The denigration of glam metal

I don't like the image but I kinda think it's [spoiler]fun[/spoiler] music.

>>53563753
Rock critics.

Literally nobody would hate hair metal if rockists hadn't crafted this narrative of "le grunge killing hair metal XD

It's probably because they got tons of 12 year old girl pussy while Metallica, Megadeth, Venom, and Anthrax had to resort to homosexuality (everyone knows meal is one of the most homoerotic genres ever - just ask one of its most seminal figures, Robert John Arthur Halford)

This genre deserves no contempt. It was just fun-loving ear candy that made no pretention of seriousness or fedora-ness. That's why we still hear these groups every day on commercials and FM radio. Songs like "Once Bitten, Twice Shy" and "Photograph" still rule. I could do without the power ballads though.

>>53563753
This was the pinnacle of crossdressing and it being cool.

I seriously wish more guys wore yoga pants though.

The American idea of "glam rock" is a very odd one since that term originally referred to the 70s British scene characterised by David Bowie, Elton John, Queen, Slade, and Gary Glitter. When American bands like Motley Crue and Ratt burst onto the pop charts around 1983-84, some may have viewed their images as copying a style associated with the Brits. Copying the Brits was not new, as the Beatles, Stones, and Cream were trendsetters of their own. Maybe people just resented the appearance of American bands imitating British styles late in the game rather than the Americans being the trendsetters.

>>53563834
>Copying the Brits was not new, as the Beatles, Stones, and Cream were trendsetters of their own
And those guys all stole from Elvis, Chuck Berry, Little Richard, and blues artists. Your point?

>>53563852
No, I'm actually gay and have a crossdressing fetish and wish it would come back.

I think it was power ballads that really soured people on hair metal. Some of them like Home Sweet Home were good, but by 1987 it seemed practically every band had to have one. Also while circa-1983 Motley Crue and Quiet Riot were legitimately badass hard rock, a lot of the later groups like Winger and Warrant seemed like corporately-assembled boybands for little girls.

File: Malice-Mizer-malice-mizer-30385483-785-415.jpg (85KB, 785x415px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 785x415px

It's absurd-looking and it's over. It's really safe to make fun of something that's really evocative because you really don't have to do anything other than state your initial reaction of "omg wtf?? so stupid..." Personally, I think things that have some sort of loud, difficult sort of deal about them should be celebrated instead of made fun of because otherwise you have a situation where everyone is trying to do some sort of quiet and unobtrusive sort of sound/image with the artist wearing a t-shirt and jeans or something. That's not really fun to me.

A good bulk of glam metal is really samey though, but it was fun and required effort to pull off. I like a lot of genres that pull on that same sort of idea but try to do it for a reason other than vanity or sex appeal, like visual kei. They look like idiots if they walk down the street, but that's not the point. They're performers and they should put on a show.

IMO, it was the whole idea of calling these groups "metal" when their music was just cheesy blues rock played by guys in transvestite costumes. Some of the hair metal groups like Cinderella started out playing heavier music but eventually lapsed into this kind of soft radio rock mush.

>>53563870
>Some of them like Home Sweet Home were good, but by 1987 it seemed practically every band had to have one.

Paul Stanley claimed that at that time guitar groups couldn't get on the radio unless they had a power ballad.

Image became more important then the music. Style over substance. The best thing about hair metal was it led to a massive backlash and brought grunge to the forefront.

>>53563930
Yeh, but by the time grunge really came into its own, hair metal was already on the decline.

What grunge really replaced was the squeaky-clean, mindless pop music (and Michael Jackson).

>>53563843
I dunno; the American hair bands were a lot more OTT in their appearance gender-bendingwise than the UK bands ever were, and some of the main players - most notably Nikki Sixx perhaps - gave a nod to the New York Dolls for inspiration.

>>53563942
Wha...you don't think David Bowie looked like a horrible mutant troll male female thing for dramatic effect? I'm not an expert on the subject, but the appearance of music videos may have made the 80s bands more noteworthy for being gender-bending.

>>53563870

What soured people on hair metal was the fact every fucking album had the same formula, along with the same theme. When the economy hit bottom in the early 90s along with the first iraq war, the last thing people wanted to hear was some dipshit in spandex talking about how he was scoring mad pussy while downing a bottle of jack.

Heavy metal was legitimately exciting and dangerous in the late 70s-early 80s, but by 83 when the slicked-back glam rock started taking over, something vital was lost. They looked like circus clowns, comic book characters, trannies, etc. And every song was pretty much exactly the same. For a genre so apparently focused on rebellion and offending your parents, it seemed awfully conformist and stamped from an assembly line.

File: Motley Crue Poison.jpg (303KB, 952x753px) Image search: [Google]

303KB, 952x753px

>>53563964
Things were changing even before that. The silly, ultra-tranny look was mostly popular in 85-86. This was during the height of the Reagan economic boom, everyone was happy, partying down, life in America was good. By 88-90, things were a little different. A series of dark events had happened since 85 like Iran-Contra, the S&L Crisis, Challenger Disaster, and the Crack Wars.

If you compare these pics, you can see that bands were dressing in more macho-looking leather and studs outfits by 1989. Some of this had to do with the social atmosphere in America having changed a little since the middle of the decade, also the rise of GNR and thrash bands had an effect.

Not sure how Def Leppard or Great White were lumped in with Poison when they were really pretty different bands.

>>53564082
Lots of bands were called "hair metal" when they weren't, including AC/DC, Van Halen, GNR, the list goes on.

And as far as the looks go, everyone in that era looked ridiculous. U2, Rolling Stones, Yes, Heart, Van Halen. Everyone had mullets and Day-Glo wardrobes.

>>53563936
Grunge was gross as fuck. I'd rather listen to Motley Crue and have fun then hear Layne Stayley whine to me about drugs and then overdose.

>>53563936
What really killed late 80s dancepop was the backlash surrounding Milli Vanilli when it turned out that they weren't actually the guys singing on the record. Michael Jackson (who was really hurt by the child molestation scandal in 93 more than anything as Dangerous still was a huge hit), Madonna, Prince (done in more by his weird behavior than anything), Mariah Carey, Whitney Houston, Janet Jackson, and Gloria Estefan all still had hits and got radio play during the grunge era. OTOH, hair metal groups like Poison rapidly fell off the charts by 92.

Grunge had every bit as much of an image as hair metal. Even an anti-image is still an image.

>>53564154
What really led to the takeover of grunge was a concerted effort by MTV and radio stations to ditch AOR. By the late 80s, the MTV suits were really getting tired of AC/DC, Kiss, and Van Halen and wanted to throw them overboard as soon as possible. So alternative rock, the rapidly-rising hip-hop, and new girl singers like Mariah Carey quickly flooded the airwaves.

Another important thing that happened was the rapid disappearance of dinosaur rock from the radio. Up to the end of the 80s, most 70s, heck even 60s bands like the Rolling Stones and Beach Boys could still get at least some radio play. By 1993, that was no longer the case and essentially every pre-80s band except for Aerosmith got booted from the airwaves. Stations would not play any new material they came out with and it offended their fans who felt that nobody cared about what they wanted to listen to.

It incorporated so many elements: in image it borrowed heavily from late 60's Steppenwolf and early 70's Stones, the UK glam scene, from 80's punk & new wave, and classic American motorcycle gangs/clubs. Its music was part arena rock with its polished, soaring vocals / ballad format, part AM pop, yet part hard rock. What a mish-mash. And looking goofy as all get out: the macho pose of 150 pound guys wearing spiked naugahyde cuffs, make up, and crucifixes dangling by 4 inch baby chains from their earlobes (great for brawling!) -- and strategically razor sliced jeans so tight they could barely walk.

In a way it was brilliant, when you think about it.

>>53564167
But it was a lot more real and believable than what Poison were doing.

File: received_m_mid_1399355546042_1ed88f461c7027e378_0.jpg (72KB, 600x900px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 600x900px

>>53563753
Get Out

>>53564234
Agreed. One of the big things about grunge was that the guys looked like some dudes you'd see in your neighborhood jamming in a garage. They dressed in ordinary street clothes instead of absurd costumes. And really, the thrash bands started it several years earlier when Metallica would go on stage in jeans and band T-shirts.

If you'd see Pearl Jam or Metallica nowadays, they still dress more-or-less the same as they did in 1991. None of the hair metal guys wear wigs and pink tights anymore.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aM4BqmRA9WM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85BVnQMiFFw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1PUGBhElxAc

Grunge bands did wear street clothes on stage yes, but eventually the flannel shirt look got commercialized and you had "grunge fashion contests" by 1994.

>>53563877

It's actually getting a upswing in Scandinavian countries and other parts of the world thanks to shit like Yohio etc... The problem is that there are literally only like 2 bands at best that actually know anything about playing music in a sea of retards. The amount of incompetence outside of styling your hair for the majority of these "bands" is terrifying.

Still, I can see the scene becoming quite a dominant one in rock music a few years down the line if more serious and talented musicians get the guts to try it out.

>>53564278
Image is inseparable, it's just a matter of by how much. Mark Mothersbaugh once said that Devo were no more "uniformed" on stage than Bruce Springsteen.

The image went hand-in-hand with the new 24 hour music television stations like MTV and VH1. The bands and executives did what they could to get the video to air. In the 60s, to promote your band, you could get your foot in the door with a great record that people hear rather than an appealing video that people watch and kinda hear as they watch Tawny Kitaen writhe on the hood of a car.

>>53564284
Can you tell me the names of those bands? I've heard BatAAr and they've got a lot of good ideas but I've never really felt satisfied with how those ideas come together.

>>53564316
Well, the two I had in mind were actually BatAAr and Kerbera. The rest is pure shit in my opinion (Yohio is competent at what he does I guess? Don't know if makes his own material though), but I put that to the scene still being in some sort of extreme infancy.

File: 0f.jpg (29KB, 396x400px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 396x400px

>>53564304
You'd think so, but MTV didn't magically drop from another planet. The idea of using videos to promote music goes way further back. Elvis did it with the Jailhouse Rock movie and 60s bands had routine appearances on Ed Sullivan and many local music TV programs. Yes, the event of cable TV was a big step forward, but it was just an evolution of something that had already been done for a long time.

As for the hair metal look, of course that wasn't original either, it evolved from 70s fashions which were in of themselves pretty ridiculous and flamboyant. Watch the Led Zeppelin movie from 76 and you can see what I mean.

>>53564278
>>53564261
If the guys in Pearl Jam were just normal guys making music in 1991, they certainly are not that anymore, no matter how they dress. Eddie Vedder certainly had big rock star hair at the beginning of the band's career, even if his clothing was more outwardly normal than that of the hair metal bands.

>>53564278
The flannel shirt look came from the Seattle scene and of course was just the normal way people in the PNW dressed (ie. like a lumberjack).

>>53564334
>Kerbera
This is pretty interesting. I'm definitely excited about the possibility of white-man VK at least.

>everyone knows meal is one of the most homoerotic genres ever

[citation needed]

Motley Crue and Ratt were entry level heavy rock. You'd grow out of them once you discovered thrash and death metal. ;)

>>53564336
You don't think that the institutionalization of MTV, VH1, and home videos into American culture represented monumental shifts in the way that people received new music? Music videos were on right when kids got out of school. It was FM radio for televisions. A live appearance for a TV show is one thing as it would not be rebroadcast to the extent of a popular video on MTV. MTV set cultural trends with its VJs who interviewed and popularized bands. We are talking about a dramatically different paradigm for the music industry to promote artists.

It should be pointed out that Def Leppard were a good little NWOBM band in the early Eighties before selling out and turning into hair metal rubbish to get Amerifat money. Truth be told, the hair metal sound did evolve out of the hard rock of the late 70s-early 80s even though many of them didn't whore themselves the way DL did.

Hair Metal was a good term because it coincided with the Big Hair/Mall Hair thing that was popular with girls at the same time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGbqXz-gUwA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=caxCV9jov6g

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wbmn1b4WSGE

>>53564445
IDK the term "hair metal" was even used in the 80s. At that time, the genre was usually called "pop metal" or "glam metal".

No, the phrase "hair metal" or "buttrock" came into use in the 90s when smug, self-assured grungefags had to take a crap on Poison and Skid Row even though there was more difference between those bands than is oft believed.

>>53563870
>Winger
Mike Judge killed that band.

>>53563843
(1/2)

Pop metal is probably a less disparaging term. Especially since not all the acts associated with the movement were especially glam. The connection with the UK glam rock movement was more stylistic than substance. In fact, hair metal bands owed most of their sound to Aerosmith, AC/DC, Kiss, and Van Halen, not T-Rex, Slade, or Bowie.

There were glam bands in the US, but they weren't quite as fruity as the British scene. Alice Cooper started out with a crossdresser kind of look, but quickly realized that it wasn't macho enough to sell to Americans. Unlike Europe and Japan, we tend to not like cutesy things. The New York Dolls never achieved major commercial success, but Kiss took their basic sound, put on tougher looking leather-and-studs costumes, and ran away with it. Another American glam band, that provided Motley Crue with one of their biggest hits, was Brownville Station.

Judas Priest started out wearing flowing pastel-colored robes (ie. vintage 70s British glam rock) and then when they needed to break through in North America, donned leather and studs.

And, of course, Bowie himself came over to hang out with Andy Warhol's crew, where he met rather outrageous fringe artists like Wayne County and Cherry Vanilla, before he invented Ziggy. By the early 80s, American cultural sensibilities had evolved to the point where it found androgony funny rather than threatening, so fishnet stockings were a go!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kN9ZGOFaWY0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dPWfNJRU-s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bs39QXZK58U

>>53563753
it's all image and no substance. Super cheezy, cookie cutter music with mediocre playing, and childish lyrics.

>>53564592
(2/2)

But as I said, Van Halen was the single biggest catalyst behind hair metal since Eddie's shredder guitar rapidly replaced the blues rock riffs of Black Sabbath, Led Zeppelin, and Aerosmith. After Van Halen, Quiet Riot and Twisted Sister broke out, both with a fairly minimalist sound (the Slade covers that provided QR with their biggest hit were done at management insistence). Then Bon Jovi had all of the big hair, flashy clothes, giant hooks, and synth fluff.

Of course the UK's own Def Leppard quickly dropped their original NWOBM sound when they realized that glam rock was needed to tap into the huge American market.

But the classic glam rock look we associate with Poison had its origins in the LA scene. I'm not sure who was first, but with that many bands, playing "dress up" was one way to get yourselves noticed.

Plus, even before grunge, GNR already brought about a revival of raw, sleazy hard rock. They were also from LA, but didn't grow up there (Axl was from the Midwest). So now Aerosmith's kind of music (twin-guitar riff-based cockrock) was back. Several bands like Poison tried to adapt by making more bluesy albums, even though most people just laughed at them.

As for why Americans rejected glam metal, the rockist college crowd never liked the shit to begin with and once the underground alternative sound got mainstream, they ran with that. Frat boys got into jam bands like Phish as well as RHCP and grunge (which could still be hooky, albeit dirty hooky). Sorority girls who'd liked them, grew into soccer moms, who still like them, and flood Bon Jovi shows every summer. The metal guys who'd liked them, moved on to heavier fare.

tl;dr it was like disco around 1980

>>53564434
Def Leppard didn't really get "bad" until Adrenalize. Hysteria may have been completely pop and sellout and MTV and all, but it was a good album, and there was a reason it connected like it did. Adrenalize was a wimpier second-rate sequel to Hysteria and thus began their demise.

In my opinion the negative connotation stems from how silly most hair metal musicians looked.

See >>53564004

>>53564800
Gene Simmons apparently was no fan of the late 80s androgynous look (that Kiss were forced to wear to appear "with it"). He said "I looked like someone I'd fucked."

>>53564470
"False metal" was another popular term at the time.

MTV had everything to do with the rise of the glam rock look. To make a music video, you needed extreme, eye-catching clothes.

Grunge bands of course did videos with their much more subdued outfits, but that was in the 90s by which point video-making technology had advanced to the point where you could get away with it.

What did glam rock in were a combination of the following:

>too much Van Halen-style shredder guitar with pinch harmonics
>too much snare reverb drumming
>too many huge choruses
>phoned-in songwriting

I mean, some of it wasn't bad like early Motley Crue, but what really did the genre in were that last wave of manufactured boybands like Skid Row.

It got oversaturated just like disco a decade earlier and people got tired of the shit.

I still don't buy the notion that MTV created "visual components" in rock.

>>53564939
Of course not, but MTV created the need for super in-your-face clothing. See >>53564879

In the Seventies, Americans were sporting long hair and blue jeans while Britain was dominated by the androgyny of David Bowie and Slade.

The first bands to break, thanks to MTV were the New Romanitcs, who already had a "look" and videos ready for distribution.

The first American movement to be popularized by MTV, was glam metal. "What do you want to do with your life?" "I WANT TO ROCK!"

>>53564962
>In the Seventies, Americans were sporting long hair and blue jeans
Not true at all. Plenty of American bands in the 70s had silly outfits like NY Dolls, Alice Cooper, and Kiss. Plus a lot of those British glam guys like Elton John were selling tons of records here as well as Led Zeppelin filling up football stadiums in the US with their teased hair and satin jumpsuits.

>The first bands to break, thanks to MTV were the New Romantics, who already had a "look" and videos ready for distribution.
There's some truth to that theory, but early MTV also played the hell out of artists ranging from the Police to John Cougar Mellencamp to Phil Collins-era Genesis, none of whom had an especially glam image. Plus The Who had some early music videos made up which got quite a bit of MTV rotation. They certainly weren't glam even if Roger Daltrey had a New Romantic haircut for a period.

>The first American movement to be popularized by MTV, was glam metal.
Madonna and Michael Jackson actually were the people who put MTV on the map even though hair metal bands obviously got plenty of airtime. Plus as I said, they all copied their look and sound from Aerosmith, Kiss, and Van Halen who'd been wearing goofy, flamboyant stage costumes years earlier. Much as the New Romantics were following in the footsteps of Bowie, Roxy Music, and other 70s artists who featured a strong visual image long before MTV ever existed.

Heck, maybe Little Richard started it all in the 50s. Elvis had the gold lame suit, but LR had huge giant wigs. Then a decade later, Jimi Hendrix had some really crazy outfits.

Zeppelin, Free, Fleetwood Mac, Sabbath and Deep Purple were early hairy metal cool. Alice Cooper, Mountain, Aerosmith and New York Dolls were cool but once the punk trend made all of them look hopelessly outdated, the glam/hair bands that followed that seemed even more ridiculous.

You'll have autists insist to their dying day that grunge killed hair metal when the reality was way more complex. Besides that, even a lot of alternative bands like AIC and STP had some degree of hair metal/cockrock origins.

>>53565125
Yeah there were plenty of glam rock bands who one day realized that that era was over and put on flannel and ripped jeans and "entered" the 90s. From the members of AIC and Pearl Jam starting out with hair metal acts to Pantera.

>>53565167
That's a big part of why I don't buy the argument that grunge was a retreat from the "image" aspect of hair metal. It was simply a different image, and one that was just as conformist in many ways as the hair metal image had been.

>>53565180
We have discussed image and rock and roll for a long time----yes grunge was a "different" image, but it appealed to those who were tired of the the boring 80s Los Angeles heavy/glam/hair/whatever metal scene. Plus the whole underground/indie label thing, LA vs Seattle, and the rise of the ironic Gen Xer "anti-rock star" image. The whole flamboyant rock star persona had been going on since the early 70s, nearly an entire generation. Keith Moon destroyed hotel rooms in 1975 and ten years later, Motley Crue were doing exactly the same thing.

>>53565248
>We have discussed image and rock and roll for a long time----yes grunge was a "different" image, but it appealed to those who were tired of the the boring 80s Los Angeles heavy/glam/hair/whatever metal scene.
IDK about you, but I find the Seattle grunge sound much more dire and tedious to listen to than the LA glam sound. Dammit, I wanna have fun and sing about girls with big titties, not whine about how I'm a junkie and I hate my mom.
>Plus the whole underground/indie label thing, LA vs Seattle
Ah, but Motley Crue did release their debut album (Too Fast For Love) on an indie label before signing with a major one just like Nirvana.
> Keith Moon destroyed hotel rooms in 1975 and ten years later, Motley Crue were doing exactly the same thing.
Wha...Nirvana never smashed their instruments on stage or wrecked a hotel room? I seem to recall they did.

I meant credibility. You could argue until your face turns blue that Nirvana sold out by going on a major label and having music videos, but at least they had some self-awareness about it to the point where Kurt literally took his own life when he realized what he'd become.

>>53565349
>at least they had some self-awareness
LOLgoodone.

Motley Crue and Nirvana had the same start - indie debut album and sophomore release on a major label. Pearl Jam never had an indie album and their debut (major label) sold 10 million copies, 4 million more than Crue's biggest seller (Girls, Girls, Girls). But I suppose because Eddie Vedder feels bad or guilty or something about that, that excuses him from being a sellout.

>>53565389
I don't really give a shit about Pearl Jam or Eddie Vedder. I've never listened to their music. I was thinking more of Cobain wanting to stay on an indie label (as, indeed, REM worried about with IRS in the 80s), and not primarily worrying about what hottie they could get in their music video.

>>53565414
Hey look, Cobain voluntarily made the choice to sign with Geffen and produce music videos. He damn well knew what he was doing.

>>53565428
Just like REM bailed on IRS when their deal expired. They went for the bigger money; if I had been them, I would have been no different.

However, Subpop did, IIRC, get some points or percentage of Nevermind. Whether that was from Cobain's guilt or shrewd lawyering, I do not know.

>>53563870
Oh, too bad really because Cherry Pie is a solid blues rock album. Too bad the only song anyone knows was the title track which was designed from the get-go to be commercialized pap.

>>53565428
Put yourself in Kurt's shoes. Why stay on an indie label that was on the verge of going under? It's no different than Judas Priest dropping Gull Records in 1976 since they were getting a little bored of living in a van and eating half a sandwich every two days.

Besides that, Kurt clearly wanted to bring alternative rock to the mainstream and eject the stale hair metal poseurs.

>>53564365
The flannel grunge look was a blend of typical working class clothing worn in the PNW and also the local punk scene. Seattle punk bands didn't wear the dyed hair, nose piercings, or Mohawks of New York punk or British punk. A few groups like Mother Love Bone were more hair metal-esque, but for the most part guys took the stage in their street clothes.

It seemed fresh and appealing at a time when being a rock star seemed to necessitate lots of wigs, leather, and studs.

>>53565464
There's an interview of Jani Lane accusing their record label of pushing that crap onto them and forcing them to ditch any creative direction they might've had as a band.
Which can't be much for a glam band to begin with I imagine.
Also he dead now.

Let's get down to brass tacks here. The reason people got tired of hair metal is because of how incredibly stale it was. How many more times can you listen to a faggot in a giant clown wig playing the same exact shredder guitar licks and the same exact cookie cutter power ballad lyrics about life on the road or doing teenage groupies or how his parents hate when he cranks up the stereo.

While there were actual good hair metal tunes here and there like Photograph or Here We Go Again, the majority, especially at the tail end of the 80s, was just really tired, lame, and totally predictable.

And yes, every musician has an image, but the difference here is when image becomes bigger than the music. The whole glam rock schtick was this in-your-face "I'm an untouchable rock star who rides in a limousine and has all the sex I can handle and you're not." which goes against the indie/punk rock ethos which had it that anyone could be a rock star if they wrote good songs that connected with people. You didn't need to have outrageous costumes or sing or play good, you just had to write meaningful, passionate music. There's no comparison of the hair-metal image to the grunge image, which has a uniform (flannels, Chuck Taylors), but it's one that is so emphatically ordinary that part of its point is that anyone can adopt it.

>>53565514
Of course. I believe he thought he could change the world and start a music revolution. He also tried to get other bands he liked onto major labels. Too bad people preferred to listen to slop like Puddle of Mudd instead.

>>53565685
Oh please, Cobain had the worst case of rock star snobbery on the planet, the difference being that he acted like he was too cool for the sheeple out there and didn't want any normies listening to his music. He merely traded "I'm a rock star who rides in a limo and has groupies hanging off my arms." for "I'm a rock star who makes music that's 2deep4u you are not worthy enough to attend my concerts, you scum."

At least I don't think Nikki Sixx ever told anyone that they were not cool enough to listen to his music.

>>53565836
That is true and by offing himself, he sure did prove he had artistic integrity since he'd rather be dead (literally) than have legions of normalfags listening to his music.

Heck, maybe he saw what happened to Metallica (a band he idolized) when they came out with TBA and traded their long-haired skater punk fanbase for a horde of teenybopper girls, soccer moms, and jocks. Judging by the various comments and actions of Eddie Vedder and Billy Corgan over the years, I'm sure they felt the same way.

>1991+24
>still being this butthurt that grunge killed off cheesy party rock
Shug.

>>53565951
Oh, that's nothing. You should see some of those VH1 Behind The Music docus where some member of Whitesnake or Ratt is on and still bawling about how those evil grunge bands ruined their day.

I'm not kidding. Brett Michaels, Kip Winger, Tom Kiefer, even Gene Simmons have never gotten over the rapid expulsion of glam metal from the airwaves in the early 90s. So much butthurt...

>>53566014
It's hard to say. Some hair metal guys may have been butthurt about grunge, although it seems quite a few were relieved about it since a lot of them were just doing that music for money and couldn't play the kind of stuff they really enjoyed (as mentioned earlier, Paul Stanley said that power ballads were the only way to get radio play in the late 80s).

>>53565951
Yes, yes I am.

>>53566014
Not as bad as the ones that tried to hop on the Grunge bandwagon

No mention that Mtv was showing blocks and blocks of Ren and Stimpy, House of Style and Beavis and Butthead?
Mtv began ending their music video format around the time of grunge. They had plenty of air time to feature all manner of music but decided to move away from that and into lifestyle. For millions they were the number 1 source for music. They stopped. It affected many, many artists.

>>53564470
>Skid Row
Hey now. Seb Bach is possibly the best rock vocalist I've ever seen live. He has a fucking ridiculous voice, still.

>>53566014
Honestly, despite his Nirvana-bashing, I don't think Gene Simmons liked the direction of rock in the late 80s anyway. He really lost interest in Kiss during that time and only Paul Stanley kept the band going. At heart he's always been the Demon who wears black leather and sings about violating innocent girls' orifices with his giant Jew tongue.

>>53566137
Red Beach is also a killer guitarist and he took Kirk Hammett to task in an interview some years ago for being shit and one of the most overrated guitarists of the 80s.

Need I also mention Nitro who had a guitarist that could play insanely fast riffs. This dude was almost inhuman.

>>53566106
They were still airing quite a bit of music every day well into the 90's (compared to today).

I don't get it. Did MTV really think people would rather watch Teen Mom than music videos?

>>53566195
Nuno Bettencourt from Extreme is also a stupidly gifted guitarist, too bad they're pretty much only known outside the genre for More Than Words.

>>53566224
Sure...the prime viewing hours had tons of music. 1993 MTV was very different from 1983 MTV. It became shit.

>>53566256
>>53566236
I think they were considering it in terms of advertisement dollars. Scheduled programming generated a much more reliable audience than just playing music videos all the time. It's possible their revenues might have increased with scheduled programming even if raw audience numbers were down.

>>53566316
Whoawhoawhoa. MTV in the early to mid 90s still had plenty of music airing aside from scripted programming.

When they moved to Time Square in 97 is really when they start phasing music out wholesale. This would have been around the time that grunge was at the end of the road and being replaced by pop punk and Britney Spears. By that time, STP, Pearl Jam, Alice In Chains, and Smashing Pumpkins were giving way to Blink 182, Limp Bizkit, and Korn. And MTV started dropping music videos like a hot potato.

>>53566236
MTV in hindsight was brilliant to abandon the music video format. Music videos are irrelevant in 2015, and MTV's purpose would have been non-existent if they still relied on them.

>>53566400
As an avid MTV watcher during those days, MTV still played tons of music videos in the morning and during Total Request Live. The internet was still young and Youtube was still off in the distant future, so MTV and VH1 didn't quite stop playing videos.

>>53566400
Nah dude, it happened early, like around 92-93.

>>53566508
You're right. Whereas in 1985, MTV would have been 90% music, by 1995 it was more like 60% scheduled programming, 40% music. In the mid-90s, they ran at least three hours of music videos a day. The videos for 1979, Black Hole Sun, Plush, and Shoots & Ladders got played constantly and you couldn't miss them. By 1999, there wasn't any video out at the time (Californication, Genie In A Bottle, All The Small Things, etc) that got close to the same amount of airplay.

Beavis & Butthead got a whole lot more videos backed with them than Teen Mom does.

W.A.S.P. and Twisted Sister completely slay.

>>53565836
Because REM never did an ironic Midnight In Blue concert, amirite?

>>53566662
Sure, MTV really fell off the video wagon post-9/11, or once Carson Daly left TRL. I was really annoyed at the time because it felt like MTV was betraying its purpose but like I've said, it was a brilliant move in hindsight because they've managed to stay alive, and lets be honest, music videos are not as relevant as a whole as they were in the 1980's.

>>53566711
They covered that song because Peter Buck happened to be partial to Foreigner and Michael Stipe, once he heard the thing, quickly warmed to it.

In the bigger picture, REM did a whole lot less whining and complaining about bandwagoner fans than Nirvana. It's true that they did do it in a more subtle way, for instance distancing themselves from the mainstream audience they got from Shiny Happy People and Peter's comments how he didn't understand why people would come to their concerts and act offended when they found out that he wasn't a Republican, but nothing like the nonstop whining and butthurt that came out of Kurt Cobain's mouth.

Hair metal died out because it had approached near-parody territory by 1990. It was so ridiculous as the 80s ended that Spinal Tap looked more real.

Same thing happened to grunge ten years later. That too drifted into self-parody with Creed and Staind.

>>53564349
My cousin worked in a record store in the early 90s and the manager met Pearl Jam when they were giving a show in Detroit about when Ten first came out. He said that Eddie Vedder was all bubbling with enthusiasm and eager to meet fans and sign autographs. Flash forward a few years and he was a pretentious douchenozzle who didn't want to release any more singles or music videos. They may not have been as pretty, but they (and many of the other grunge bands) had equally manufactured images to their big-haired counterparts

>>53567021
Ah yeah, you can look at almost any interview Eddie gave after about 1992 and he's full on pretentious 2deep4u fedora snobbery.

>>53563753
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxLUUQdqA0I

>>53567057
Eddie Vedder was really edgy in the early 90's, he was my idol as a kid. Looking back, I still love PJ but I cringe at his interviews.

>>53567162
>>53567057
Also every single blasted interview (not to mention stage banter at concerts), he feels the need to tell everyone that he does not like Republicans and Christfags.

>>53565125
Stone Temple Pilots were verrrryy poorly disguised cockrock.

>Meat Plow
>I wanna run through your wicked garden

Read Robert Christgau's review of Core. He wasn't fooled by them one bit.

>>53566400
Mellon Collie & The Infinite Sadness - that was the final last great alternative album before the era of nu metal and pop punk started.

why not be a littl..(*^&e vaguer
everyth98274ing you think you
maldoror is deadknow
every specifica blining///// eclipse of the manorthern borderny terrible shapes of this world detail
that is where you begin to lose
the shingles on my roof
the plot
do not forget the diff a cautious misunderstandingerence between the two
when you arin a foreign land in a foreign towne half3333333-gone, drunk or pissed, vomiting on the side-walk, fucked up on narcotics, s982714paced out beyond comprehension, that is when you truly understa8746nd(*^& how little you understand
your festering consciousness
do you have a room?
howas by a shininmelathe singing you will know it is timencholy is the most faithful mistressg br921847ainless beacon insignificant your thoughts arthe blessing of e in the greater scheme o8888
4827f things
moving as if aaginst a stro91287riuhng breeze, a hellish wind, the soft pressings of a padded breeze
how ignorant and pointless e a broken bottle cuffed with the blood of an unknown manach and every single
idea yo./u haand the faulthe fathe ringing of some long forgotten bellultlines of our selvests of our eldersve ever had truly is
how rid//iculou s you
r problems are, your flespecial pegg shaped headlanetin\g issues, slight anno88888yan
a cast of iron in sadnes a cacophony of clanging a dog's head on a stihidden between two buildingscksces in your brief and me,,aningless lifewhen you are calm and joyful

thou shalt not meddle
ach golgotha

>>53565349
>>53565389
Any similarity stops there. You couldn't tell me from listening to Girls, Girls, Girls and then Lithium that the two bands had much, if any common shared musical ideas. Motley Crue were mostly inspired by 70s stadium rock like Kiss and Led Zeppelin while Nirvana were inspired by Pixies, Black Flag, REM, Sonic Youth, Stooges, etc.

>>53564004
Yeah, you're right. Poison by 1990 look disturbingly close to GNR. They even fucking copied Slash's top hat.

File: Marc_Bolan.jpg (46KB, 550x540px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 550x540px

>>53568243

File: adam-and-the-ants.jpg (95KB, 488x500px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 488x500px

>>53564760
>But as I said, Van Halen was the single biggest catalyst behind hair metal since Eddie's shredder guitar rapidly replaced the blues rock riffs of Black Sabbath, Led Zeppelin, and Aerosmith.

Very true, it was Van Halen that started it around 77/78 in the US.

I remember seeing a vid on Dave Lee Roth's youtube channel where he said it was all to do with the popularity of the New Romantics in the UK in the late 70s........that's what led many US rock bands to take on that tranny style from there on into the 80s.

>>53568243
That was when they had Flesh & Blood out. That album already felt distinctly different from Look What That Cat Dragged in four years earlier as there was more of a toned-down blues rock sound on it and less of the cheesy hair metal style.

File: cute.jpg (31KB, 425x328px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 425x328px

>>53564592
>>53564760
very rarely you can find a meaningful post on /mu/, let alone 4chan. thank you, you made this puppy happy

>>53566414
yes and no. people keep making music videos, but on the other hand, most of these videos are watched on youtube.

>>53568414
It was a combination of things happening on both sides of the Atlantic (as you said). The New Romantics inspired most of the fashion while the music itself was due to Van Halen (on the US side) and Judas Priest/Motorhead (on the British side) moving rock guitar away from the Led Zeppelin blues riff sound.

>>53568050
for people like me, these were the times of youth.
I won't deny, I started with Korn, Linkin Park, System of a down (even if I already heard some Iron Maiden at this point), but as I grew older I started getting more and more into metal, so there is not a bad thing that wouldn't turn into a good thing in the end.

>>53566414
Rly, nigger? If I had a dime for every damn time I saw that music video for Taylor Swift - Trouble on VH1...

>>53569273
Everyone listens to shitty bands like LP when they're, like, 11. Then when you finish middle school, you graduate to more advanced music. ;)