There will be an opening band on the last tour, and here's what we're looking at.....

[coventry]

I realize I am just an old fart and have been living under a large rock for 25 years or so but............. I really don't want to see an opening band. This is just a personal thing, but I wouldn't know the music and wouldn't probably care. Unless they have some band that was around in my "era", I have no interest in that any longer. I would rather just see and hear them as long as possible. Just my opinion as always :codger:

Everyone in this forum understands this sentiment. Seems like you're starting something new by joining TRF. So, you're still expanding your horizons. Do yourself a favor and check out foo fighters or smashing pumpkins...there's something there for you I promise.

 

As for The Foo Fighters and The Smashing Pumpkins, well, The Smashing Pumpkins SUCK!!!! Since when did they expand anyones horizons? Really?! I mean, that singer actually sings that way?! f**k that group! They are a perfect example of why the 90's was such shit.

 

I think you very adequately summed up why old people suck and don't know a damn thing about music. Extra irony points for making the same comments about Corgan's voice that people made about Geddy's, and criticizing the band's style the same way critics criticized Rush's.

 

Nicely put, Tony.

 

Someone that clueless can't be legitimate.

 

Who's Tony?

:rfl: :outtahere:

 

:D

 

Crap. Your profile pic coupled with a large glass of brandy reminded me of Tony's profile pic. My humble (occasionally) apologies.

[Narps]

I realize I am just an old fart and have been living under a large rock for 25 years or so but............. I really don't want to see an opening band. This is just a personal thing, but I wouldn't know the music and wouldn't probably care. Unless they have some band that was around in my "era", I have no interest in that any longer. I would rather just see and hear them as long as possible. Just my opinion as always :codger:

Everyone in this forum understands this sentiment. Seems like you're starting something new by joining TRF. So, you're still expanding your horizons. Do yourself a favor and check out foo fighters or smashing pumpkins...there's something there for you I promise.

 

As for The Foo Fighters and The Smashing Pumpkins, well, The Smashing Pumpkins SUCK!!!! Since when did they expand anyones horizons? Really?! I mean, that singer actually sings that way?! f**k that group! They are a perfect example of why the 90's was such shit.

 

I think you very adequately summed up why old people suck and don't know a damn thing about music. Extra irony points for making the same comments about Corgan's voice that people made about Geddy's, and criticizing the band's style the same way critics criticized Rush's.

 

Nicely put, Tony.

 

Someone that clueless can't be legitimate.

 

Who's Tony?

:rfl: :outtahere:

 

:D

 

Crap. Your profile pic coupled with a large glass of brandy reminded me of Tony's profile pic. My humble (occasionally) apologies.

You more than made up for it! Good1 :codger: :rfl:

[one80Srocker]

I realize I am just an old fart and have been living under a large rock for 25 years or so but............. I really don't want to see an opening band. This is just a personal thing, but I wouldn't know the music and wouldn't probably care. Unless they have some band that was around in my "era", I have no interest in that any longer. I would rather just see and hear them as long as possible. Just my opinion as always :codger:

Everyone in this forum understands this sentiment. Seems like you're starting something new by joining TRF. So, you're still expanding your horizons. Do yourself a favor and check out foo fighters or smashing pumpkins...there's something there for you I promise.

 

As for The Foo Fighters and The Smashing Pumpkins, well, The Smashing Pumpkins SUCK!!!! Since when did they expand anyones horizons? Really?! I mean, that singer actually sings that way?! f**k that group! They are a perfect example of why the 90's was such shit.

 

I think you very adequately summed up why old people suck and don't know a damn thing about music. Extra irony points for making the same comments about Corgan's voice that people made about Geddy's, and criticizing the band's style the same way critics criticized Rush's.

 

I actually I very knowledgable about music. And if you wanna see how bad old people suck then come to Naples, Florida. For one thing, I don't have kids so that keeps me young. I look younger than my age and I carry a youthful demeanor. I like to have fun in life. But if you think you learned something musically inclined from what you got in the 90's then you may wanna take some advice from your elders. Yeah, grab your Trapper Keeper and go sit in the front of the classroom. I will share with you some of the good I was able to pluck from the 90's. There were quite a few good one-hit-wonders but unfortunately there weren't many bands/artists that could put out a CD that was good start to finish or at least close to it. Ok, we got the obvious, Stone Temple Pilots and Pearl Jam. And let me add that 1990, 91, and 92, as much as they are years in the 90's, they really were an extension of the 80's. Something went severely wrong in 93 and 94 and then before we knew it we were in some other conservative era of just strumming chords and mocking music. The 90's was like going through bad withdraw from the 80's and 70's and might as well include the 60's and 50's too. So-called rock music took steps backwards. It was reduced and condensed into such a simple form. But through all the mockery of what was supposed to be real and the "generation X" crap (and yeah I know I am considered a gen X too because I was born in the 70's but I wasn't part of that target market), I was able to find some music that was good. I don't want to include Rush or any existing bands that had already made their mark in a prior era. Only those who were new and part of the new sound of the 90's that would mark the era with what they had us listening to as part of the soundtrack of our lives during this flat and dull era. One band in particular that will take me time to get to know and I have quite a bit of respect for, for their unpredictableness, originality, and creativity as well as making music the art it should be, is Radiohead. Here's an underrated band that could have and should have been more popular on the airwaves instead of just playing "Creep" to death. Another great sound that came out in the 90's was the first Garbage CD, along with the b-sides. That CD is trippy and and very modern in its era and timeless for that matter. The songs are deep, the changes throughout the songs are unpredictable and complex in their originality, creativity, and composition. Live was another very good band with a great singer and many good songs (but I don't ever wanna hear "Lightning Crashes" again). Nirvana was the real deal. It really sucks we didn't get to hear what they could've done for the years to come. They were the original band that started the new sound of the 90's. But go through the bands of the 70's and 80's, heck just go through the year 1984 for that matter. There isn't a year in the 90's that could match up to 1984 even if you combine years in the 90's. Find us some guitar players in the 90's that match up to Richie Blackmore, Eddie Van Halen, Yngwie Malmsteen, Michael Schenker, Jimmy Page, Randy Rhoads, Steve Howe, etc., etc. Billy Corgan? Yeah ok!!! And as far as his voice and comparing to some irony about, "well that's what they said about Geddy too." Not the same. Geddy sings with his natural voice and it may not appeal to all. King Diamond's high pitch singing doesn't appeal to everyone either but neither are singing like a complete idiot like Billy Corgan does. Anyone of of us can do an impression of that guy's singing. And their songs do suck, I don't care what anyone thinks. The drums suck, the guitar sucks, the lyrics suck, and the singing totally sucks. There is no comparison with them and Rush. The Pumpkins dominate X stations, not rock stations. They are played within the comtext of bands just as low in the talent pool that you bought into in that era, Weezer, The Offspring, Green Day, Cake, that stupid "She Missed the Train To Mars" song and "Peaches", etc. Marylin Manson sucks too. But Alice In Chains, Pearl Jam, Stone Temple Pilots, Soundgarden, Live, can be played on the same channels as classic rock bands. Ozzfest saved us from the 90's. Black Sabbath reuniting was the best thing that came out of the downward spiral of the 90's. It's certainly not that I don't like new music becuase I do. Things got way better as soon as that terrible era/decade came to an end. But let's not forget that the 90's were very ghetto and dominated by rap as well. So were you musically inclined by all that rap and R&B stuff too? Do you like Keith Sweat? How about DMX? Is that your boy? Do you go chasing waterfalls? Here's an idea, go look at the top 40 in 1994 then look at the top 40 in 1984 and you can compare talent. Def Leppard "Pyromania" is what we liked in 1984 and if I recall correctly it didn't make #1 because of Michael Jackson's "Thriller." But while we were jammin' out to Pyromania in 1984, 10 years later you were kickin' it to TLC and Des'ree. I'll take Michael Jackson and Madonna over Des'ree, TLC, and Fiona Apple any day. We had Shout At The Devil, you had Dookie. That pretty much sums it up. And don't get me wrong, some of this alternative and grunge was ok at the time but when that's the best you have to offer then there's some people out there that got away with one. Music theory certainly wasn't a prerequisite for entry level "musicians" in the 90's. Even some of the cheesiest glam bands of the 80's still had some great guitar players. And just so you know, I never intend to knock someone for what they enjoy. I'll only state my opinion and can appreciate that another really enjoys their music. I have very strong opinions of what the 90's did to music however. And "Despite all my rage I am still just a rat in a cage...." and the stupid drum fills sucks. "Letttttt....let me outtttt..." sucks! I rank it up there with my all time most hated bands. But you're so smart, right? You know something about music, right? I mean there are so many 90's bands headlining and playing arenas and stadiums, right? There's nothing inspiring about this decade. Just listen to Metallica in the 80's then listen to Metallica in the 90's. 'nuf said. Beck, there's another one dominating X stations with annoying so-called songs. The Flaming Lips! Are they selling out arenas? How about Blur? "What happened to 2-Pac?" Who cares? In 2000 Iron Maiden and Bruce reunited, Motley Crue reunited with Vince Neil and Tommy Lee, Disturbed, Linkin Park, Godsmack, 3 Doors Down, POD, Halford and Priest soon reunited, Sevendust, music was getting fun to listen to again. There was a wave of hard rock bands coming out. The door to the 90's got closed real quick! But go to your I-Heart Radio and look up 105.9 The X from Pittsburgh. You'll love that station! Your welcome!

[LedRush]

I realize I am just an old fart and have been living under a large rock for 25 years or so but............. I really don't want to see an opening band. This is just a personal thing, but I wouldn't know the music and wouldn't probably care. Unless they have some band that was around in my "era", I have no interest in that any longer. I would rather just see and hear them as long as possible. Just my opinion as always :codger:

Everyone in this forum understands this sentiment. Seems like you're starting something new by joining TRF. So, you're still expanding your horizons. Do yourself a favor and check out foo fighters or smashing pumpkins...there's something there for you I promise.

 

As for The Foo Fighters and The Smashing Pumpkins, well, The Smashing Pumpkins SUCK!!!! Since when did they expand anyones horizons? Really?! I mean, that singer actually sings that way?! f**k that group! They are a perfect example of why the 90's was such shit.

 

I think you very adequately summed up why old people suck and don't know a damn thing about music. Extra irony points for making the same comments about Corgan's voice that people made about Geddy's, and criticizing the band's style the same way critics criticized Rush's.

 

I actually I very knowledgable about music. And if you wanna see how bad old people suck then come to Naples, Florida. For one thing, I don't have kids so that keeps me young. I look younger than my age and I carry a youthful demeanor. I like to have fun in life. But if you think you learned something musically inclined from what you got in the 90's then you may wanna take some advice from your elders. Yeah, grab your Trapper Keeper and go sit in the front of the classroom. I will share with you some of the good I was able to pluck from the 90's. There were quite a few good one-hit-wonders but unfortunately there weren't many bands/artists that could put out a CD that was good start to finish or at least close to it. Ok, we got the obvious, Stone Temple Pilots and Pearl Jam. And let me add that 1990, 91, and 92, as much as they are years in the 90's, they really were an extension of the 80's. Something went severely wrong in 93 and 94 and then before we knew it we were in some other conservative era of just strumming chords and mocking music. The 90's was like going through bad withdraw from the 80's and 70's and might as well include the 60's and 50's too. So-called rock music took steps backwards. It was reduced and condensed into such a simple form. But through all the mockery of what was supposed to be real and the "generation X" crap (and yeah I know I am considered a gen X too because I was born in the 70's but I wasn't part of that target market), I was able to find some music that was good. I don't want to include Rush or any existing bands that had already made their mark in a prior era. Only those who were new and part of the new sound of the 90's that would mark the era with what they had us listening to as part of the soundtrack of our lives during this flat and dull era. One band in particular that will take me time to get to know and I have quite a bit of respect for, for their unpredictableness, originality, and creativity as well as making music the art it should be, is Radiohead. Here's an underrated band that could have and should have been more popular on the airwaves instead of just playing "Creep" to death. Another great sound that came out in the 90's was the first Garbage CD, along with the b-sides. That CD is trippy and and very modern in its era and timeless for that matter. The songs are deep, the changes throughout the songs are unpredictable and complex in their originality, creativity, and composition. Live was another very good band with a great singer and many good songs (but I don't ever wanna hear "Lightning Crashes" again). Nirvana was the real deal. It really sucks we didn't get to hear what they could've done for the years to come. They were the original band that started the new sound of the 90's. But go through the bands of the 70's and 80's, heck just go through the year 1984 for that matter. There isn't a year in the 90's that could match up to 1984 even if you combine years in the 90's. Find us some guitar players in the 90's that match up to Richie Blackmore, Eddie Van Halen, Yngwie Malmsteen, Michael Schenker, Jimmy Page, Randy Rhoads, Steve Howe, etc., etc. Billy Corgan? Yeah ok!!! And as far as his voice and comparing to some irony about, "well that's what they said about Geddy too." Not the same. Geddy sings with his natural voice and it may not appeal to all. King Diamond's high pitch singing doesn't appeal to everyone either but neither are singing like a complete idiot like Billy Corgan does. Anyone of of us can do an impression of that guy's singing. And their songs do suck, I don't care what anyone thinks. The drums suck, the guitar sucks, the lyrics suck, and the singing totally sucks. There is no comparison with them and Rush. The Pumpkins dominate X stations, not rock stations. They are played within the comtext of bands just as low in the talent pool that you bought into in that era, Weezer, The Offspring, Green Day, Cake, that stupid "She Missed the Train To Mars" song and "Peaches", etc. Marylin Manson sucks too. But Alice In Chains, Pearl Jam, Stone Temple Pilots, Soundgarden, Live, can be played on the same channels as classic rock bands. Ozzfest saved us from the 90's. Black Sabbath reuniting was the best thing that came out of the downward spiral of the 90's. It's certainly not that I don't like new music becuase I do. Things got way better as soon as that terrible era/decade came to an end. But let's not forget that the 90's were very ghetto and dominated by rap as well. So were you musically inclined by all that rap and R&B stuff too? Do you like Keith Sweat? How about DMX? Is that your boy? Do you go chasing waterfalls? Here's an idea, go look at the top 40 in 1994 then look at the top 40 in 1984 and you can compare talent. Def Leppard "Pyromania" is what we liked in 1984 and if I recall correctly it didn't make #1 because of Michael Jackson's "Thriller." But while we were jammin' out to Pyromania in 1984, 10 years later you were kickin' it to TLC and Des'ree. I'll take Michael Jackson and Madonna over Des'ree, TLC, and Fiona Apple any day. We had Shout At The Devil, you had Dookie. That pretty much sums it up. And don't get me wrong, some of this alternative and grunge was ok at the time but when that's the best you have to offer then there's some people out there that got away with one. Music theory certainly wasn't a prerequisite for entry level "musicians" in the 90's. Even some of the cheesiest glam bands of the 80's still had some great guitar players. And just so you know, I never intend to knock someone for what they enjoy. I'll only state my opinion and can appreciate that another really enjoys their music. I have very strong opinions of what the 90's did to music however. And "Despite all my rage I am still just a rat in a cage...." and the stupid drum fills sucks. "Letttttt....let me outtttt..." sucks! I rank it up there with my all time most hated bands. But you're so smart, right? You know something about music, right? I mean there are so many 90's bands headlining and playing arenas and stadiums, right? There's nothing inspiring about this decade. Just listen to Metallica in the 80's then listen to Metallica in the 90's. 'nuf said. Beck, there's another one dominating X stations with annoying so-called songs. The Flaming Lips! Are they selling out arenas? How about Blur? "What happened to 2-Pac?" Who cares? In 2000 Iron Maiden and Bruce reunited, Motley Crue reunited with Vince Neil and Tommy Lee, Disturbed, Linkin Park, Godsmack, 3 Doors Down, POD, Halford and Priest soon reunited, Sevendust, music was getting fun to listen to again. There was a wave of hard rock bands coming out. The door to the 90's got closed real quick! But go to your I-Heart Radio and look up 105.9 The X from Pittsburgh. You'll love that station! Your welcome!

 

Paragraphs are your friend.

[JohnnyBlaze]

I realize I am just an old fart and have been living under a large rock for 25 years or so but............. I really don't want to see an opening band. This is just a personal thing, but I wouldn't know the music and wouldn't probably care. Unless they have some band that was around in my "era", I have no interest in that any longer. I would rather just see and hear them as long as possible. Just my opinion as always :codger:

Everyone in this forum understands this sentiment. Seems like you're starting something new by joining TRF. So, you're still expanding your horizons. Do yourself a favor and check out foo fighters or smashing pumpkins...there's something there for you I promise.

 

As for The Foo Fighters and The Smashing Pumpkins, well, The Smashing Pumpkins SUCK!!!! Since when did they expand anyones horizons? Really?! I mean, that singer actually sings that way?! f**k that group! They are a perfect example of why the 90's was such shit.

 

I think you very adequately summed up why old people suck and don't know a damn thing about music. Extra irony points for making the same comments about Corgan's voice that people made about Geddy's, and criticizing the band's style the same way critics criticized Rush's.

 

I actually I very knowledgable about music. And if you wanna see how bad old people suck then come to Naples, Florida. For one thing, I don't have kids so that keeps me young. I look younger than my age and I carry a youthful demeanor. I like to have fun in life. But if you think you learned something musically inclined from what you got in the 90's then you may wanna take some advice from your elders. Yeah, grab your Trapper Keeper and go sit in the front of the classroom. I will share with you some of the good I was able to pluck from the 90's. There were quite a few good one-hit-wonders but unfortunately there weren't many bands/artists that could put out a CD that was good start to finish or at least close to it. Ok, we got the obvious, Stone Temple Pilots and Pearl Jam. And let me add that 1990, 91, and 92, as much as they are years in the 90's, they really were an extension of the 80's. Something went severely wrong in 93 and 94 and then before we knew it we were in some other conservative era of just strumming chords and mocking music. The 90's was like going through bad withdraw from the 80's and 70's and might as well include the 60's and 50's too. So-called rock music took steps backwards. It was reduced and condensed into such a simple form. But through all the mockery of what was supposed to be real and the "generation X" crap (and yeah I know I am considered a gen X too because I was born in the 70's but I wasn't part of that target market), I was able to find some music that was good. I don't want to include Rush or any existing bands that had already made their mark in a prior era. Only those who were new and part of the new sound of the 90's that would mark the era with what they had us listening to as part of the soundtrack of our lives during this flat and dull era. One band in particular that will take me time to get to know and I have quite a bit of respect for, for their unpredictableness, originality, and creativity as well as making music the art it should be, is Radiohead. Here's an underrated band that could have and should have been more popular on the airwaves instead of just playing "Creep" to death. Another great sound that came out in the 90's was the first Garbage CD, along with the b-sides. That CD is trippy and and very modern in its era and timeless for that matter. The songs are deep, the changes throughout the songs are unpredictable and complex in their originality, creativity, and composition. Live was another very good band with a great singer and many good songs (but I don't ever wanna hear "Lightning Crashes" again). Nirvana was the real deal. It really sucks we didn't get to hear what they could've done for the years to come. They were the original band that started the new sound of the 90's. But go through the bands of the 70's and 80's, heck just go through the year 1984 for that matter. There isn't a year in the 90's that could match up to 1984 even if you combine years in the 90's. Find us some guitar players in the 90's that match up to Richie Blackmore, Eddie Van Halen, Yngwie Malmsteen, Michael Schenker, Jimmy Page, Randy Rhoads, Steve Howe, etc., etc. Billy Corgan? Yeah ok!!! And as far as his voice and comparing to some irony about, "well that's what they said about Geddy too." Not the same. Geddy sings with his natural voice and it may not appeal to all. King Diamond's high pitch singing doesn't appeal to everyone either but neither are singing like a complete idiot like Billy Corgan does. Anyone of of us can do an impression of that guy's singing. And their songs do suck, I don't care what anyone thinks. The drums suck, the guitar sucks, the lyrics suck, and the singing totally sucks. There is no comparison with them and Rush. The Pumpkins dominate X stations, not rock stations. They are played within the comtext of bands just as low in the talent pool that you bought into in that era, Weezer, The Offspring, Green Day, Cake, that stupid "She Missed the Train To Mars" song and "Peaches", etc. Marylin Manson sucks too. But Alice In Chains, Pearl Jam, Stone Temple Pilots, Soundgarden, Live, can be played on the same channels as classic rock bands. Ozzfest saved us from the 90's. Black Sabbath reuniting was the best thing that came out of the downward spiral of the 90's. It's certainly not that I don't like new music becuase I do. Things got way better as soon as that terrible era/decade came to an end. But let's not forget that the 90's were very ghetto and dominated by rap as well. So were you musically inclined by all that rap and R&B stuff too? Do you like Keith Sweat? How about DMX? Is that your boy? Do you go chasing waterfalls? Here's an idea, go look at the top 40 in 1994 then look at the top 40 in 1984 and you can compare talent. Def Leppard "Pyromania" is what we liked in 1984 and if I recall correctly it didn't make #1 because of Michael Jackson's "Thriller." But while we were jammin' out to Pyromania in 1984, 10 years later you were kickin' it to TLC and Des'ree. I'll take Michael Jackson and Madonna over Des'ree, TLC, and Fiona Apple any day. We had Shout At The Devil, you had Dookie. That pretty much sums it up. And don't get me wrong, some of this alternative and grunge was ok at the time but when that's the best you have to offer then there's some people out there that got away with one. Music theory certainly wasn't a prerequisite for entry level "musicians" in the 90's. Even some of the cheesiest glam bands of the 80's still had some great guitar players. And just so you know, I never intend to knock someone for what they enjoy. I'll only state my opinion and can appreciate that another really enjoys their music. I have very strong opinions of what the 90's did to music however. And "Despite all my rage I am still just a rat in a cage...." and the stupid drum fills sucks. "Letttttt....let me outtttt..." sucks! I rank it up there with my all time most hated bands. But you're so smart, right? You know something about music, right? I mean there are so many 90's bands headlining and playing arenas and stadiums, right? There's nothing inspiring about this decade. Just listen to Metallica in the 80's then listen to Metallica in the 90's. 'nuf said. Beck, there's another one dominating X stations with annoying so-called songs. The Flaming Lips! Are they selling out arenas? How about Blur? "What happened to 2-Pac?" Who cares? In 2000 Iron Maiden and Bruce reunited, Motley Crue reunited with Vince Neil and Tommy Lee, Disturbed, Linkin Park, Godsmack, 3 Doors Down, POD, Halford and Priest soon reunited, Sevendust, music was getting fun to listen to again. There was a wave of hard rock bands coming out. The door to the 90's got closed real quick! But go to your I-Heart Radio and look up 105.9 The X from Pittsburgh. You'll love that station! Your welcome!

I agree with a lot of what you said. And I disagree with a bunch of stuff too. I'd go into more detail but after reading your mega-paragraph, I feel I need to go for a shoulder massage and a stiff drink. Damn, I'm tired.

[HomesickAlien]

I realize I am just an old fart and have been living under a large rock for 25 years or so but............. I really don't want to see an opening band. This is just a personal thing, but I wouldn't know the music and wouldn't probably care. Unless they have some band that was around in my "era", I have no interest in that any longer. I would rather just see and hear them as long as possible. Just my opinion as always :codger:

Everyone in this forum understands this sentiment. Seems like you're starting something new by joining TRF. So, you're still expanding your horizons. Do yourself a favor and check out foo fighters or smashing pumpkins...there's something there for you I promise.

 

As for The Foo Fighters and The Smashing Pumpkins, well, The Smashing Pumpkins SUCK!!!! Since when did they expand anyones horizons? Really?! I mean, that singer actually sings that way?! f**k that group! They are a perfect example of why the 90's was such shit.

 

I think you very adequately summed up why old people suck and don't know a damn thing about music. Extra irony points for making the same comments about Corgan's voice that people made about Geddy's, and criticizing the band's style the same way critics criticized Rush's.

 

I actually I very knowledgable about music. And if you wanna see how bad old people suck then come to Naples, Florida. For one thing, I don't have kids so that keeps me young. I look younger than my age and I carry a youthful demeanor. I like to have fun in life. But if you think you learned something musically inclined from what you got in the 90's then you may wanna take some advice from your elders. Yeah, grab your Trapper Keeper and go sit in the front of the classroom. I will share with you some of the good I was able to pluck from the 90's. There were quite a few good one-hit-wonders but unfortunately there weren't many bands/artists that could put out a CD that was good start to finish or at least close to it. Ok, we got the obvious, Stone Temple Pilots and Pearl Jam. And let me add that 1990, 91, and 92, as much as they are years in the 90's, they really were an extension of the 80's. Something went severely wrong in 93 and 94 and then before we knew it we were in some other conservative era of just strumming chords and mocking music. The 90's was like going through bad withdraw from the 80's and 70's and might as well include the 60's and 50's too. So-called rock music took steps backwards. It was reduced and condensed into such a simple form. But through all the mockery of what was supposed to be real and the "generation X" crap (and yeah I know I am considered a gen X too because I was born in the 70's but I wasn't part of that target market), I was able to find some music that was good. I don't want to include Rush or any existing bands that had already made their mark in a prior era. Only those who were new and part of the new sound of the 90's that would mark the era with what they had us listening to as part of the soundtrack of our lives during this flat and dull era. One band in particular that will take me time to get to know and I have quite a bit of respect for, for their unpredictableness, originality, and creativity as well as making music the art it should be, is Radiohead. Here's an underrated band that could have and should have been more popular on the airwaves instead of just playing "Creep" to death. Another great sound that came out in the 90's was the first Garbage CD, along with the b-sides. That CD is trippy and and very modern in its era and timeless for that matter. The songs are deep, the changes throughout the songs are unpredictable and complex in their originality, creativity, and composition. Live was another very good band with a great singer and many good songs (but I don't ever wanna hear "Lightning Crashes" again). Nirvana was the real deal. It really sucks we didn't get to hear what they could've done for the years to come. They were the original band that started the new sound of the 90's. But go through the bands of the 70's and 80's, heck just go through the year 1984 for that matter. There isn't a year in the 90's that could match up to 1984 even if you combine years in the 90's. Find us some guitar players in the 90's that match up to Richie Blackmore, Eddie Van Halen, Yngwie Malmsteen, Michael Schenker, Jimmy Page, Randy Rhoads, Steve Howe, etc., etc. Billy Corgan? Yeah ok!!! And as far as his voice and comparing to some irony about, "well that's what they said about Geddy too." Not the same. Geddy sings with his natural voice and it may not appeal to all. King Diamond's high pitch singing doesn't appeal to everyone either but neither are singing like a complete idiot like Billy Corgan does. Anyone of of us can do an impression of that guy's singing. And their songs do suck, I don't care what anyone thinks. The drums suck, the guitar sucks, the lyrics suck, and the singing totally sucks. There is no comparison with them and Rush. The Pumpkins dominate X stations, not rock stations. They are played within the comtext of bands just as low in the talent pool that you bought into in that era, Weezer, The Offspring, Green Day, Cake, that stupid "She Missed the Train To Mars" song and "Peaches", etc. Marylin Manson sucks too. But Alice In Chains, Pearl Jam, Stone Temple Pilots, Soundgarden, Live, can be played on the same channels as classic rock bands. Ozzfest saved us from the 90's. Black Sabbath reuniting was the best thing that came out of the downward spiral of the 90's. It's certainly not that I don't like new music becuase I do. Things got way better as soon as that terrible era/decade came to an end. But let's not forget that the 90's were very ghetto and dominated by rap as well. So were you musically inclined by all that rap and R&B stuff too? Do you like Keith Sweat? How about DMX? Is that your boy? Do you go chasing waterfalls? Here's an idea, go look at the top 40 in 1994 then look at the top 40 in 1984 and you can compare talent. Def Leppard "Pyromania" is what we liked in 1984 and if I recall correctly it didn't make #1 because of Michael Jackson's "Thriller." But while we were jammin' out to Pyromania in 1984, 10 years later you were kickin' it to TLC and Des'ree. I'll take Michael Jackson and Madonna over Des'ree, TLC, and Fiona Apple any day. We had Shout At The Devil, you had Dookie. That pretty much sums it up. And don't get me wrong, some of this alternative and grunge was ok at the time but when that's the best you have to offer then there's some people out there that got away with one. Music theory certainly wasn't a prerequisite for entry level "musicians" in the 90's. Even some of the cheesiest glam bands of the 80's still had some great guitar players. And just so you know, I never intend to knock someone for what they enjoy. I'll only state my opinion and can appreciate that another really enjoys their music. I have very strong opinions of what the 90's did to music however. And "Despite all my rage I am still just a rat in a cage...." and the stupid drum fills sucks. "Letttttt....let me outtttt..." sucks! I rank it up there with my all time most hated bands. But you're so smart, right? You know something about music, right? I mean there are so many 90's bands headlining and playing arenas and stadiums, right? There's nothing inspiring about this decade. Just listen to Metallica in the 80's then listen to Metallica in the 90's. 'nuf said. Beck, there's another one dominating X stations with annoying so-called songs. The Flaming Lips! Are they selling out arenas? How about Blur? "What happened to 2-Pac?" Who cares? In 2000 Iron Maiden and Bruce reunited, Motley Crue reunited with Vince Neil and Tommy Lee, Disturbed, Linkin Park, Godsmack, 3 Doors Down, POD, Halford and Priest soon reunited, Sevendust, music was getting fun to listen to again. There was a wave of hard rock bands coming out. The door to the 90's got closed real quick! But go to your I-Heart Radio and look up 105.9 The X from Pittsburgh. You'll love that station! Your welcome!

 

Paragraphs are your friend.

 

You didn't slog through that? Here's a summary:

 

Although there were a few exceptions, he thinks 90's bands were composed of talentless hacks, and he still hates the Pumpkins with unrelenting fervor.

[LedRush]

I realize I am just an old fart and have been living under a large rock for 25 years or so but............. I really don't want to see an opening band. This is just a personal thing, but I wouldn't know the music and wouldn't probably care. Unless they have some band that was around in my "era", I have no interest in that any longer. I would rather just see and hear them as long as possible. Just my opinion as always :codger:

Everyone in this forum understands this sentiment. Seems like you're starting something new by joining TRF. So, you're still expanding your horizons. Do yourself a favor and check out foo fighters or smashing pumpkins...there's something there for you I promise.

 

As for The Foo Fighters and The Smashing Pumpkins, well, The Smashing Pumpkins SUCK!!!! Since when did they expand anyones horizons? Really?! I mean, that singer actually sings that way?! f**k that group! They are a perfect example of why the 90's was such shit.

 

I think you very adequately summed up why old people suck and don't know a damn thing about music. Extra irony points for making the same comments about Corgan's voice that people made about Geddy's, and criticizing the band's style the same way critics criticized Rush's.

 

I actually I very knowledgable about music. And if you wanna see how bad old people suck then come to Naples, Florida. For one thing, I don't have kids so that keeps me young. I look younger than my age and I carry a youthful demeanor. I like to have fun in life. But if you think you learned something musically inclined from what you got in the 90's then you may wanna take some advice from your elders. Yeah, grab your Trapper Keeper and go sit in the front of the classroom. I will share with you some of the good I was able to pluck from the 90's. There were quite a few good one-hit-wonders but unfortunately there weren't many bands/artists that could put out a CD that was good start to finish or at least close to it. Ok, we got the obvious, Stone Temple Pilots and Pearl Jam. And let me add that 1990, 91, and 92, as much as they are years in the 90's, they really were an extension of the 80's. Something went severely wrong in 93 and 94 and then before we knew it we were in some other conservative era of just strumming chords and mocking music. The 90's was like going through bad withdraw from the 80's and 70's and might as well include the 60's and 50's too. So-called rock music took steps backwards. It was reduced and condensed into such a simple form. But through all the mockery of what was supposed to be real and the "generation X" crap (and yeah I know I am considered a gen X too because I was born in the 70's but I wasn't part of that target market), I was able to find some music that was good. I don't want to include Rush or any existing bands that had already made their mark in a prior era. Only those who were new and part of the new sound of the 90's that would mark the era with what they had us listening to as part of the soundtrack of our lives during this flat and dull era. One band in particular that will take me time to get to know and I have quite a bit of respect for, for their unpredictableness, originality, and creativity as well as making music the art it should be, is Radiohead. Here's an underrated band that could have and should have been more popular on the airwaves instead of just playing "Creep" to death. Another great sound that came out in the 90's was the first Garbage CD, along with the b-sides. That CD is trippy and and very modern in its era and timeless for that matter. The songs are deep, the changes throughout the songs are unpredictable and complex in their originality, creativity, and composition. Live was another very good band with a great singer and many good songs (but I don't ever wanna hear "Lightning Crashes" again). Nirvana was the real deal. It really sucks we didn't get to hear what they could've done for the years to come. They were the original band that started the new sound of the 90's. But go through the bands of the 70's and 80's, heck just go through the year 1984 for that matter. There isn't a year in the 90's that could match up to 1984 even if you combine years in the 90's. Find us some guitar players in the 90's that match up to Richie Blackmore, Eddie Van Halen, Yngwie Malmsteen, Michael Schenker, Jimmy Page, Randy Rhoads, Steve Howe, etc., etc. Billy Corgan? Yeah ok!!! And as far as his voice and comparing to some irony about, "well that's what they said about Geddy too." Not the same. Geddy sings with his natural voice and it may not appeal to all. King Diamond's high pitch singing doesn't appeal to everyone either but neither are singing like a complete idiot like Billy Corgan does. Anyone of of us can do an impression of that guy's singing. And their songs do suck, I don't care what anyone thinks. The drums suck, the guitar sucks, the lyrics suck, and the singing totally sucks. There is no comparison with them and Rush. The Pumpkins dominate X stations, not rock stations. They are played within the comtext of bands just as low in the talent pool that you bought into in that era, Weezer, The Offspring, Green Day, Cake, that stupid "She Missed the Train To Mars" song and "Peaches", etc. Marylin Manson sucks too. But Alice In Chains, Pearl Jam, Stone Temple Pilots, Soundgarden, Live, can be played on the same channels as classic rock bands. Ozzfest saved us from the 90's. Black Sabbath reuniting was the best thing that came out of the downward spiral of the 90's. It's certainly not that I don't like new music becuase I do. Things got way better as soon as that terrible era/decade came to an end. But let's not forget that the 90's were very ghetto and dominated by rap as well. So were you musically inclined by all that rap and R&B stuff too? Do you like Keith Sweat? How about DMX? Is that your boy? Do you go chasing waterfalls? Here's an idea, go look at the top 40 in 1994 then look at the top 40 in 1984 and you can compare talent. Def Leppard "Pyromania" is what we liked in 1984 and if I recall correctly it didn't make #1 because of Michael Jackson's "Thriller." But while we were jammin' out to Pyromania in 1984, 10 years later you were kickin' it to TLC and Des'ree. I'll take Michael Jackson and Madonna over Des'ree, TLC, and Fiona Apple any day. We had Shout At The Devil, you had Dookie. That pretty much sums it up. And don't get me wrong, some of this alternative and grunge was ok at the time but when that's the best you have to offer then there's some people out there that got away with one. Music theory certainly wasn't a prerequisite for entry level "musicians" in the 90's. Even some of the cheesiest glam bands of the 80's still had some great guitar players. And just so you know, I never intend to knock someone for what they enjoy. I'll only state my opinion and can appreciate that another really enjoys their music. I have very strong opinions of what the 90's did to music however. And "Despite all my rage I am still just a rat in a cage...." and the stupid drum fills sucks. "Letttttt....let me outtttt..." sucks! I rank it up there with my all time most hated bands. But you're so smart, right? You know something about music, right? I mean there are so many 90's bands headlining and playing arenas and stadiums, right? There's nothing inspiring about this decade. Just listen to Metallica in the 80's then listen to Metallica in the 90's. 'nuf said. Beck, there's another one dominating X stations with annoying so-called songs. The Flaming Lips! Are they selling out arenas? How about Blur? "What happened to 2-Pac?" Who cares? In 2000 Iron Maiden and Bruce reunited, Motley Crue reunited with Vince Neil and Tommy Lee, Disturbed, Linkin Park, Godsmack, 3 Doors Down, POD, Halford and Priest soon reunited, Sevendust, music was getting fun to listen to again. There was a wave of hard rock bands coming out. The door to the 90's got closed real quick! But go to your I-Heart Radio and look up 105.9 The X from Pittsburgh. You'll love that station! Your welcome!

 

Paragraphs are your friend.

 

You didn't slog through that? Here's a summary:

 

Although there were a few exceptions, he thinks 90's bands were composed of talentless hacks, and he still hates the Pumpkins with unrelenting fervor.

 

Oh. So he's still just as ignorant as before, and still can't write coherently. Got it.

 

My beef with the 80s was that the popular music was dance or pussified music. You still had great metal (and crappy hair bands) and great rock, but it was dominated by the cheese of the 80s. The 90s basically saved rock music, in my mind. It brought the guitar to the front and the radios were filled with hard rocking acts that actually knew what their instruments were for. Unfortunately, how we consume music has changed so dramatically and the landscape has reverted back to dance/pop since the mid-to-late 90s, we'll likely look back at the early 1990s as the last time that rock was king. I hope I'm wrong about that.

[EagleMoon]

I keep hoping some great bands will surface and bring back rock music. The pablum we keep getting served on television and the radio is not real music at all anymore. It's just a bunch of generic fluff.

[Tony R]

I keep hoping some great bands will surface and bring back rock music. The pablum we keep getting served on television and the radio is not real music at all anymore. It's just a bunch of generic fluff.

 

Thanks EagleMoon, I've discovered a new word "pablum".

 

Pablum is a processed cereal for infants originally marketed by the Mead Johnson Company in 1931. The trademarked name is a contracted form of the Latin word pabulum, which means "foodstuff". The name had long been used in botany and medicine to refer to nutrition or substances of which the nutritive elements are passively absorbed.

The word can also refer to something that is bland, mushy, unappetizing, or infantile.

 

 

Not crossed the Atlantic, obviously. It will now!!

 

 

[Tony R]

I realize I am just an old fart and have been living under a large rock for 25 years or so but............. I really don't want to see an opening band. This is just a personal thing, but I wouldn't know the music and wouldn't probably care. Unless they have some band that was around in my "era", I have no interest in that any longer. I would rather just see and hear them as long as possible. Just my opinion as always :codger:

Everyone in this forum understands this sentiment. Seems like you're starting something new by joining TRF. So, you're still expanding your horizons. Do yourself a favor and check out foo fighters or smashing pumpkins...there's something there for you I promise.

 

 

Seeker, it has nothing to do with being an old fart or not. Opening acts tend to suck in general. Well, except back in the 70's/80's when both bands were worthy of being the headlining act. But opening acts for Rush are usually a drag. I remember having to sit through Mr Big opening for Rush on the Presto tour. Not only does Mr Big not really have good songs but it wasn't a match for Rush music. I'd rather see a band that has a new progressive sound. If there is to be an opening act for Rush again then I trust Rush's judgement on who they might select. We don't hear all the rock bands that come out of Canada. I'm sure there are some talented bands up there that would keep our interest and play a good show. But, it's like seeing opening bands for U2. The opening acts suck and when I go to a Rush show or a U2 show, I am there for their music only. Both these bands have achieved such status that they can get away with no opening acts. U2 still has opening acts. But I don;t want anything other than An Evening with Rush. Not to mention, it's a long time to be standing there, I don't care how young or old, when you're bored with the opening act it sucks standing there. Rush fans don't wanna hear anything other than Rush. Screw the opening act. As for The Foo Fighters and The Smashing Pumpkins, well, The Smashing Pumpkins SUCK!!!! Since when did they expand anyones horizons? Really?! I mean, that singer actually sings that way?! f**k that group! They are a perfect example of why the 90's was such shit. As for the Foos, good radio rock songs but not interesting. Boring actually. I'd be f*ckin' pissed if I had to sit through either of these bands. Well, I wouldn't be sitting because I'm usually very close to the stage. But I'd be out roaming the halls and making friends with all the Rush fans that feel the same way until the opening band finished. But if there is gonna be an opening act then my vote goes to April Wine or Zebra. Not that either of those two would happen but that's a much better match. Smashing Pumpkins, gimme a break. Maybe Filter can open up too or Nine Inch Nails. Maybe POTUSA or The Offspring could open. How about Paula Cole or Luscious Jackson? Maybe Cake or Bush. How about Weezer? I mean, if we're gonna have stupid f*ckin' 90's bands opening up then here's your Rush setlist,

 

Set 1: Test For Echo (in its entirety)

Set 2: Counterparts (in its entirety)

Encore: Roll The Bones (entire album in a medley)

 

Most Rush fans favorite era is the late 70's through the early 80's. So IF there was an opening act then it'd make sense to pair the band up with bands from that era. Or, introduce us to something we haven't heard of yet. But I hope they don't have an opening act.

 

As far as Primus, I've seen them a a couple times at the Ozfests. I just don't get their music. The songs aren't any good. Yeah the bass playing is wicked but the songs suck.

 

Seeker, if you got with the times then you'd be wearing you pants way below your waist, you ball cap sideways and the cap would have an oversized bill, don't forget your bling-bling and your wife-beater muscle shirt, and you'd talk like, "yo! yo! wha'dup dog? Y u dissin' me?" It doesn't matter when you were born. Good music is good music and stuff that sucks simply sucks. I hate country music but not the stuff from the 50's, 60's, and 70's. There were some very good songs then. Old Motown and Soul, it's not in my i-pod but it was good. If your family is telling you to get with the times then my guess is you need to update how you're listening to your music. Yeah, ditch the cassette player and portable disc player. You deserve better. Put all your songs in an i-pod. But I know kids half my age that love Pink Floyd and Led Zep and they are bummed that they didn't grow up with that music. They love when I introduce them to more stuff from the era before Cobain killed himself and took the industry down with him. If you don't understand the modern stuff, it's not because of age. Put it this way, Incubus is a very good band. They are very talented and have some very good songs. But they can't make a good album from start to finish. And something else to remember, and I don't know your age but I'm pretty sure we come from the same era, or pretty close at least. We are that generation that doesn't grow up in many ways. We still like Star Wars and still think the X-Wing Fighter is a cool ship and still wanna own one and fly one. We still like the Trans Am in the first Smokey and the Bandit and still wanna own one. We still go to rock concerts and still feel like a kid at these shows. We had alot of cool popculture growing up that other generations didn't have. It's a little different for you because you have a wife and kids. I have a cat, so I can be whatever age I want. But be yourself and enjoy what always made you happy. I don't hate the 90's beacause I was out of high school then. There were just horrible bands then. They didn't add anything new. There were some good albums and some new sounds but for the most part it was pathetic and so bad that it was offensive. And no ofense to Tombstone, I don't mean to attack anyone's taste in music, not everyone will agree with what I like, but those 90's bands really piss me off. And by the way, I totally noticed the Sad Wings of Destiny album cover you have pictured with your posts. That's one of the best metal albums ever and totally underrated. I love Deceiver! I'm not sure what all you like these days but I'll throw a couples bands your way. You may already be familiar but here goes. Trapt, check out the CD Someone in Control. They are a very good and underrated modern hard rock band. I see that you are a Yes fan. Did you like Asia? They reunited and did 3 more albums. Omega is the middle one and has some good songs on it. I'd say it's more than half good. The secong track, Through My Veins, and the third track, Holy War, are very good songs. Sevendust has a very good album, Animosity. I'm not too crazy about the first two tracks but it really takes off after that. Great percussion and unpredictable progressions. They have good songs on the next two albums after that but they also try to just make noise and buncha double bass and roaring. You may already know all this, if so, sorry. Just sounded like you hadn't heard anything new or recent in a while. I'm guessing you never heard this band before though, To Die For. They're from Finland I believe. A dark, gothic, talented metal band. Not sure the wife will like this band since you're a Priest fan you may like them. Their early stuff was good. Check out the songs, Little Deaths, Vale of Tears, and Loveless. Stupid-ass Smashing Pumkins! If you have ever seen the show South Park, well, picture Eric Cartman singing. That's what Smashing Pumpkins' Billy Corgan sounds like. Looks like too!

 

Rock on Seeker!

Zzzzzzzzzzzz

Keep ya cockyogurt to yourself.

 

 

[coventry]

I realize I am just an old fart and have been living under a large rock for 25 years or so but............. I really don't want to see an opening band. This is just a personal thing, but I wouldn't know the music and wouldn't probably care. Unless they have some band that was around in my "era", I have no interest in that any longer. I would rather just see and hear them as long as possible. Just my opinion as always :codger:

Everyone in this forum understands this sentiment. Seems like you're starting something new by joining TRF. So, you're still expanding your horizons. Do yourself a favor and check out foo fighters or smashing pumpkins...there's something there for you I promise.

 

As for The Foo Fighters and The Smashing Pumpkins, well, The Smashing Pumpkins SUCK!!!! Since when did they expand anyones horizons? Really?! I mean, that singer actually sings that way?! f**k that group! They are a perfect example of why the 90's was such shit.

 

I think you very adequately summed up why old people suck and don't know a damn thing about music. Extra irony points for making the same comments about Corgan's voice that people made about Geddy's, and criticizing the band's style the same way critics criticized Rush's.

 

I actually I very knowledgable about music. And if you wanna see how bad old people suck then come to Naples, Florida. For one thing, I don't have kids so that keeps me young. I look younger than my age and I carry a youthful demeanor. I like to have fun in life. But if you think you learned something musically inclined from what you got in the 90's then you may wanna take some advice from your elders. Yeah, grab your Trapper Keeper and go sit in the front of the classroom. I will share with you some of the good I was able to pluck from the 90's. There were quite a few good one-hit-wonders but unfortunately there weren't many bands/artists that could put out a CD that was good start to finish or at least close to it. Ok, we got the obvious, Stone Temple Pilots and Pearl Jam. And let me add that 1990, 91, and 92, as much as they are years in the 90's, they really were an extension of the 80's. Something went severely wrong in 93 and 94 and then before we knew it we were in some other conservative era of just strumming chords and mocking music. The 90's was like going through bad withdraw from the 80's and 70's and might as well include the 60's and 50's too. So-called rock music took steps backwards. It was reduced and condensed into such a simple form. But through all the mockery of what was supposed to be real and the "generation X" crap (and yeah I know I am considered a gen X too because I was born in the 70's but I wasn't part of that target market), I was able to find some music that was good. I don't want to include Rush or any existing bands that had already made their mark in a prior era. Only those who were new and part of the new sound of the 90's that would mark the era with what they had us listening to as part of the soundtrack of our lives during this flat and dull era. One band in particular that will take me time to get to know and I have quite a bit of respect for, for their unpredictableness, originality, and creativity as well as making music the art it should be, is Radiohead. Here's an underrated band that could have and should have been more popular on the airwaves instead of just playing "Creep" to death. Another great sound that came out in the 90's was the first Garbage CD, along with the b-sides. That CD is trippy and and very modern in its era and timeless for that matter. The songs are deep, the changes throughout the songs are unpredictable and complex in their originality, creativity, and composition. Live was another very good band with a great singer and many good songs (but I don't ever wanna hear "Lightning Crashes" again). Nirvana was the real deal. It really sucks we didn't get to hear what they could've done for the years to come. They were the original band that started the new sound of the 90's. But go through the bands of the 70's and 80's, heck just go through the year 1984 for that matter. There isn't a year in the 90's that could match up to 1984 even if you combine years in the 90's. Find us some guitar players in the 90's that match up to Richie Blackmore, Eddie Van Halen, Yngwie Malmsteen, Michael Schenker, Jimmy Page, Randy Rhoads, Steve Howe, etc., etc. Billy Corgan? Yeah ok!!! And as far as his voice and comparing to some irony about, "well that's what they said about Geddy too." Not the same. Geddy sings with his natural voice and it may not appeal to all. King Diamond's high pitch singing doesn't appeal to everyone either but neither are singing like a complete idiot like Billy Corgan does. Anyone of of us can do an impression of that guy's singing. And their songs do suck, I don't care what anyone thinks. The drums suck, the guitar sucks, the lyrics suck, and the singing totally sucks. There is no comparison with them and Rush. The Pumpkins dominate X stations, not rock stations. They are played within the comtext of bands just as low in the talent pool that you bought into in that era, Weezer, The Offspring, Green Day, Cake, that stupid "She Missed the Train To Mars" song and "Peaches", etc. Marylin Manson sucks too. But Alice In Chains, Pearl Jam, Stone Temple Pilots, Soundgarden, Live, can be played on the same channels as classic rock bands. Ozzfest saved us from the 90's. Black Sabbath reuniting was the best thing that came out of the downward spiral of the 90's. It's certainly not that I don't like new music becuase I do. Things got way better as soon as that terrible era/decade came to an end. But let's not forget that the 90's were very ghetto and dominated by rap as well. So were you musically inclined by all that rap and R&B stuff too? Do you like Keith Sweat? How about DMX? Is that your boy? Do you go chasing waterfalls? Here's an idea, go look at the top 40 in 1994 then look at the top 40 in 1984 and you can compare talent. Def Leppard "Pyromania" is what we liked in 1984 and if I recall correctly it didn't make #1 because of Michael Jackson's "Thriller." But while we were jammin' out to Pyromania in 1984, 10 years later you were kickin' it to TLC and Des'ree. I'll take Michael Jackson and Madonna over Des'ree, TLC, and Fiona Apple any day. We had Shout At The Devil, you had Dookie. That pretty much sums it up. And don't get me wrong, some of this alternative and grunge was ok at the time but when that's the best you have to offer then there's some people out there that got away with one. Music theory certainly wasn't a prerequisite for entry level "musicians" in the 90's. Even some of the cheesiest glam bands of the 80's still had some great guitar players. And just so you know, I never intend to knock someone for what they enjoy. I'll only state my opinion and can appreciate that another really enjoys their music. I have very strong opinions of what the 90's did to music however. And "Despite all my rage I am still just a rat in a cage...." and the stupid drum fills sucks. "Letttttt....let me outtttt..." sucks! I rank it up there with my all time most hated bands. But you're so smart, right? You know something about music, right? I mean there are so many 90's bands headlining and playing arenas and stadiums, right? There's nothing inspiring about this decade. Just listen to Metallica in the 80's then listen to Metallica in the 90's. 'nuf said. Beck, there's another one dominating X stations with annoying so-called songs. The Flaming Lips! Are they selling out arenas? How about Blur? "What happened to 2-Pac?" Who cares? In 2000 Iron Maiden and Bruce reunited, Motley Crue reunited with Vince Neil and Tommy Lee, Disturbed, Linkin Park, Godsmack, 3 Doors Down, POD, Halford and Priest soon reunited, Sevendust, music was getting fun to listen to again. There was a wave of hard rock bands coming out. The door to the 90's got closed real quick! But go to your I-Heart Radio and look up 105.9 The X from Pittsburgh. You'll love that station! Your welcome!

 

A few corrections and amendations:

 

1. "But if you think you learned something musically inclined from what you got in the 90's then you may wanna take some advice from your elders. Yeah, grab your Trapper Keeper and go sit in the front of the classroom."

 

Yes, TK's were relatively popular in the '90's until 1995, but they're associated with the 80's - specifically '82-89, daddy-o.

 

2. "One band in particular that will take me time to get to know and I have quite a bit of respect for, for their unpredictableness, originality, and creativity as well as making music the art it should be, is Radiohead. Here's an underrated band that could have and should have been more popular on the airwaves instead of just playing "Creep" to death."

 

Radiohead is far from underrated. And they were and are quite popular, selling out arenas (which I guess is an important criterion, as you pointed out later). And I doubt Thom Yorke would really care about airplay.

 

3. "Find us some guitar players in the 90's that match up to Richie Blackmore, Eddie Van Halen, Yngwie Malmsteen, Michael Schenker, Jimmy Page, Randy Rhoads, Steve Howe, etc., etc"

 

Seriously? Trey Anastasio, Dave Navarro, Eric Johnson, Tom Morello, John Frusciante, Kim Thayil. I think you missed the point that 90's guitar zeitgeist still used, as needed, 70's and 80's technical dick waving, but also used much broader brush-strokes.

 

4. "Billy Corgan? Yeah ok!!! And as far as his voice and comparing to some irony about, "well that's what they said about Geddy too." Not the same. Geddy sings with his natural voice and it may not appeal to all. King Diamond's high pitch singing doesn't appeal to everyone either but neither are singing like a complete idiot like Billy Corgan does. Anyone of of us can do an impression of that guy's singing. And their songs do suck, I don't care what anyone thinks. The drums suck, the guitar sucks, the lyrics suck, and the singing totally sucks. There is no comparison with them and Rush. The Pumpkins dominate X stations, not rock stations. They are played within the comtext of bands just as low in the talent pool that you bought into in that era, Weezer, The Offspring, Green Day, Cake, that stupid "She Missed the Train To Mars" song and "Peaches", etc"

 

This is so sadly vitriolic that is almost HAS to be clever parody. But it's not funny enough. Look, the Pumpkins aren't my favorite band by any means, but to deny their talent, musicianship, and influence on post-'95 rock is to remain hiding behind one's own fart-cloud.

 

6. "Marylin Manson sucks too. But Alice In Chains, Pearl Jam, Stone Temple Pilots, Soundgarden, Live, can be played on the same channels as classic rock band"

 

The fact that you put Live up there with Alice and Pearl Jam is a measure of how myopic some of your opinions are. IMNSHO, of course.

 

7. "But let's not forget that the 90's were very ghetto and dominated by rap as well. So were you musically inclined by all that rap and R&B stuff too? Do you like Keith Sweat? How about DMX? Is that your boy? Do you go chasing waterfalls?"

 

Wow. Racist much? Keith Sweat = rap? Erm. Yes, much of the '90's rap scene was obscured by the glorified belligerence of over-the-top acts like Ghetto Boys or Cypress Hill, but you're ignorant of the influence and artistry of Tupac, Nas, KRS-1, Notorious B.I.G, Mos Def, even latter-day Public Enemy - all of whom many contemporary rock acts cite as being influences and passions. And as far as the whole "chasing waterfalls" shit - TLC did more to advance female presences in a decidedly misogynistic genre than anyone since Janet Jackson or Salt-n-Pepa.

 

But to call a decade "very ghetto" is about as passive-aggressive bigoted as you can get. Shocker you live in Florida.

 

8. "Def Leppard "Pyromania" is what we liked in 1984 and if I recall correctly it didn't make #1 because of Michael Jackson's "Thriller." But while we were jammin' out to Pyromania in 1984, 10 years later you were kickin' it to TLC and Des'ree."

 

Um, Pyromania was released in early '83 and Thriller were released in late '82. The latter topped the charts until Synchronicity knocked it off, though Thriller still was the number one album in the US in '83 and '84. Still, get your years straight if you're going to be all music-y and shit.

 

9. "I mean there are so many 90's bands headlining and playing arenas and stadiums, right?"

 

Chili Peppers, Phish, Pearl Jam, Radiohead, U2, and a few others are still doing the above consistently. What you miss, though, is that the 90's really wasn't about arena rock any more. The '90's saw the birth of festivals, small venues (The 930 Club in DC, the Pageant in StL, the Continental Club in Austin, etc), and more niche acts that still could sell out venues across the country.

 

10. "Motley Crue reunited with Vince Neil and Tommy Lee, Disturbed, Linkin Park, Godsmack, 3 Doors Down, POD, Halford and Priest soon reunited, Sevendust, music was getting fun to listen to again"

 

Haha - you said Linkin Park...

 

11. "But go to your I-Heart Radio and look up 105.9 The X from Pittsburgh. You'll love that station! Your welcome!"

 

That's "You're". Please remember paragraphs and contractual apostrophes.

[LedRush]

Soundgarden

I realize I am just an old fart and have been living under a large rock for 25 years or so but............. I really don't want to see an opening band. This is just a personal thing, but I wouldn't know the music and wouldn't probably care. Unless they have some band that was around in my "era", I have no interest in that any longer. I would rather just see and hear them as long as possible. Just my opinion as always :codger:

Everyone in this forum understands this sentiment. Seems like you're starting something new by joining TRF. So, you're still expanding your horizons. Do yourself a favor and check out foo fighters or smashing pumpkins...there's something there for you I promise.

 

As for The Foo Fighters and The Smashing Pumpkins, well, The Smashing Pumpkins SUCK!!!! Since when did they expand anyones horizons? Really?! I mean, that singer actually sings that way?! f**k that group! They are a perfect example of why the 90's was such shit.

 

I think you very adequately summed up why old people suck and don't know a damn thing about music. Extra irony points for making the same comments about Corgan's voice that people made about Geddy's, and criticizing the band's style the same way critics criticized Rush's.

 

I actually I very knowledgable about music. And if you wanna see how bad old people suck then come to Naples, Florida. For one thing, I don't have kids so that keeps me young. I look younger than my age and I carry a youthful demeanor. I like to have fun in life. But if you think you learned something musically inclined from what you got in the 90's then you may wanna take some advice from your elders. Yeah, grab your Trapper Keeper and go sit in the front of the classroom. I will share with you some of the good I was able to pluck from the 90's. There were quite a few good one-hit-wonders but unfortunately there weren't many bands/artists that could put out a CD that was good start to finish or at least close to it. Ok, we got the obvious, Stone Temple Pilots and Pearl Jam. And let me add that 1990, 91, and 92, as much as they are years in the 90's, they really were an extension of the 80's. Something went severely wrong in 93 and 94 and then before we knew it we were in some other conservative era of just strumming chords and mocking music. The 90's was like going through bad withdraw from the 80's and 70's and might as well include the 60's and 50's too. So-called rock music took steps backwards. It was reduced and condensed into such a simple form. But through all the mockery of what was supposed to be real and the "generation X" crap (and yeah I know I am considered a gen X too because I was born in the 70's but I wasn't part of that target market), I was able to find some music that was good. I don't want to include Rush or any existing bands that had already made their mark in a prior era. Only those who were new and part of the new sound of the 90's that would mark the era with what they had us listening to as part of the soundtrack of our lives during this flat and dull era. One band in particular that will take me time to get to know and I have quite a bit of respect for, for their unpredictableness, originality, and creativity as well as making music the art it should be, is Radiohead. Here's an underrated band that could have and should have been more popular on the airwaves instead of just playing "Creep" to death. Another great sound that came out in the 90's was the first Garbage CD, along with the b-sides. That CD is trippy and and very modern in its era and timeless for that matter. The songs are deep, the changes throughout the songs are unpredictable and complex in their originality, creativity, and composition. Live was another very good band with a great singer and many good songs (but I don't ever wanna hear "Lightning Crashes" again). Nirvana was the real deal. It really sucks we didn't get to hear what they could've done for the years to come. They were the original band that started the new sound of the 90's. But go through the bands of the 70's and 80's, heck just go through the year 1984 for that matter. There isn't a year in the 90's that could match up to 1984 even if you combine years in the 90's. Find us some guitar players in the 90's that match up to Richie Blackmore, Eddie Van Halen, Yngwie Malmsteen, Michael Schenker, Jimmy Page, Randy Rhoads, Steve Howe, etc., etc. Billy Corgan? Yeah ok!!! And as far as his voice and comparing to some irony about, "well that's what they said about Geddy too." Not the same. Geddy sings with his natural voice and it may not appeal to all. King Diamond's high pitch singing doesn't appeal to everyone either but neither are singing like a complete idiot like Billy Corgan does. Anyone of of us can do an impression of that guy's singing. And their songs do suck, I don't care what anyone thinks. The drums suck, the guitar sucks, the lyrics suck, and the singing totally sucks. There is no comparison with them and Rush. The Pumpkins dominate X stations, not rock stations. They are played within the comtext of bands just as low in the talent pool that you bought into in that era, Weezer, The Offspring, Green Day, Cake, that stupid "She Missed the Train To Mars" song and "Peaches", etc. Marylin Manson sucks too. But Alice In Chains, Pearl Jam, Stone Temple Pilots, Soundgarden, Live, can be played on the same channels as classic rock bands. Ozzfest saved us from the 90's. Black Sabbath reuniting was the best thing that came out of the downward spiral of the 90's. It's certainly not that I don't like new music becuase I do. Things got way better as soon as that terrible era/decade came to an end. But let's not forget that the 90's were very ghetto and dominated by rap as well. So were you musically inclined by all that rap and R&B stuff too? Do you like Keith Sweat? How about DMX? Is that your boy? Do you go chasing waterfalls? Here's an idea, go look at the top 40 in 1994 then look at the top 40 in 1984 and you can compare talent. Def Leppard "Pyromania" is what we liked in 1984 and if I recall correctly it didn't make #1 because of Michael Jackson's "Thriller." But while we were jammin' out to Pyromania in 1984, 10 years later you were kickin' it to TLC and Des'ree. I'll take Michael Jackson and Madonna over Des'ree, TLC, and Fiona Apple any day. We had Shout At The Devil, you had Dookie. That pretty much sums it up. And don't get me wrong, some of this alternative and grunge was ok at the time but when that's the best you have to offer then there's some people out there that got away with one. Music theory certainly wasn't a prerequisite for entry level "musicians" in the 90's. Even some of the cheesiest glam bands of the 80's still had some great guitar players. And just so you know, I never intend to knock someone for what they enjoy. I'll only state my opinion and can appreciate that another really enjoys their music. I have very strong opinions of what the 90's did to music however. And "Despite all my rage I am still just a rat in a cage...." and the stupid drum fills sucks. "Letttttt....let me outtttt..." sucks! I rank it up there with my all time most hated bands. But you're so smart, right? You know something about music, right? I mean there are so many 90's bands headlining and playing arenas and stadiums, right? There's nothing inspiring about this decade. Just listen to Metallica in the 80's then listen to Metallica in the 90's. 'nuf said. Beck, there's another one dominating X stations with annoying so-called songs. The Flaming Lips! Are they selling out arenas? How about Blur? "What happened to 2-Pac?" Who cares? In 2000 Iron Maiden and Bruce reunited, Motley Crue reunited with Vince Neil and Tommy Lee, Disturbed, Linkin Park, Godsmack, 3 Doors Down, POD, Halford and Priest soon reunited, Sevendust, music was getting fun to listen to again. There was a wave of hard rock bands coming out. The door to the 90's got closed real quick! But go to your I-Heart Radio and look up 105.9 The X from Pittsburgh. You'll love that station! Your welcome!

 

A few corrections and amendations:

 

 

9. "I mean there are so many 90's bands headlining and playing arenas and stadiums, right?"

 

Chili Peppers, Phish, Pearl Jam, Radiohead, U2, and a few others are still doing the above consistently. What you miss, though, is that the 90's really wasn't about arena rock any more. The '90's saw the birth of festivals, small venues (The 930 Club in DC, the Pageant in StL, the Continental Club in Austin, etc), and more niche acts that still could sell out venues across the country.

 

 

 

Soundgarden, Alice in Chains, DMB, Foo Fighters, Counting Crows, Black Crows, RATM, STP, Green Day, the respective Oasis bands, 311...and those are just the ones who came to mind (that weren't included in your list). Seriously, compare the rock bands that broke it big in the '80s and see how they compare in this metric. I'm sure there are a lot more that are outside of the scope of music I am thinking of now.

[coventry]

Soundgarden

I realize I am just an old fart and have been living under a large rock for 25 years or so but............. I really don't want to see an opening band. This is just a personal thing, but I wouldn't know the music and wouldn't probably care. Unless they have some band that was around in my "era", I have no interest in that any longer. I would rather just see and hear them as long as possible. Just my opinion as always :codger:

Everyone in this forum understands this sentiment. Seems like you're starting something new by joining TRF. So, you're still expanding your horizons. Do yourself a favor and check out foo fighters or smashing pumpkins...there's something there for you I promise.

 

As for The Foo Fighters and The Smashing Pumpkins, well, The Smashing Pumpkins SUCK!!!! Since when did they expand anyones horizons? Really?! I mean, that singer actually sings that way?! f**k that group! They are a perfect example of why the 90's was such shit.

 

I think you very adequately summed up why old people suck and don't know a damn thing about music. Extra irony points for making the same comments about Corgan's voice that people made about Geddy's, and criticizing the band's style the same way critics criticized Rush's.

 

I actually I very knowledgable about music. And if you wanna see how bad old people suck then come to Naples, Florida. For one thing, I don't have kids so that keeps me young. I look younger than my age and I carry a youthful demeanor. I like to have fun in life. But if you think you learned something musically inclined from what you got in the 90's then you may wanna take some advice from your elders. Yeah, grab your Trapper Keeper and go sit in the front of the classroom. I will share with you some of the good I was able to pluck from the 90's. There were quite a few good one-hit-wonders but unfortunately there weren't many bands/artists that could put out a CD that was good start to finish or at least close to it. Ok, we got the obvious, Stone Temple Pilots and Pearl Jam. And let me add that 1990, 91, and 92, as much as they are years in the 90's, they really were an extension of the 80's. Something went severely wrong in 93 and 94 and then before we knew it we were in some other conservative era of just strumming chords and mocking music. The 90's was like going through bad withdraw from the 80's and 70's and might as well include the 60's and 50's too. So-called rock music took steps backwards. It was reduced and condensed into such a simple form. But through all the mockery of what was supposed to be real and the "generation X" crap (and yeah I know I am considered a gen X too because I was born in the 70's but I wasn't part of that target market), I was able to find some music that was good. I don't want to include Rush or any existing bands that had already made their mark in a prior era. Only those who were new and part of the new sound of the 90's that would mark the era with what they had us listening to as part of the soundtrack of our lives during this flat and dull era. One band in particular that will take me time to get to know and I have quite a bit of respect for, for their unpredictableness, originality, and creativity as well as making music the art it should be, is Radiohead. Here's an underrated band that could have and should have been more popular on the airwaves instead of just playing "Creep" to death. Another great sound that came out in the 90's was the first Garbage CD, along with the b-sides. That CD is trippy and and very modern in its era and timeless for that matter. The songs are deep, the changes throughout the songs are unpredictable and complex in their originality, creativity, and composition. Live was another very good band with a great singer and many good songs (but I don't ever wanna hear "Lightning Crashes" again). Nirvana was the real deal. It really sucks we didn't get to hear what they could've done for the years to come. They were the original band that started the new sound of the 90's. But go through the bands of the 70's and 80's, heck just go through the year 1984 for that matter. There isn't a year in the 90's that could match up to 1984 even if you combine years in the 90's. Find us some guitar players in the 90's that match up to Richie Blackmore, Eddie Van Halen, Yngwie Malmsteen, Michael Schenker, Jimmy Page, Randy Rhoads, Steve Howe, etc., etc. Billy Corgan? Yeah ok!!! And as far as his voice and comparing to some irony about, "well that's what they said about Geddy too." Not the same. Geddy sings with his natural voice and it may not appeal to all. King Diamond's high pitch singing doesn't appeal to everyone either but neither are singing like a complete idiot like Billy Corgan does. Anyone of of us can do an impression of that guy's singing. And their songs do suck, I don't care what anyone thinks. The drums suck, the guitar sucks, the lyrics suck, and the singing totally sucks. There is no comparison with them and Rush. The Pumpkins dominate X stations, not rock stations. They are played within the comtext of bands just as low in the talent pool that you bought into in that era, Weezer, The Offspring, Green Day, Cake, that stupid "She Missed the Train To Mars" song and "Peaches", etc. Marylin Manson sucks too. But Alice In Chains, Pearl Jam, Stone Temple Pilots, Soundgarden, Live, can be played on the same channels as classic rock bands. Ozzfest saved us from the 90's. Black Sabbath reuniting was the best thing that came out of the downward spiral of the 90's. It's certainly not that I don't like new music becuase I do. Things got way better as soon as that terrible era/decade came to an end. But let's not forget that the 90's were very ghetto and dominated by rap as well. So were you musically inclined by all that rap and R&B stuff too? Do you like Keith Sweat? How about DMX? Is that your boy? Do you go chasing waterfalls? Here's an idea, go look at the top 40 in 1994 then look at the top 40 in 1984 and you can compare talent. Def Leppard "Pyromania" is what we liked in 1984 and if I recall correctly it didn't make #1 because of Michael Jackson's "Thriller." But while we were jammin' out to Pyromania in 1984, 10 years later you were kickin' it to TLC and Des'ree. I'll take Michael Jackson and Madonna over Des'ree, TLC, and Fiona Apple any day. We had Shout At The Devil, you had Dookie. That pretty much sums it up. And don't get me wrong, some of this alternative and grunge was ok at the time but when that's the best you have to offer then there's some people out there that got away with one. Music theory certainly wasn't a prerequisite for entry level "musicians" in the 90's. Even some of the cheesiest glam bands of the 80's still had some great guitar players. And just so you know, I never intend to knock someone for what they enjoy. I'll only state my opinion and can appreciate that another really enjoys their music. I have very strong opinions of what the 90's did to music however. And "Despite all my rage I am still just a rat in a cage...." and the stupid drum fills sucks. "Letttttt....let me outtttt..." sucks! I rank it up there with my all time most hated bands. But you're so smart, right? You know something about music, right? I mean there are so many 90's bands headlining and playing arenas and stadiums, right? There's nothing inspiring about this decade. Just listen to Metallica in the 80's then listen to Metallica in the 90's. 'nuf said. Beck, there's another one dominating X stations with annoying so-called songs. The Flaming Lips! Are they selling out arenas? How about Blur? "What happened to 2-Pac?" Who cares? In 2000 Iron Maiden and Bruce reunited, Motley Crue reunited with Vince Neil and Tommy Lee, Disturbed, Linkin Park, Godsmack, 3 Doors Down, POD, Halford and Priest soon reunited, Sevendust, music was getting fun to listen to again. There was a wave of hard rock bands coming out. The door to the 90's got closed real quick! But go to your I-Heart Radio and look up 105.9 The X from Pittsburgh. You'll love that station! Your welcome!

 

A few corrections and amendations:

 

 

9. "I mean there are so many 90's bands headlining and playing arenas and stadiums, right?"

 

Chili Peppers, Phish, Pearl Jam, Radiohead, U2, and a few others are still doing the above consistently. What you miss, though, is that the 90's really wasn't about arena rock any more. The '90's saw the birth of festivals, small venues (The 930 Club in DC, the Pageant in StL, the Continental Club in Austin, etc), and more niche acts that still could sell out venues across the country.

 

 

 

Soundgarden, Alice in Chains, DMB, Foo Fighters, Counting Crows, Black Crows, RATM, STP, Green Day, the respective Oasis bands, 311...and those are just the ones who came to mind (that weren't included in your list). Seriously, compare the rock bands that broke it big in the '80s and see how they compare in this metric. I'm sure there are a lot more that are outside of the scope of music I am thinking of now.

 

DMB, the Black Crows, and Foo Fighters are obvious oversights on my part. Your list simply adds to the point that many 90's bands are just as popular now as they were a two decades ago. One of my seniors a few years ago said it best: "Music in the 90's rocked! But music today seems so bullshit." This was said by an 18-year old in 2008.

[Jsteinrush]

Am i missing something here. Where is the link saying Rush will have a opening band??

[JohnnyBlaze]

Am i missing something here. Where is the link saying Rush will have a opening band??

No link. Likely, it's just a misinterpretation of something Geddy said

[Xanadoood]

Soundgarden

I realize I am just an old fart and have been living under a large rock for 25 years or so but............. I really don't want to see an opening band. This is just a personal thing, but I wouldn't know the music and wouldn't probably care. Unless they have some band that was around in my "era", I have no interest in that any longer. I would rather just see and hear them as long as possible. Just my opinion as always :codger:

Everyone in this forum understands this sentiment. Seems like you're starting something new by joining TRF. So, you're still expanding your horizons. Do yourself a favor and check out foo fighters or smashing pumpkins...there's something there for you I promise.

 

As for The Foo Fighters and The Smashing Pumpkins, well, The Smashing Pumpkins SUCK!!!! Since when did they expand anyones horizons? Really?! I mean, that singer actually sings that way?! f**k that group! They are a perfect example of why the 90's was such shit.

 

I think you very adequately summed up why old people suck and don't know a damn thing about music. Extra irony points for making the same comments about Corgan's voice that people made about Geddy's, and criticizing the band's style the same way critics criticized Rush's.

 

I actually I very knowledgable about music. And if you wanna see how bad old people suck then come to Naples, Florida. For one thing, I don't have kids so that keeps me young. I look younger than my age and I carry a youthful demeanor. I like to have fun in life. But if you think you learned something musically inclined from what you got in the 90's then you may wanna take some advice from your elders. Yeah, grab your Trapper Keeper and go sit in the front of the classroom. I will share with you some of the good I was able to pluck from the 90's. There were quite a few good one-hit-wonders but unfortunately there weren't many bands/artists that could put out a CD that was good start to finish or at least close to it. Ok, we got the obvious, Stone Temple Pilots and Pearl Jam. And let me add that 1990, 91, and 92, as much as they are years in the 90's, they really were an extension of the 80's. Something went severely wrong in 93 and 94 and then before we knew it we were in some other conservative era of just strumming chords and mocking music. The 90's was like going through bad withdraw from the 80's and 70's and might as well include the 60's and 50's too. So-called rock music took steps backwards. It was reduced and condensed into such a simple form. But through all the mockery of what was supposed to be real and the "generation X" crap (and yeah I know I am considered a gen X too because I was born in the 70's but I wasn't part of that target market), I was able to find some music that was good. I don't want to include Rush or any existing bands that had already made their mark in a prior era. Only those who were new and part of the new sound of the 90's that would mark the era with what they had us listening to as part of the soundtrack of our lives during this flat and dull era. One band in particular that will take me time to get to know and I have quite a bit of respect for, for their unpredictableness, originality, and creativity as well as making music the art it should be, is Radiohead. Here's an underrated band that could have and should have been more popular on the airwaves instead of just playing "Creep" to death. Another great sound that came out in the 90's was the first Garbage CD, along with the b-sides. That CD is trippy and and very modern in its era and timeless for that matter. The songs are deep, the changes throughout the songs are unpredictable and complex in their originality, creativity, and composition. Live was another very good band with a great singer and many good songs (but I don't ever wanna hear "Lightning Crashes" again). Nirvana was the real deal. It really sucks we didn't get to hear what they could've done for the years to come. They were the original band that started the new sound of the 90's. But go through the bands of the 70's and 80's, heck just go through the year 1984 for that matter. There isn't a year in the 90's that could match up to 1984 even if you combine years in the 90's. Find us some guitar players in the 90's that match up to Richie Blackmore, Eddie Van Halen, Yngwie Malmsteen, Michael Schenker, Jimmy Page, Randy Rhoads, Steve Howe, etc., etc. Billy Corgan? Yeah ok!!! And as far as his voice and comparing to some irony about, "well that's what they said about Geddy too." Not the same. Geddy sings with his natural voice and it may not appeal to all. King Diamond's high pitch singing doesn't appeal to everyone either but neither are singing like a complete idiot like Billy Corgan does. Anyone of of us can do an impression of that guy's singing. And their songs do suck, I don't care what anyone thinks. The drums suck, the guitar sucks, the lyrics suck, and the singing totally sucks. There is no comparison with them and Rush. The Pumpkins dominate X stations, not rock stations. They are played within the comtext of bands just as low in the talent pool that you bought into in that era, Weezer, The Offspring, Green Day, Cake, that stupid "She Missed the Train To Mars" song and "Peaches", etc. Marylin Manson sucks too. But Alice In Chains, Pearl Jam, Stone Temple Pilots, Soundgarden, Live, can be played on the same channels as classic rock bands. Ozzfest saved us from the 90's. Black Sabbath reuniting was the best thing that came out of the downward spiral of the 90's. It's certainly not that I don't like new music becuase I do. Things got way better as soon as that terrible era/decade came to an end. But let's not forget that the 90's were very ghetto and dominated by rap as well. So were you musically inclined by all that rap and R&B stuff too? Do you like Keith Sweat? How about DMX? Is that your boy? Do you go chasing waterfalls? Here's an idea, go look at the top 40 in 1994 then look at the top 40 in 1984 and you can compare talent. Def Leppard "Pyromania" is what we liked in 1984 and if I recall correctly it didn't make #1 because of Michael Jackson's "Thriller." But while we were jammin' out to Pyromania in 1984, 10 years later you were kickin' it to TLC and Des'ree. I'll take Michael Jackson and Madonna over Des'ree, TLC, and Fiona Apple any day. We had Shout At The Devil, you had Dookie. That pretty much sums it up. And don't get me wrong, some of this alternative and grunge was ok at the time but when that's the best you have to offer then there's some people out there that got away with one. Music theory certainly wasn't a prerequisite for entry level "musicians" in the 90's. Even some of the cheesiest glam bands of the 80's still had some great guitar players. And just so you know, I never intend to knock someone for what they enjoy. I'll only state my opinion and can appreciate that another really enjoys their music. I have very strong opinions of what the 90's did to music however. And "Despite all my rage I am still just a rat in a cage...." and the stupid drum fills sucks. "Letttttt....let me outtttt..." sucks! I rank it up there with my all time most hated bands. But you're so smart, right? You know something about music, right? I mean there are so many 90's bands headlining and playing arenas and stadiums, right? There's nothing inspiring about this decade. Just listen to Metallica in the 80's then listen to Metallica in the 90's. 'nuf said. Beck, there's another one dominating X stations with annoying so-called songs. The Flaming Lips! Are they selling out arenas? How about Blur? "What happened to 2-Pac?" Who cares? In 2000 Iron Maiden and Bruce reunited, Motley Crue reunited with Vince Neil and Tommy Lee, Disturbed, Linkin Park, Godsmack, 3 Doors Down, POD, Halford and Priest soon reunited, Sevendust, music was getting fun to listen to again. There was a wave of hard rock bands coming out. The door to the 90's got closed real quick! But go to your I-Heart Radio and look up 105.9 The X from Pittsburgh. You'll love that station! Your welcome!

 

A few corrections and amendations:

 

 

9. "I mean there are so many 90's bands headlining and playing arenas and stadiums, right?"

 

Chili Peppers, Phish, Pearl Jam, Radiohead, U2, and a few others are still doing the above consistently. What you miss, though, is that the 90's really wasn't about arena rock any more. The '90's saw the birth of festivals, small venues (The 930 Club in DC, the Pageant in StL, the Continental Club in Austin, etc), and more niche acts that still could sell out venues across the country.

 

 

 

Soundgarden, Alice in Chains, DMB, Foo Fighters, Counting Crows, Black Crows, RATM, STP, Green Day, the respective Oasis bands, 311...and those are just the ones who came to mind (that weren't included in your list). Seriously, compare the rock bands that broke it big in the '80s and see how they compare in this metric. I'm sure there are a lot more that are outside of the scope of music I am thinking of now.

 

DMB, the Black Crows, and Foo Fighters are obvious oversights on my part. Your list simply adds to the point that many 90's bands are just as popular now as they were a two decades ago. One of my seniors a few years ago said it best: "Music in the 90's rocked! But music today seems so bullshit." This was said by an 18-year old in 2008.

 

Yeah, the 90s bands have far more respect than 80s acts. Mention 80s rock to anyone under 35, and you'll hear a lot of chuckling and ball bustin.

[EagleMoon]

That's because every generation makes fun of the music that came before them.

[GeminiRising79]

I think the 90's were awful for rock music. The whole dark, heroin-influenced grunge music. I turned it all off that whole decade.

[JohnnyBlaze]

I think the 90's were awful for rock music. The whole dark, heroin-influenced grunge music. I turned it all off that whole decade.

Fair enough. Given that you bitch a lot or call it as you see it (depending on the point of view), which decade(s) from 1950 to 2010 was/were not awful?

[JohnnyBlaze]

That's because every generation makes fun of the music that came before them.

Don't know about that. I don't remember ripping music from the 60s at any point in my life.

[metallithrax]

I would go if they had Primus, as long as they play the 1992 set as I cannot remember any of it (from either band) apart from Closer To The Heart. And I only remember that because my mate spilt his beer on the guy in front of us by throwing up his arms.

 

Too many shandies.

[GeminiRising79]

I think the 90's were awful for rock music. The whole dark, heroin-influenced grunge music. I turned it all off that whole decade.

Fair enough. Given that you bitch a lot or call it as you see it (depending on the point of view), which decade(s) from 1950 to 2010 was/were not awful?

50s: sterile

60s: phenomenal

70s: phenomenal

80s: not phenomenal, but v good

 

[GeminiRising79]

Dbl post Edited November 2, 2013 by GeminiRising79

[GeddysMullet]

For me, there were a lot of bands in the 90s that had a few good songs, but there were very few who made whole albums that I liked.

[coventry]

Another 90's overlook by One80srocker is the Beastie Boys.

 

Yes, they came to prominence with 86's Licence to Ill, but they really hit mainstream AND critical acceptance starting with Paula's Boutique and leading into Ill Communication. No rap group (and certainly no white rap artist outside of Eminem) besides PE, NWE, and Wu-Tang has been as critically and popularly successful. Certainly not the misshapen rap/rock chimeras of Linkin Park, Limp Bizkit, and the other sludge of the late 90's/early 2000's.

 

Honorable mention: Rage