Guns n Roses is the greatest rock & roll band of all time, and I am willing to defend this statement if you disagree

Guns n Roses is the greatest rock & roll band of all time, and I am willing to defend this statement if you disagree.

Attached: gnr.jpg (1000x600, 81.58K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=RlYO-lVrSCg
youtube.com/watch?v=ROAKlnaMuRw
youtube.com/watch?v=5Ut9LNE73_Q
youtube.com/watch?v=qjN5uHRIcjM
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

WHat do you base this assement on?

Attached: WACF.jpg (1080x720, 206.9K)

Well, they certainly grate on my nerves.....

well for starters. GNR was in a different universe of kick-ass compared to their contemporaries.

You must have low testosterone.

Barely anyone did hard rock right after that second wave -- Aerosmith, Alice Cooper, KISS, Blue Oyster Cult, Queen. All the humor and wit disappeared and it either became like unironic jock anthems (Van Halen), shitty ballads (Journey, Styx), trailer-park nonsense (GnR) or bands like Rush that just turned themselves into this gross cacophony of regular hard rock but with cheesy space noises and other bad production features.

>he dislikes Rush
pathetic user

>their contemporaries.
But considering their contemporaries...thats not saying that much.

>All the humor and wit disappeared
So...you never actually have listened to any classic Van Halen. VH was the wittiest, funniest band in hard rock. wtf??

Attached: VH.jpg (920x611, 69.47K)

>unironic jock anthems (Van Halen)
Pleb detected
youtube.com/watch?v=RlYO-lVrSCg

Attached: DLRJD.jpg (300x208, 12.33K)

Bringing up the many far better chapters of rock isn't "fancy"

Dunning-Kruger effect

Cognitive dissonance.

>Dunning-Kruger effect
Thanks for being honest. At least you realize now that you are a dumbshit.

>Bringing up the many far better chapters of rock isn't "fancy"

I think GNR are better, the studio albums and live shows are so energetic and awesome. Axl singing like shit is still a better show than whatever morose crap you listen to so that you know about the "chapters of rock"

I was talking about you.

And now friends, we see an example of willful ignorance.

Imagine thinking Van Halen are better than The Rolling Stones, The Velvet Underground, The Who, or even Motörhead. It's just sad and painful. But have fun with your transexual bubblegum pop "rock"

It's a strong enough album. But for a solid rock album, I'd take Let It Bleed or Sticky Fingers over it any day. Or Are You Experienced? Or many other things.

My stance is still that GNR are the best rock band of all time. That doesn't mean they're the greatest musicians of all time or whatever, but in terms of rock, GNR are the best.

youtube.com/watch?v=5Ut9LNE73_Q

>Imagine thinking Van Halen are better than
please point out where I ever stated anything remotely close to your assertion.

again, we all realize you have cognitive difficulties but try to refrain from lying.

>VH "bubblegum"
are you really that muh of a pleb?

Strong enough, but they've never had the magic of The Who, The Stones, or even Nirvana IMO.
youtube.com/watch?v=qjN5uHRIcjM

GNR are a great band. The issue is, to me they're not on the top tier.

lol keep whining, ya pissy triggered bitch

lurk more before posting so that you don't look like an idiot the next time

LOL. Not an argument. Gets caught making shit up...and somehow Im the bitch. Face it. you're a cunt and deep down inside you know that. good luck with that.

>The Who
>The Stones
>Nirvana
These were all bands mostly known for their antics as opposed to their music, especially Nirvana. Most performances by The Who and all performances by Nirvana were dogshit

Uriah Heep made the Guns N Roses sound in 73 with the album Sweet Freedom.

someone hasn't listened to Igor & the Red Elvises

>Axl is a bad singer
He has a 6 octave range, keep thinking Kirk Cocain's vocal fry, forced edge, no range, and shit technique make him "good"

>He has a 6 octave range
That doesn't change the fact that he sounds like fucking Snarf

Attached: dcxoibp-0e675b98-0cc5-43cf-8f3c-7c91572757ce.png (705x537, 356.77K)

>Does a screechy falsetto that's painful to listen to

OH MY GOD THAT RANGE

Attached: datrangedo.jpg (221x250, 7.67K)

Now you're a whiny teenager. The point is, you love a shitty pop band with a good guitarist, and it's not even in the same league as the greatest rock bands. I wasn't trying to argue, there's no point, you're just throwing a hissy fit. As well you should, you seem inbred.

YIKES
You really think GNR's music is anywhere near as good as any of those bands'? WOW

>You really think GNR's music is anywhere near as good as any of those bands'?
Maybe not the Stones but The Who are all inept musicians and Nirvana is objective garbage so yeah. Also enough with the "yikes", you fucking incel.

>The Who are all inept musicians and Nirvana is objective garbage
Holy shit, it's retarded

Entwistle is a GOAT bassist, Moon is a competent and fun drummer, and Townshend is a pretty good guitarist. I don't know how you could call any of them inept, unless you yourself are not a musician.

IMO, Nirvana's songwriting was way more vital and interesting than GNR's ever were, they were classicists with none of the freshness of what they were aping.

And I'm no incel, you incel.

>seething
LOL. Once again you are so far off the mark as to make yourself look completely retarded. to be expected I guess. I never once stated a preference for VH over any other band. Simply pointed out innaccuracies and falsehoods. Your lack of emotional intelligence and cognitive dissonace forces you to hide behind non-sensical claims and insults. You are a fucking idiot. Good luck with that.

Just look at any live performance, none of them know what the fuck they're doing live. They're worse than Led Zeppelin, and on the subject of Zeppelin JPJ is the actual GOAT bassist.

Nirvana was trash, I won't even elaborate on why because anyone who doesn't realize this doesn't deserve to have their opinions entertained

everyone in guns and roses is shit accept Slash

GNR was way more fresh than Nirvana

Anybody with good taste in rock knows Nirvana was just Cheap Trick with depression, and has no need for Nirvana since we have Cheap Trick, the fun good band who's one of the greatest rock bands of all time

The funny thing about Nirvana is that you say that they're the shitty version of any band that Kurt was influenced by and you'd be right.

Van Halen (with DLR) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> guns n roses

Cheap Trick and Nirvana are both better than guns n roses.

Attached: Cheap Trick.jpg (600x600, 87.69K)

Cheap Trick is better than Guns N' Roses, Nirvana is not. Nirvana isn't even better than LA Guns.

I'm sorry that you're stupid. WASP and Hanoi Rocks are also miles better than guns n roses and la guns.

>You really think GNR's music is anywhere near as good as any of those bands'? WOW

it's better, actually. you don't see anyone wanting to crank out the who or Zeppelin at a house party very much, do ya?.Not the case for GNR.

If the metric for good music for you is what gets cranked at parties, then there is no hope for you.

if the band in question is a rock&roll band it is very much a good metric.

WASP and Hanoi Rocks couldn't be more opposite musically, so good to know you just lump any band with eye liner and teased hair into one category out of ignorance. I mean really I get you're going for a "hair band" comparison but that's such an odd pairing both of which hardly make any sense in this scenario.

Nirvana simply has no musical redeeming qualities. Shit vocals, shit musicianship, if you're gonna suck you gotta at least be fun, and Nirvana was anti fun, you could also be a good showman....Nirvana were garbage live performers. No appeal whatsoever outside of their posturing as historical contrarians/coffee shop snobs, and I guess some people still want to be Daria or something so more power to you I guess.

I'll also say, I have actually owned every single Nirvana album myself, while I bet you never even listened to a full album from any other band mentioned here.

I dunno about this...I feel like Zeppelin is way more broadly enjoyed band than Gn'R, at least among any group of people who'd be playing rock music at a house party. Most people would be playing garbage rap tunes and Drake anyway.

Hey, Cinderella is pretty great

You sound like a confused teenager

Attached: 1583893972693.jpg (1200x1098, 95.77K)

Based

Guns N Roses the peak of faggot Boomer Rock. Like a lot of shit of that era, they were loud, soulless, and vapid, designed to appeal to your average dumb Amerimutt. 1985 to 1990 was a pretty terrible time for music, and a large reason for that was because of the continued popularity of shit bands like Guns N Roses.

Correct.

>Guns N Roses the peak of faggot Boomer Rock. Like a lot of shit of that era, they were loud, soulless, and vapid, designed to appeal to your average dumb Amerimutt. 1985 to 1990 was a pretty terrible time for music, and a large reason for that was because of the continued popularity of shit bands like Guns N Roses.
>Correct.

Attached: Smug Soijak.png (280x305, 28.81K)

So you're a teenager, nice projecting. Come back to Yas Forums when you've listened to rock music for a couple decades, then you can discuss it without sounding like a moron who thinks WASP and Hanoi Rocks are part of the same genre.