sorry...when you are wearing red spandex pants and a leopard bandana, you are not gunslinger cool....you are a cheeseball.
Bon Jovi is corporate, velveeta cheese hair band rock. Always have been.
The only band that could be considered bigger than Bon Jovi now would be U2?
Laughable.
Heard of the ROlling Stones?
Heard of Metallica?
AC/DC?
All are far cooler bands than Bon Jovi and all made better music.
So because you still release a crappy album every couple of years that makes you great?
So because you had big concert tours to your dedicated, cheesy fanbase, you are awesome? NO, it just means you have loyal cheesy fans for your cheesy music.
They sold 130 million records? So did the Backstreet Boys...and they suck.
That makes Bon Jovi not cheesy? Even the name is cheesy. Not to mention, totally retarded.
They still suck. They are a cheesy spandex and feathered hair band, who made cheesy ballads and retarded cock rock.
Nirvana changed the musical course of a generation and was the focal point of a groundswell in youth culture the likes of which Bon Jovi could never even hope to remotely hit.
Nirvana sucks simple reason kurt K can't sing and his lyrics were emo ..no thanks give me 80's era anyday ..at least they still play it on the radio ..i haven't heard one single nirvana song on the radio in 10 years and how the fk did nirvana change music? what follow grunge ? the boyband and crappy pop era that's what
shareI'm a Nirvana fan, and I'm SICK of how much they have played a select few songs by them. I don't know hat area you're from, but Philly plays them more than Bon Jovi or other mainstream 80s rock. I like all kinds of rock, but Grunge (along with prog) is my favorite
"Are You Watching Closely?"
Yeah, yeah because a few distorted, fuzzy, noisy chords combined with lyrics about alienation and depression are soooo much deeper and anything the slightest bit happy or fun is, of course, stupid.
Yeah because grunge dominated for the whole entirely of the early 90s to the early late 90s. Yeah because if you walked into a dorm in 1988, other than maybe in Seattle, you'd here zero grunge and if you walked into a dorm in 1999 you'd hear only a very little grunge, but if you walked into a dorm in 1988 you'd hear a lot of Bon Jovi and some hair metal (and tons of pop) and if you walked into a dorm in 1999 you'd hear a fair amount of Bon Jovi and occasionally someone having some fun blasting out some glam rock.
Heck you still hear some people blasting Bon Jovi on campuses today and occasionally having a little fun with old 80s glam rock.
Listen if you loved grunge, fine, people did, some still do, but just because something isn't filled with talk of depression and alienation and it's catchy and has some pure tones and melody doesn't mean it is more shallow (strictly speaking, musical theorists found grunge to be about the single most simplistic of all the recent popular forms, much more so than even the cheesy bubble gum pop that you'd surely despise).
So because some meathead blasts Bon Jovi in 1988 from a dorm that means it is good music? I got to college in 1989. I never once heard Bon Jovi blasted from the dorms. I heard Zeppelin, Black Sabbath, Bob Marley, The Who etc. then later Nirvana, Pearl Jam, Soundgarden. I never heard Bon Jovi.
Your conjecture on the dorm stylings of Bon Jovi vs Grunge have zero merit, unless you were on every campus to document the events you describe in 1988 and 1999.
Not all grunge lyrics were about alienation and depression. But music that is about some thing, like child abuse, depression, death, fear, is in fact much deeper than anything fun.
You pretty much just made the point. By definition, things that discuss deeper more important issues, are in fact, deeper than things that are superficial or fluffy.
Kindly point out the many examples you have witnessed on campuses today of folks blasting Bon Jovi. Cite them.
Tell me why it would be more likely for someone to blast "Wanted Dead of Alive" ahead of say, "Lithium"
You have zero proof of this ridiculous assertion.
"strictly speaking, musical theorists found grunge to be about the single most simplistic of all the recent popular forms, much more so than even the cheesy bubble gum pop that you'd surely despise"
Blues is the most simplistic of all guitar based music. It is also incredible.
The Beatles early music is just as simple.
Simplicity is sometimes genius. Complexity is many times nonsense.
If you would like to tell me that "I wanna hold your hand" by the Beatles, because of its total simplicity is somehow less of a brilliant song because it is basic beat, melody and chord progression vs. say, "Judas" by Lady Gaga, which is more "complex", then I'd say you have lost your mind.
Musical theorists can kiss my rear end.
If you would like to tell me how electronic music and drum beat machines is somehow more complex then three-four actual musicians, who learn their craft and combine actual percussion, bass, guitar and vocals, be my guest to believe that.
You can listen to Timberlake and tell me how good it is compared to a "simple" band like Nirvana.
and yes, by definition a silly song like Unskinny Bop, is in fact, more shallow than a song like say, All Apologies. It does mean it is more shallow.
Music that deals with more important issues, are, by nature and definition, deeper than music that does not.
perhaps you might want to change your views to "Good or bad" vs "deep vs shallow", because with deep vs shallow, you have already slit your throat based on the simple fact of what those words actually mean.
[deleted]
Blues is the most simplistic of all guitar based music.
If you would like to tell me how electronic music and drum beat machines is somehow more complex then three-four actual musicians, who learn their craft and combine actual percussion, bass, guitar and vocals, be my guest to believe that.
9ry old post but it needs to be said. BSB doesn't suck, there are a variety of genres and just because it doesn't fit your palette, it doesn't mean everything else outside your narrow taste sucks.
I like 50s rock n roll, 60s, 70s, some 80s hair bands, grunge/alternative, and indie/punk rock. You guys acting like 5yr olds are the ones that suck imo. You're like those people that only eat burgers and pizzas because you are uncultured enough to try anything else.
PS. If you don't like people reading your post & responding, delete it, problem solved.
Yeah because if a few simplistic chords are matched to a few depressing lyrics it's suddenly magically deep and complex music. Hair metal and 80s rock and pop may mostly not have been the most complex music every made but at least it was catchy, had some melody, had some fun and wasn't a few simplistic chords noisily strung together and over each other.
"They single-handedly changed the course of music. When Nirvana came on the scene, the hair bands died and became irrelevant almost instantly."
then how come there's still 80s hair metal bands around (including newer hair metal bands, granted they're not very popular but they still exist nontheless) and no more grunge bands except for, like, Pearl Jam?
Soundgarden are still around. Dave Grohl's still going strong. Mudhoney's still around.
Bite me, fanboy! -- Lobo
Grohl hasn't done any grunge since Nirvana. Foo Fighters is not grunge. His work on the first Queens of the Stone Age album wasn't grunge. Them Crooked Vultures isn't grunge.
shareI'll give you Soundgarden...but Dave Grohl's more alternative than grunge now (and I actually like Foo Fighters, despite my hatred for Nirvana), and I never heard of Mudhoney
shareSorry but Nirvana did NOT make music that mattered, they made heroin infused emo music that only appealed to goth, losers and people who had no concept of musicianship.
They were the epitome of what was wrong with all kinds of rock and what destroyed true talent.
They who give up liberty to
obtain a temporary safety deserve
neither liberty or safety
All I can say growing up at the time is that we all thanked God grunge killed 80s hair bands. Most of these bands made a handful good singles and most of the material really started wear out its welcome. Many of these bands on the soundtrack had peaked in the early 80s, such Twisted Sister, Foreigner, Journey, Pat Benatar, Quiet Riot. Even one of the better bands Bon Jovi 1988 album New Jersey was considered lame back in the day. (Although it sell well but the used copies were everywhere.) To be honest, I was more in the rap music of the day.
Anyway, all these bands were yesterday news when Nirvana hit the scene.
How exactly did they make music that mattered?
Just being dark, depressing and angsty and laughing at the mainstream isn't the same as being deep. And this also relates in a way to hipsters too.
And how is all the dingy, depression of Grunge a postive thing?
People seemed a lot happier and fun loving before Grunge came and killed the 80s. Heck when did the school shooting stuff start, along with Grunge.
How does getting people sucked into a morass of their own angst matter?
Nirvana alone pisses on Bon Jovi...
I prefer any rock era to 80s-early 90s hair metal. I'm not the Nirvana fanatic I once was but I will always be grateful to Kurt Cobain for destroying all that bullsh!t.
I can't sing it strong enough
Except he didn't destroy anything. The bigger bands of that era are still around and touring successfully.
Bon Jovi, Motley Crue, Def Leppard, Poison. All still around.
Where are the grunge bands?
[deleted]
Bon Jovi was never metal, and never claimed to be. They were hard rock, lumped into the hair metal category because management wanted to capitalize on the look.
As for it being a "select few", you should do some research before you type. Those "select few" are millions of people every year, always putting those tours among the top moneymakers. In Bon Jovi's case, their last 3 tours have been the biggest moneymakers of those years (2006, 2008, 2010).
Okay, let's rewrite what happened. Let's pretend grunge music didn't kill the hair metal phase of mainstream rock music.
I can't sing it strong enough
It's just that the music of Bon Jovi, Motley Crue, Def Leppard, Poison and the lesser bands emulating them like Dokken, Ratt, Skid Row etc really got old, stale, and repetitive - the nineties music was quite refreshing indeed.
Pearl Jam, Blues Traveler, Smashmouth, No Doubt etc are still very popular and actively touring and recording bands from the nineties.
The nineties was certainly a refreshing time for rock music, but there was some great music from the eighties too.
I liked Van Halen (the Hagar days in the eighties too), Linda Ronstadt and Aaron Neville had some cool tunes, Amy Grant, Kenny Loggins...
A lot of great music from all eras, really.
"If you love Jesus Christ and are 100% proud of it copy this and make it your signature!"
I agree with the op, I grew up with the hair bands and the music makes me happy. It was rebellious and infectious. Certainly the music industry changed when Nirvana came on the scene. It's exactly what happened when Van Halen hit the scene & hair bands became the previous "next big thing". I hate when people start talking about how one genre pisses on the other. They all piss on each other. These genres exist b/c the music industry was constantly searching for the next cash cow. They are all a sign of the times and they fade away b/c the labels shoved them down everyone's throat until people welcomed a new, unique sound. Very few bands are able to be that turning point. Nirvana was, Van Halen was, the Beatles, the Doors, Black Sabbath, everyone is influenced by their predecessors. I like Nirvana and Van Halen is one of my favorite bands, but to be fair, their changing music was b/c of their timing just as much as it was from talent. They showed up when people were ready for something new. There are a lot of under-rated musicians in the 80s b/c they were dismissed as all glam & no substance. A lot of talent has gone unappreciated b/c people don't see past the aqua net.
But back to the op's comment... how many people here go to sporting events regularly? In my opinion, sporting events have immortalized a lot of 80s metal. On any given day in any sports arena in the country you will hear Gn'R, AC/DC, Ozzy, Poison, Def Leppard, Quiet Riot, Twisted Sister, Warrant... Yeah, they are upbeat and they get an audience pumped up. If you think that angst makes a song meaningful, then you won't find much value in 80s metal. But many of us, including most major sports leagues, know that 80s metal never went away and I don't believe it ever will. There's definitely more to that than just tricking fans with fancy costumes.
Exactly, most teens today know lyrics to lots of that stuff. It gets played at stadiums all the time. Sometimes people still play it at parties (and by people I mean current college age) or in the dorm or car for fun. You are setting out on a road trip or driving back from your team winning a championship, do you really want put on some depressing grunge? I saw what appeared to be HS kids getting excited and singing along to Poison and other songs. Why do even teens today still know lyrics to some of those songs now a few decades old and start squealing when they hear some of them come on? Maybe because they are catchy and fun? Nothing wrong with that.
shareI prefer neither. You're giving us a choice between femmy hair bands and mopey lumberjack-rejects? I'll pass.
share80s. No contest.
shareinstead of comparing hair metal to grunge why not just compare 80s metal and 90s metal? Still the 80s!
shareAs much as I like grunge, I can admit that it doesnt have the mainstream or lasting appeal that hair metal does. Its not fun music so less people can relate to it. There were like tons of popular hair metal bands and by comparision far less popular grunge bands, so I dont think its fair to compare them. Grunge music wasnt really meant for mainstream and popular consumption, it just so happened that it got popular when it wasnt really meant to be so. I see grunge as the more honest and real music done by regular people who werent in it for the money, fame, and groupies where as hair metal was more like boy bands with heavy guitars while grunge had the punk mentality and background.
shareVery well stated. I prefer grunge, mainly cause I find it more easy to relate to, but I don't hate 80s metal, some of it I absolutely hate (Twisted Sister mostly) but I like some of the bands in this movie especially Bon Jovi and Journey.
Hi. I'm an 18-year-old female, so don't call me an idiot.
That's not really being entirely fair though and somewhat falling into the hipster trap about unique and deep and real.
Grunge was like folk music w electric guitars and amps.
Yes I admit though i listen to some Bon Jovi too--like my parents listened to both Dylan and pop music. It's just how the world works