Being "one of the hardest working men in the business" might sound like a cool thing, but it also wears the body down.

Ace Frehley also has more of his voice left than Paul Stanley.

Different genetics. Axl hasn’t even done much for most of the last few decades. What has to he done to wear himself out?

Saying I don’t mind that he doesn’t move around as much is not an “excuse.” It’s a dose of reality infused common sense. Some of you seem to completely lack this.

Um, Axl has been touring constantly for the last god knows how many years. The Original line up just got back together, but Guns N Roses still carried on with a different line up after Slash etc left, constantly touring all over the word....

It is not about physical efforts. It's a question of aesthetics. Imagine THINFS with an acoustic guitar, imagine God Bless or Born Again Tomorrow or Knockout with acoustic guitar. It just is not attractive in this kind of songs.

THINFS does have an acoustic guitar. In fact it's the opposite, he doesn't play it on stage and doesn't really play guitar on the new songs live so I'm not sure what people are complaining about here.

Sent from my SM-G920W8 using Tapatalk

I'm not complaining by the way, I don't mind Jon playing his acoustic at all, I never found it hindered him on stage, I just though the comment about him overdosing was silly....

I do wish BJ would rock more, but songs like Saturday Night still used to rock live, even with Jon on the acoustic...

Agreed, yeah. It's the intensity of the song that's dropped and the energy on stage.

Sent from my SM-G920W8 using Tapatalk

Más bien 'misunderstood'. Me parece bien que tengas ganas de pelea, pero a mí no me incluyas por favor, vengo a dar mi opinión y a leer las de los demás. No le he faltado al respeto a nadie, así que te pido por favor que no me insultes y dejes tus niñateces para otra ocasión 😉.

Its a shame but Bon Jovi are sh1t now in terms of new music.
Its all dull dull dull.
With the exception of about 10 songs Id be happy if theyd split after Bounce. Thats the last acceptable album for me and even then I skip 3 or 4. A split after These Days wouldve probably been better come to think of it.

The live shows Im struggling with. I dont want to see the stage with Shanks and the dude playing bonjos. Thats not Jovi.

Im happy being stuck in a 1983-95 Jovi time warp.

I agree with most of what you're saying: 80s was hair metal, early 90s Bob Rock production, TD era was very ballady, then since Crush (except Creedy Bounce and country Lost Highway), it's been the pop rock vibe (U2, Coldplay, Killers even a bit of Pinky stuff).

However why did he do 'Stand up guy', talk about doing a solo record then suddenly ditch the idea? IMO, it's because the fans gave him terrible feedback. Stand up guy' wasn't trendy, commercial music; I'm convinced it was Jon trying to do something of his own, something he CAN do. Don't tell me his voice didn't sound great...

Jon is not going to appeal to new fans, but I'm just saying that because the majority like his current musical direction, that's what we'll get. Let's say us rockers are 10%, that leaves 90% pop rockers, that's why we get 1.5 rock songs on a record and 12 pop (0 acoustic ones obviously) 😓

Amen to that...✌️

This is a Bon Jovi message board for English speakers,so if you want to talk in spanish you can go to Spain Bon Jovi on facebook.
Im going to answer you in English out of respect fot the rest of the other members of the board.

I dont want to fight,you are the one wanting to fight since your first reply to me.
You didnt give your opinion,I gave my opinion and then you made a ridiculous deduction about my post.
I have not insulted you,I just said that you are behaving in a ridiculous and in a childish way.

Just because I think KOTM,ARTY,TTF and SD are crap songs,do you think and adult can state that,because of fans like me is why BJ make pop records nowadays?
Do you really believe in that statement?
If so,then you have a problem.

I can accept it but that won't stop me from saying the new songs suck because they do.

I would be happy with songs more similar to what Jon wrote at 30-36 (KTF-TD-DA era). He wasn't a kid at that age anymore and it's just lack of will and effort as far as I'm concerned. Those songs have the best lyrics and don't sound outdated.

Noone expects him to run across the stage like he did 20 years ago but come on, he's a frickin statue these days. The grip of death on the microphone is not normal. Surely he still knows how to walk so it wouldn't kill him or fracture his hip, if he walked around the stage or god forbid gave the impression he is not in agony while performing.

i agree 100% !

what is the POP when you talking about BJ? is it popular rock music or pop as a category in music? and tell me please is u2,coldplay,paramore,the killers,muse,the strokes,radiohead and many more more rock than BJ because every music expert or music critic or list of modern rock bands contains some of these bands.
Jon cant write songs like used to,main reason his state of mind and his age,they are one of the rare bands that dont repeat themselves as much as others do.

Actually Bon Jovi have become very repetitive and predictive. Dull and boring also comes to mind. Bad caricatures of the once greatest band in the world (IMO). The problem I think most of us have with them is that that they are stuck on repeat with low quality forgettable pop/rock songs. I don't think there would be any complaining, if they kept repeating the KTF/TD type songs or performances on that level.

IMO the reason is the passion is gone. Couple that with a weak voice and you get boring songs and a bored frontman. Jon is not relaxed being on stage. It's a job now, the fun is gone. I would never have become a fan of this band had it not been for the pre 2000 period.

Before 2000 this band was unbelievable, out of this world. And in my opinion that has helped them to still be able to have huge tours even after their prime had been long gone. Come to think of it, wouldn't that make them a nostalgia act? I doubt the masses are there to hear THINFS.

like i said,that the thing with every band today,I like the new stuff,not on level like old stuff but enjoy it,dont feel like I depend on their music,I take what I like because I listen other bands also but BJ are and will stay my favourite band

Stones manage to rock,they are joke from the start,they are famous thanks to personal life of each member of the band,not because of music and if they are more rock then BJ then this forum is useless

How do you know he’s not in pain? He’s had surgery for plantar fasciitis, so at one point you could bet a million bucks he was in pain on stage. I speak from experience because I will probably have surgery for this condition in June. I regularly get steroid shots in my feet to help make it bearable. Ten years ago, I had no problems standing for a 2-3 hour concert. Lately, if I stand for 30 minutes, I am hurting. Add to that his lousy knees and calf muscles and he’s probably got chronic issues. He travels with a chiropractor for goodness sake. He’s got pain. I know it’s not glamorous to think of your favorite rock stars as being subject to human frailties, but they really are not supermen. The list of dead rock stars since 2016 reminds us that the heroes we grew up with are mere mortals.

Well, I see it like this:

Have a Nice Day, This House is Not For Sale = ROCK
Summertime, Rollercoaster = POP

based on what? pop like Pink or Sting?
those songs are in terms of music ordinary rock

Watch any Stones live performance from last year and it rocks way harder than any BJ performance from last year....fact! They may be a joke to you, but their concert ticket sales say otherwise....as does the amount of bands that their songs have influenced (including Bon Jovi)

When you have doubts about a jovi song, ask me, I will tell you what gender I feel is on my scale.

More examples:

Just Older: Rock
Misunderstood: Pop
Undivided: Rock
Any Other Day: Pop/Rock
Its My Life: Pop/Rock
Because We Can: Pop

Is Easy. Try it. ;)

Aah, the two genders.

To be honest, ALL of these are good songs. Well, Because We Can is just okay. But I certainly wouldn't mind an album's worth of Misunderstood-calibre tracks. The problem is not the (sub)genre. If it was recorded today, In These Arms would be a pop song as well.

On my scale In These Arms would be a pop / rock song, however, Without Love would be Pop.

But you seem to take the concept, yep.

they rock harder??? they are freaking cirkus,their song are 2 chords and bumbling from Jagger mouth,dude never could sing,they are popular and sell tickets because of personal life and because they are over 50 years active,they must be influence because they are one of the first band to appear,they are child game for Deep purple and Zeppelin or Queen.Their songs could play average cover band,exclude Jagger who shouts and jump like kengaroo,others are like mummies with little movement

[QUOTE=rolo_tomachi;1233586]When you have doubts about a jovi song, ask me, I will tell you what gender I feel is on my scale.

More examples:

Just Older: Rock
Misunderstood: Pop
Undivided: Rock
Any Other Day: Pop/Rock
Its My Life: Pop/Rock
Because We Can: Pop

Is Easy. Try it

what is the POP,you didnt say what that means,why is Misunderstood pop when most of the modern rock bands have songs like that

when you think like that Nothing else matters(metallica) is pop song,is this love(whitesnake) is pop song,always is pop song,carrie(europe) is pop song and so on. Judging by that some of the greatest bands like Journey or Queen re more pop than rock because of their popular songs or singles. You cant define some bands and their albums by some of the songs on it.

You don't like the songs, that's fine, but to say that they are only famous for their personal lives is ridiculous. Do you really think that people will spend £100s on tickets because of the bands personal lives. Idiotic. they have a lot of great, timeless songs. More so than Bon Jovi, I'm afraid...and they certainly have a lot more respect.

you can't compare them to Purple, Queen or Zep, they are all completely different types of bands. All amazing in their own way. Stones have much more in common with Bon Jovi then any of those bands....

You see, it was not that difficult. Although it is a rock or metal band, its music is not always is rock or metal. Most of these bands that you name have a solid rock n roll or metal catalog. Bon Jovi unfortunately lost it in the last 6 albums.

This is Pop





This is Rock





Don't be fooled.

it is not idiotic,people pay a lot of money for worse things,it is matter of taste or point of view,I dont like them,never will Their audience is either their peers or young ones who want to see them like people go in ZOO or cirkus,their songs are boring,simple and Jagger never knew to sing,whatever they are popular for it is not quality for sure

You continually mistake your opinions for fact....

I respect your opinion but dont agree,again what makes song poppy,because if something little faster or hitting harder its not rock,they use same instruments with different tempo,dinamic and lyric.POP is short from popular,Robbie Williams is pop. I judge genre by sound not by tempo or lyrics,pop for me is Coldplay,pop rock for me is U2,rock for me is BJ,Whitesnake,Europe,Aerosmith,Queen.

I say it is my opinion and opinion many others,when they were in Monte Negro people go to see them because of name,just to see them not to listen,they heard for them and what they say after is monumental stage,one man jump,others not move,nothing impressive,they are the most overrated band with U2 in the world

It's not about the tempo, it's the sound and the attitude, if you can not differentiate it, then I can not help you.

In this part I agree, but not everything they do is cataloged pop or rock according to the artist / band. Many bands have tried both genres, and have merged it many times. Jon is simply abusing these pop elements so much that eventually his rock shines very little.

I always think that BJ is band with strong attitude,but you cant have album full of it,some songs are easier some not,rock is not always "bad attitude" or finger up,rock band is rock band,many of them use like you said pop elements but that is normal. Then you have bands like Maiden,Metallica,AC DC,they cant use that because of genre they belong to.Every rock band have that kind of songs but you cant call the whole album pop or pop rock,like I said judge by that Queen are the most pop rock band ever. You separate every song by genre.

And that's where I wanted to go. Bon Jovi does not have to make an album full of finger rock, he just has to make sure that rock songs prevail, 6-7 songs on a 12 album would be fantastic. About Queen, I think it was one of the first bands that knew how to fuse rock and pop very well, for me, he gave meaning to the term pop / rock with a lot of songs.

Undivided, Whole Lot of a Leaving, Brokenpromiseland, WWYDF, a teardrop, even songs like Fingerprints, I'm With You, Bells OF Freedom are rocking for me.

Jon can write anything, just have to adapt it to a less pop and artificial sound, look for something more real, interesting and introspective.

Then there's the rock n roll songs, God Bless could have been the new Sleep, but its sound sucks, even so, it's a great THINFS highlight for me. Born Again Tomorrow and Knockout is pop/rock, is ok, not bad and is cool, have energy, as When We Were Us, I can be gentle with this tracks, but give the power.

Anyway, I must confess that Bon Jovi is not doing it as badly as other bands / artists in these years. But there are also better ones, and sometimes I have that healthy envy, that my fav band, do something strong, with more energy at least.

Whatever it is and whatever happens, I don't want to get lost any chapter of this band, and enjoy it as much as possible.

Rolo: while I only agree with 60-70% of your list, you have a point there. Though I'd consider Rollercoaster as much Rock as Just Older, for example. Both are not Pop, but Pop/Rock IMO. Hell, Rollercoaster even has the heavier guitars, if you "look" for them in the wall of sound ;-)

But Beat It? Yeah, it has some guitars, but Michael Jackson is the definition of Pop (at least to me)...

And considering the Stones: I've seen them last year, I've seen them the tour before that (my first time), and I was absolutely blown away. Yes, Jagger never was the best vocalist, but he actually improved during the last 10-20 years IMO. And yes, the songs seem simple, but not every band could play them. In fact, maybe no one could play them like Richards does. Same thing with RS to some degree. Phil X is a great guitar player and I really like him, but some things simply cannot be reproduced, simply because you have great technics...

What is the problem with having the opinion that the music Jon makes nowadays is down to his fans? I think it's just as respectable as saying it's down to his comfort zone, Jon Shanks, current pop music,... It's my opinion and if anybody feels offended then it's their problem, not mine 😉

Once again, you are 'misunderstood'. A great Jovi pop song by the way IMO, nothing wrong with well written pop music, it's all about musical taste ✌️