I'm still wondering what interest you have in a Bon Jovi message board if you don't like that genre of music.

With the exception of Oasis (who are not big at all in the US), none of those bands you mentioned are existant in the US.

Which genre of music spawned more successfull artists, Brit-pop or "hair metal"?

I like Oasis, but they're only the biggest band in the world in their own minds.

Now that I have a minute, I want to elaborate my feelings a bit more on this.

Every generation of music is taken over, if you will, by another, at some point. What grunge did to hair metal is no different than what rock did to doo-wap, what heavy metal did to hippie music, what rap did to heavy metal, what boy bands did to grunge, etc etc. It doesn't make one genre better than another. To me, all it does, is point out who the truly successfull are. In my favorite genre of music, rock, Bon Jovi is successfull. Warrant, is not. Aerosmith is successfull. Dokken, is not.

To talk about Motley or Def Leppard is tough. They've both had periods of great success after their "hey-day", and they've both shit the clubs they were playing in. Right now, Motley is successfull. Def Leppard is not. It's very arguable to call either's success nostalgia. That's what pisses me off so much when people say Bon Jovi are nostalgia. Those people need to find the definition of the word.

Opinions are like assholes - Everybody has one. But facts are facts, and are undeniable. This thread, about Def Leppard and Motley Crue has brought up the question of their relevance. This is different from overall success. Any fanof rock music who would deny either of these bands' relevance truly is in denial, or doesn't know what they're talking about.

Never seen live Crue, not even footage so I can't really vote. Seen Def Leppard once though (in person) and thought they were pretty good. Joe's voice was a tad weak, but it wasn't terrible by any means, and he worked the stage well.

I enjoy Bon Jovi's music, so surely I should be allowed on their message board. I just think hair metal was a shit genre/style, and unless you count Guns N' Roses, Bon Jovi were the only decent band to emerge from it.

I know Oasis aren't particularly big in the US (not that they really care) but they can still sell out Madison Square Garden and get their album to number 5 in the charts there. And I dunno about America, but the other bands I listed are big in the UK and in other countries, so surely they're big bands? If Blur reunited I'm sure they'd be playing some generously sized arenas Stateside anyway.

In the UK and Europe Britpop. In the US hair metal.

No they're not. In the 1990s they were coked up, confident with their classic albums and overjoyed to have achieved success, and they did indeed say they were the best band in the world. Never the biggest, though, even though they probably were the biggest band in the world in 96/97. You'd never hear them say that now. Because they've grown up, unlike Motley Crue.

And you were wrong about the "half the artists you listen to are influenced by Motley Crue" :p

The thing I love about glam metal, particulary Motley Crue, is the whole sex, drugs and rock 'n' roll thing - in other words, Crue's image.

Well actually with Motley Crue I was attracted to them due to their songs before their image but what they hey, these days I love their image that accompanies their songs. That whole lifestyle just attracts me at the moment, which is why I love Motley Crue.

With glam metal I can only think of two bands that two lyric writing seriously, Bon Jovi and Europe. I don't count GnR as glam metal.

But when it comes to lyric writing Def Leppard smack Motley Crue in every possible way. Now as I stated earlier, I love Motley Crue because they sing about drugs, drinking, shagging, etc etc but it seems to be all they constantly sing about - bareing in mind I'm only a new fan and haven't heard everything by them.

On Def Leppard's latest album 'Songs From The Sparkle Lounge' there is a song called Cruise Control which is about terroists. On Motley Crue's latest album 'Saints Of Los Angeles' they are still singing about girls and how they have fleas and cooties.

Also Nikki Sixx is running out of creative juice, Saints Of LA only had 5 or 6 songs that I truly love, where as Def Leppards latest album I love most of it. Not only that but Nikki Sixx is stealing songs.

On Saints Of LA there is a song called Welcome To The Machine which is basically a song ranting about how the music industry is so cruel and nasty. Hmm who else has written a song about that with the same title? Only that little band Pink Floyd.

And I'll say it again, I love how Crue sing about drinking, drugging, shagging etc etc but it'd be nice if they took a break from that every now and then. I'm thinking hard and the only song that wasn't showcasing their badass ways is the song about a 14 year old prostistute 'Too Young To Fall In Love'.

Yet Def Leppard can still be feel-good, get your hands up in the air rock band without having to pretend they're teenagers.


Jack - you should listen to the Def Leppard albums High N Dry and Pyromania, two of my all time albums. They're not polished up glam metal albums, hell, they're not even glam metal albums, I'd say they were closer to Guns N' Roses than Bon Jovi back in their early days. You should check them two albums out, they're real good.

I'm not sure what Danfan was getting at but it's pretty obvious you enjoy Bon Jovi's music so therefore, you should no doubt post here (plus I enjoy reading your posts). It shouldn't matter whether you like or dislike artists that were "hair bands".

I agree. One does not have to be big in America to be a big band and Oasis are a great example. They are plenty bands that are big without being big in America. Likewise, there are many successful and big acts in America that are no where close to being big in the rest of the world ie. country and rap stars.

By no means was I saying Ferrett shouldn't post here. What right do I have to say that? It's not my board. It just seemed as though Bon Jovi wasn't their cup of tea. I don't praise everything Bon Jovi does, but if I disliked them, I sure as hell wouldn't bother wasting my time talking about them.

I quote Noel:

"We are the biggest band in Britain of all time, ever. The funny thing is, that ****ing mouthing off three years ago about how we were gonna be the biggest band in the world, we actually went and done it."

I don't know about the rest of the world, but this quote is referencing their status as of 1996-1997, unquestionably their high point in America. That was the first time I saw them, in a half filled 15,000 seat arena. They were never "the biggest band in America".

Aloha !

And Noel and Liam have always admitted that they've never cracked America. However, they were the biggest band in the world at that time. It wasn't a matter of how many people went to see them live, but Oasis were everywhere at that time. On the radio, always gettign some press coverage and were always touring. They were the pioneers of that era and defined the era on their own. You just can't say that about Motley Crue or Def Leppard.

Salaam Aleikum,
Sebastiaan

Both a bit shit live, to be honest.

Def Leppard simply lack excitement or personality (despite having the better tunes).

Crue were simply a train wreck. A ten minute segment of Tommy Lee with a camcorder encouraging girls to get their tits out does nothing for me.

You are entirely wrong.

Oasis merely were the most visible expression of a loutish, vulgar culture that existed long before the band arrived. A risible totem.