How much musical merit in hair metal?

Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by mtvgeneration, Apr 7, 2021.

  1. vinylphile

    vinylphile Forum Resident

    Disagree. I lived through that era. I attended the GnR/Metallica show that came around after Use Your Illusion was released, but I remember them fading quite quickly after that. They released The Spaghetti Incident to very little response and then broke up. Their fall was likely related to Axl being Axl as well as grunge taking over. By the mid 90s it was all about Lollapalooza.
     
    Matthew Tate likes this.
  2. vinylphile

    vinylphile Forum Resident

    Your opinion is noted. In my opinion, Dynasty is a completely forgettable album.
     
    BA Baracus likes this.
  3. Matthew Tate

    Matthew Tate Forum Resident

    Location:
    Richmond, Virginia

    huh? i think its you in threads saying you remember something but its not true. did you say beavis and butthead made fun of warrant? it was winger. GNR never broke up . in 1994 they recorded a cover of "sympathy for the devil" and started working on a new album. by 1996 matt sorum, i think it was ,stated the album would be out in 1997. in 1996 slash quit. 1997 duff and matt sorum quit and all the material was scraped. in 1998 axl started working on a new album from scratch other than i think "this i love" already existed. where in this timeline did the 1993 covers album result in "and then they broke up" as if by 1994 the band announced it was over when in fact they had recorded material to be released supposedly in 1997?
     
    Pouchkine likes this.
  4. Doomster

    Doomster Forum Resident

    Location:
    London
    Accepting we may remember or perceive things differently, but I did not personally link grunge's ascendancy to the GnR demise (although it did help kill the genre that birthed them).

    GnR was the ONE band from the LA scene that properly transcended "hair metal". They ended up more like a U2 by that stage, in terms of scale, reach and brand, inhabiting a plane above, and not anchored to, the currents and eddies of of genre trends. My speculation is that if GnR had released a proper studio follow up in the nineties to the UYIs, it would have lived or died on its own qualities - and not on whether grunge (first half of 90s) or nu metal was in vogue (second half of 90s) at the time.

    The well documented demise of GnR was very largely intra-band disharmony, catalysed / exacerbated by just how huge and rich they were and - as you say - some personal demons in Axl's head, which exited his head.
     
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2021 at 7:44 AM
    Pouchkine and Matthew Tate like this.
  5. Matthew Tate

    Matthew Tate Forum Resident

    Location:
    Richmond, Virginia

    exactly and they were still working as a group until late 1997 when duff and matt finally bailed
     
    Pouchkine and Doomster like this.
  6. deeluxdx7

    deeluxdx7 Forum Resident

    Sure,

    Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

    Mine is that KISS went about their "evolution" the wrong way.

    If you look at Aerosmith (And I'm no big Aerosmith fan.) They "Updated" their sound in the 80's while still maintaining the core elements of what their product was. It was still Aerosmith, just with the new production values popular in that era mixed in.

    KISS, in my opinion, constantly tried to become a different band. It was odd that such a monumental, Hall of fame level band, with numerous classic songs that are burned into Pop-Culture consciousness, for as long as such a thing exists, would suffer from what amounts to "Low musical self-esteem."

    For some odd reason.....and I know this sounds strange.....but Paul and Gene have always given the impression they don't really "get" KISS.

    They don't seem to really know what it is they did right. It was two guys looking for a light switch in a darkened room....

    ...I actually think Gene may have "gotten it" a little more than Paul....but I have a pet theory that Paul held down "It's my life" for all those years because he couldn't stand the thought of Gene singing the successor to "Rock n' Roll all night"

    That's the song the world thinks of when you say "KISS".....and they see and hear GENE singing it......I think that drove Paul CRAZY......that no matter what KISS did, Gene would always be thought of as the "Frontman" because he sings the classic all the world knows.

    Gene Simmons is a household word, Paul Stanley is known amongst music fans, I mean, he's a huge celebrity and all that, but Gene Simmons is a name known even by those who know nothing about Pop-music.

    I just can't see any other reason for Paul's bizarre burial, over the course of multiple DECADES, of a song that I believe is the best KISS song ever written.

    I believe Gene saw this happening. ("Creatures" was the first time that song was presented for a record.) And started losing interest in KISS because of it. That is the time Gene started drifting away into other projects.

    I was really after reading Paul's book that this theory came to be something I believe is the truth,

    There is just no other reason for such bizarre self-destructive behaviour.
     
    Matthew Tate likes this.
  7. deeluxdx7

    deeluxdx7 Forum Resident

    Well, understand that I don't use "Hair metal" as a derisive slur.

    I DO think that "Primal Scream" fits the "Hair Metal" aesthetic. And would regard it as such, but to me, that isn't a bad thing, or an insult.

    ........You know, after all these years I STILL haven't listened to "Generation Swine"

    Your review certainly isn't psyching me up to give it a go either.

    The 94' record?............mehhhh......not my cup of tea......It seemed big on style and. short on substance.....I.E....There were no HOOKS!

    It seemed to me that Nikki was so desperate to "update" the Motley sound that he forgot.....or perhaps AVOIDED the thing they were best known for....HOOKS!!!

    Nikki always said "I write the chorus first, because if the chorus sucks, why waste my time working on the rest of the song?"

    And I've always taken that as some of the best advice I've ever gotten.....it seems he forgot his own advice on that record.
     
    Matthew Tate likes this.
  8. deeluxdx7

    deeluxdx7 Forum Resident

    HAHA!
     
  9. deeluxdx7

    deeluxdx7 Forum Resident

    Yes, I've never actually heard anything about Nevison being "Stanley'ed" during "Crazy Nights"

    And yes, KISS has a bad habit.....actually PAUL has a bad habit of burring anyone other than himself when it comes to an outing that was less successful than he anticipated.....with that "Stanley-esque" 20-20 hindsight of course.

    Still........If Nevison WAS given full control then I think he DOES have some wrongs to answer for. (And I know there are people here who will vehemently disagree with me on this....love ya man!)

    But if he WAS in FULL control than he allowed WAAAAAY to much low-quality material to make it's way onto "Crazy Nights"

    A producers FIRST, and perhaps most important job, is to access the material available for any project he's been hired to bring to life.....if that material is not of sufficient quality to achieve the goals stated by the artist, label, A&R, management....whoever......than he needs to say: "STOP! We can't get where you want to go with this stuff, we need to go back to the drawing board, bring in some outside help....whatever it takes, to get the SONGS that this thing will need to be what you envision."

    Ron Nevison DID NOT do that, I've even read interviews where he "chuckles" about the low quality material Gene brought in,

    So....in my estimation.....Ron Nevison was an AWEFUL choice to produce KISS. He did not help them where it REALLY mattered.

    In my estimation.......he was nothing more than an engineer.........a grossly overpaid engineer.
     
  10. Doomster

    Doomster Forum Resident

    Location:
    London
    Generation Swine has much more in the way of actual hooks than MC94 ... hooks, in fact, are not the main issue here. Its failings were:
    (a) stylistically schizophrenic, flitting between Stone Temple Pilots style pop-grunge and more NIN / Manson industrial experimentation;
    (b) Sixx and Lee taking or sharing lead vocals on two and a bit tracks - which would have much better handled with Neil;
    (c) Brandon - Lee's ode to his son, which is beyond mawkish, and really needed a stronger (or sane) producer to nix; and
    (d) redundant industrial remake to Shout At The Devil - surely a b-side or bonus track, rather than an actual album track.

     
  11. bartels76

    bartels76 Forum Hall Of Fame

    Location:
    CT
    Totally agree. He nailed the 1987 Bon Jovi/Heart sound that they were looking for but it seems like he just took the material they gave him and he didn't balk when the quality wasn't up to snuff. Kiss may have been like look we waited months for you to be free up. We need this out by the fall so we are going with what we got as we are under the gun to get it out.
     
    Matthew Tate likes this.
  12. Doomster

    Doomster Forum Resident

    Location:
    London
    Well - your KISS-related posts are always a wild read.

    You make a great point re: the 80s comparison to Aerosmith {them updating rather than transforming their core sound / songwriting}, with three reflections:

    1) A key difference is of course guitarist - Aerosmith kept Perry, whereas KISS had cycled through the unique Vincent - completely different to Ace, and then other 80s widdly-woo axe men who owed more to Eddie Van Halen than Ace Frehley.
    2) Aerosmith managed to sell to a whole new younger audience for whom the connectivity to the past was more or less irrelevant - so retention of a core sound may have supported critical acceptance, but I don't know it mattered to the MTV generation (what mattered were hooks like Dude ... / Rag Doll etc and power ballads)
    3) Maybe too little, too late, but Sonic Boom and Monster (with Tommy Thayer apeing Frehley) was probably the first time KISS did try and sound the classic KISS and with some degree of effectiveness.

    On the second part of your post - there is some pretty heavy speculation there. Can't believe Stanley would withhold a good song because of jealousy towards Simmons? He gave him God of Thunder after all.

    Gene is mainly better known that Stanley because he spends more making objectionable / d1ck like statements to anyone who'll listen. I don't think the release of any particular song would have made a difference.

     
    Matthew Tate likes this.
  13. Disagree with your disagreement. I saw GNR 3 times on the UYI tours so I also lived through that era. Even at the very end of the tour in 1993 they were playing huge soccer stadiums in Europe. In the United States they were still playing sold out and near sold out arenas in major markets during the Spring/Summer of '93 on the Skin N' Bones tour. The Metallica/GnR stadium tour was in the Summer/Fall of 1992, what I mentioned above was almost a full year after that tour ended. Your memories don't match up with the actual facts, tour dates, and attendance figures. They toured very successfully a full year after you claim they "faded quite quickly".

    I guess one could argue that they weren't in the news as much after one of the most successful tours of the era, one that lasted for 26 months, finally ended in the late summer of 1993, but that argument would be a bit disingenuous. They weren't in the news that much because their massively successful tour had ended and they didn't have a new album to promote.
     
    Pouchkine and Matthew Tate like this.
  14. Doomster

    Doomster Forum Resident

    Location:
    London
    Allegedly the Rick Rubin approach is to be supremely focused on song quality, and have a high bar for what makes it onto tape.

    That said, I think Crazy, Crazy Nights was a terrific single - charted in the Top 5 in the UK, and feels inexplicable that it didn't break the Top 50 in the US. And I am sure in Reason To Live, everyone involved felt they had a melodic rock smash hit on their hands. As for the remainder of the songs on the album - well, I really don't know if they are enormously weaker than adjacent releases in terms of hooks - it is all mediocre, and if Crazy Nights is worse, well, it's not a category-level difference in song quality, just a much softer rock / AOR production, which didn't much suit the band.

    So maybe Nevison's view was "Well, this is the best this band - running on creative fumes - is gonna produce" ...
     
  15. carlwm

    carlwm Forum Resident

    Location:
    wales
    I'll stand by my long-held view that Crazy Nights was a well produced, excellent album made by a band prepared to try something different. The style suited them better than many of their attempts at heavy music. At least in my opinion.
     
  16. BA Baracus

    BA Baracus Forum Resident

    Location:
    illinois
  17. Doomster

    Doomster Forum Resident

    Location:
    London
    "Prepared to try something different" is absolutely right - albeit they were trying to change it up from a position of perceived commercial weakness (in their eyes), and the reason for change was likely economic rather than artistic. Nevison was the expensive investment they made to try and hit big, and when it didn't hit, Hot In the Shade had to be made on a real shoe-string. The "back-to-basics" mantra was not just aesthetic ...
     
    Pouchkine and carlwm like this.
  18. Matthew Tate

    Matthew Tate Forum Resident

    Location:
    Richmond, Virginia
    that and he said they broke up shortly after when more than a year after the tour they released a new recording, cover of "sympathy for the devil", and then in 1996 had according to matt sorum, pretty much a finished a 10-12 all rock no ballad album that will come out I 1997
     
    Brett44 and Pouchkine like this.
  19. deeluxdx7

    deeluxdx7 Forum Resident

    I have no doubt you are correct.

    And I agree "Crazy Crazy Nights" is an A+ song.

    And unfortunately, the fall off was steep after that.

    I wish Rick Rubin would have produced KISS and taken 0% sh!t from Paul Stanley.
     
    Matthew Tate likes this.
  20. carlwm

    carlwm Forum Resident

    Location:
    wales
    I think Rick Rubin has got ears of tin. Glad he went nowhere near KISS. :)
     
    Matthew Tate likes this.
  21. deeluxdx7

    deeluxdx7 Forum Resident


    The Cult "Electric"?

    Danzig?

    beastie Boys?
     
    Matthew Tate and carlwm like this.
  22. deeluxdx7

    deeluxdx7 Forum Resident

    Wild read?.....Thanks........I think......

    I think whether Aerosmith's new audience cared about their past or not is less relevant than the fact that they hadn't lost sight of what they did well. They didn't really sound "forced". KISS unfortunately sounded like they were trying too hard to BE something, when what they already were was a classic band of the highest order. However, the loss of Ace was a MASSIVE blow, no argument there.

    I would also argue that "Sonic Boom" and "Monster" (Especially) were failures. They did NOT capture that original KISS magic. (With the exception of "Nobody's Perfect" and "Danger us")
     
    Doomster likes this.
  23. Ah yes, I’ve heard talk of the Vince Neil Window Of Opportunity.
     
    AlfonsoVG and Matthew Tate like this.
  24. deeluxdx7

    deeluxdx7 Forum Resident

    Oh!

    And Paul was LIVID at Gene singing "God of thunder"

    Gene actually re-wrote a lot of the lyrics, but didn't bother seeking credit because Paul had pitched such a fit. He figured: "Let's just move on."

    Gene has done that before, he actually wrote the bridge to "Cold Gin" and that is according to Ace. But they wanted an "Ace song" so Gene did not seek credit.
     
    Matthew Tate likes this.
  25. carlwm

    carlwm Forum Resident

    Location:
    wales
    Only heard Electric from that list. Great songs but I'm not thrilled about the dense and muddy sound. Demo quality at best, at least to my ears.

    I have albums by Tom Petty, The Avett Brothers and The Dixie Chicks that are enjoyable despite of Mr Rubin's heavy-handed efforts rather than because of them.
     
    Matthew Tate likes this.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine