they have like 3 singles that are widely known and popular, yet all of said singles come from their debut album
i've yet to meet someone who is just "yeah m8, lemme throw chinese democracy onto the playlist it's bangin sauce"Well yeah... like 99% of famous artists are known by like one album, maybe 2, and the rest is only for the super fans
Nirvana immediately comes to mind.Why are people only counting studio albums? Ridiculous.
They only had 3 studio album, only 2 of which were commercially successful at the time, and yet they are regarded by many as one of the most influential bands of all time.
Why are people only counting studio albums? Ridiculous.Albums which never get wide distribution historically wouldn't be heard by many people. Now days everything is on the internet but it's pretty obvious?
Oh you have got to be trolling.One is effectively a double album and live albums don't have new material. The rest of those stats line up with what I said. Just because each of their albums *had singles* doesn't mean they ever got any significant radio play. I sure as shit don't hear anything other than the appetite for destruction singles anywhere, ever.
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/c/cbe155ef.jpg
Nirvana immediately comes to mind.
They only had 3 studio album, only 2 of which were commercially successful at the time, and yet they are regarded by many as one of the most influential bands of all time.
Well yeah... like 99% of famous artists are known by like one album, maybe 2, and the rest is only for the super fansYes but not all "famous" artists are anywhere near the level of GnR. They are literally world famous and their music still gets heavy radio play and they tour a lot. But there are plenty of other bands who are slightly less famous who have hit singles from across multiple albums.
The rest of those stats line up with what I said. Just because each of their albums *had singles* doesn't mean they ever got any significant radio play. I sure as shit don't hear anything other than the appetite for destruction singles anywhere, ever.
The hard comparison there is they're defunct. Hard to know if or how many more albums they would've produced over the following 30 years or so. Or if they'd still be touring.
You're just going to have an answer for anyone pointing out how weird your question is aren't you?How is that not a valid answer? Comparing a band that's been defunct for 30 years to an active one in terms of popularity and touring is literally textbook apples and oranges.
lolnoLolyeah. Even if you release ten albums and 30 singles doesn't mean any of them got a lick of airtime. GnR has 3-4 famous singles that non fans know. None of their singles in the past 20 years have hit any significant chart level outside a couple european countries.
Lolyeah. Even if you release ten albums and 30 singles doesn't mean any of them got a lick of airtime. GnR has 3-4 famous singles that non fans know. None of their singles in the past 20 years have hit any significant chart level outside a couple european countries.
At the end of the day who cares really? Every member of GnR is obscenely overrated in regard to their technical ability. Slash is an average guitarist who is treated like some kind of guitar god. Axl rose is a complete hack like many of the singers of that era. Duff mckagan is nothing special. Steven adler is the best member but still nothing amazing
lolno
You're still missing the point of my dismissiveness. You keep saying that "they have like 3 singles that are widely known and popular, yet all of said singles come from their debut album", and that statement is objectively wrong. Speaking as a non-GnR fan who is one of the few people on this board old enough to have been listening to Top 40 radio for the entirety of their career, I'm in a unique position to tell you that you're basically full of shit .
I'm not talking about their multiple albums over the last 25 years, I'm talking about their career in the late 80s/early 90s. Their first THREE albums (four if you count Use Your Illusion I and II separately (but I won't) sold extremely well (all went multi-platinum). Their successful singles came from ALL THREE albums, and 6 charted top 10, while 2 others charted top 50 (and about 2-3 others used to get significant airplay even without officially charting). They got TONS of fucking airplay at the time, and even today you'll still hear any number of those singles still get airplay on any station that still plays music from that era (which I do, which is how I know).
No, it isn't just Welcome to the Jungle, Paradise City, and Sweet Child of Mine that gets any recognition today. Don't Cry, November Rain, and Knockin' On Heaven's Door still get pretty regular exposure, Patience still crops up from time-to-time, and even their cover of Live and Let Die gets played every now and then. And hell, I'm pretty sure I've heard Mr. Brownstone more in the last 10 years than I did when it was actually released (it wasn't a major hit at the time).
And that's deliberately ignoring You Could Be Mine, which benefited hugely from the Terminator 2 tie-in at the time, and still gets airplay now because of how big it was then.
They had TONS of airplay during that 5 year or so period from '87 to '92 (give or take), and nostalgia for that has fueled replays on "classic rock" stations right up to the current day. If you're not hearing them today, you almost certainly aren't listening to any stations that actually play 80s/90s rock, which sort of makes your observation meaningless.
Your entire premise is flawed right out of the gate, and literally nothing you've said since has really addressed that in any meaningful way.
Or to sum up - lolno .
Sounds like someone is harboring resentment towards success through mediocrity...You're damn right i am lol. But I do truly believe they are overrated musicians. Steven adler is actually pretty good but as they say... average bands with a great drummer sound great... great bands with an average drummer sound average. At the end of the day, your band is only as good as your drummer