Originally Posted by BastardofYoung

I agree and disagree. On one hand KISS did have some good songs in their early days, but my problem is, that simply they always put the stage show over the actual music they created and that reduced them to no more than a bunch of clowns.

I have nothing against shock rock, and theatrical music, be it KISS, Alice Cooper, Mentors or Marilyn Manson. But when you rely more on a stage show, it is not a signal that they have actual artistic merit behind it. Many times they use a stage show to distract people from realising the music is sub par shlock rock... Rob Zombie and Rammstein are examples of this, take away the fire and big stage show and glitz of it all, and you are left with little substance in the actual music, it is reduced to be a gimmick to sell the music to people who will buy anything based on what they see more than what they hear, and KISS embodies this as well. They were always stage first, music second, always have been always will be, not to mention on top of it they are about the money. You ca pretty much see Gene Simmons eyes turn into dollar signs, he will hawk any product you give him, Pepsi, Shoes anything.

KISS is a marketing band now, they are an image, but they never went past mediocrity in their music. Some of that stuff may be fun to listen to when first getting into the world of rock, but after the novelty of them wears off it becomes boring and one dimensional. The never evolved musically, remained about the image and money.. sold out before they even began.

Not only that, the amount of awful watered down cliche glam metal that spawned from them is reason enough to hate them. Poison, Warrent and all that garbage owe so much to KISS. Glam metal is a disgrace, always will be. Luckily apart from ocassional nostalgia overload from people it is laregely forgotten, and can only continue to be forgotten more and more... thankfully.

Gene Simmons is more about the sex, thinking he is a hot shot for sleeping with over 5000 woman or whatever, and thinks that is his feat... essentially that is all KISS every went into music for. They were always never anything special, but at that time.. didn't matter... you could walk into your high school with a guitar, not even knowing to play it and you would have girls flocking around you and wantting to get with you because of the image of having a guitar... hence KISS and what they did.

Do I think they KISS had a few good songs, yeah... but good is about all, never great. For everyone one good song, they had 20 equally awful ones on top of it.

Originally Posted by BastardofYoung

I agree and disagree. On one hand KISS did have some good songs in their early days, but my problem is, that simply they always put the stage show over the actual music they created and that reduced them to no more than a bunch of clowns.

I have nothing against shock rock, and theatrical music, be it KISS, Alice Cooper, Mentors or Marilyn Manson. But when you rely more on a stage show, it is not a signal that they have actual artistic merit behind it. Many times they use a stage show to distract people from realising the music is sub par shlock rock... Rob Zombie and Rammstein are examples of this, take away the fire and big stage show and glitz of it all, and you are left with little substance in the actual music, it is reduced to be a gimmick to sell the music to people who will buy anything based on what they see more than what they hear, and KISS embodies this as well. They were always stage first, music second, always have been always will be, not to mention on top of it they are about the money. You ca pretty much see Gene Simmons eyes turn into dollar signs, he will hawk any product you give him, Pepsi, Shoes anything.

KISS is a marketing band now, they are an image, but they never went past mediocrity in their music. Some of that stuff may be fun to listen to when first getting into the world of rock, but after the novelty of them wears off it becomes boring and one dimensional. The never evolved musically, remained about the image and money.. sold out before they even began.

Not only that, the amount of awful watered down cliche glam metal that spawned from them is reason enough to hate them. Poison, Warrent and all that garbage owe so much to KISS. Glam metal is a disgrace, always will be. Luckily apart from ocassional nostalgia overload from people it is laregely forgotten, and can only continue to be forgotten more and more... thankfully.

Gene Simmons is more about the sex, thinking he is a hot shot for sleeping with over 5000 woman or whatever, and thinks that is his feat... essentially that is all KISS every went into music for. They were always never anything special, but at that time.. didn't matter... you could walk into your high school with a guitar, not even knowing to play it and you would have girls flocking around you and wantting to get with you because of the image of having a guitar... hence KISS and what they did.

Do I think they KISS had a few good songs, yeah... but good is about all, never great. For everyone one good song, they had 20 equally awful ones on top of it.

Originally Posted by BastardofYoung

AC/DC, i do not see them as a band who ever really relied solely on the live show. They had talent, no matter how simplistic and minimal it may of been. But they had some fun stuff, and Angus Young is a little ball of energy, and a powerhouse all his own, if anything he is the funnest thing to watch.

While AC/DC as well has their share of horrible material, they also have some classic fun party rock. Would i wanna listen to anymore than an album by them at one time.. no... I think they are kinda like Ramones in the sense that they are a blanket you know and love, you know no matter what happens you can always come back to it and it will always be there for you, and never change. A new AC/DC album is like buying your favorite chocolate bar... you know you will always like it and can always go back to it anytime and find something to like in it.

I think though after Bon Scott died they lost a lot of that. had he lived and carried on, i think they would of been a much better band that always evolved, even if that evolution was a small one and slow to get to, but as Confucious said “It does not matter how slow you go so long as you do not stop."

So yeah, I think AC/DC has the talent to back up their shows, just at times it seems the waste it by releasing medicore albums now that just do not hold up to what they are capible of doing.

I am in no way an AC/DC buff, but I admit they had a sort of stripped down, bare bones type of talent that was as fun to see as it was to hear.

Originally Posted by Urban Hatemonger

It's a shame that Gene Simmons overshadows most people's opinions about Kiss.

I don't buy the whole 'they're more interested about the theatrics and the money than the music' when it comes to someone like Paul Stanley. This is a guy who's constantly writing songs for Kiss as well as other bands, he also produces other bands too.
When Kiss took a break he was the first person to put a band together & do club tours.

I think his songwriting is head & shoulders above anything Simmons put out. I don't think he gets even a fraction of the credit he deserves as a songwriter.

Originally Posted by SoundgardenRocks

You really seem to know alot about music man. What is your favorite AC/DC album and what of their stuff do you think is underrated?

Originally Posted by BastardofYoung

"Let There Be Rock" and "If You Want Blood, You've Got It" are both good records. I think the Bon Scott days as I say were the best for them. Johnson was alright, "Highway to Hell" is a classic album, and probably the best of his output. "Powerage" I would not say is really underrated, but maybe slightly less acknowledged compares to some of their stuff.

They had some rather weak albums, like "Fly on the Wall" and "Blow Up Your Video" and "Flick of the Switch" as well though. the Johnson years were wishy washy like that, but the Bon years were consistent.. though they were short lived.

Some may not know (or at least forget) Bon was not the original singer though, that would be Dave Evans:


Not sure if they would of been the band they are now if they carried on in this tradition though.

I am not an AC/DC fanatic, but I am a casual fan.. despite finding them a tad bit on the overrated side.

Oe of the funnest things to come out of their success though is the first Hayseed Dixie album, they are kind of an ocassional listen for a laugh band. Doing AC/DC covers in a bluegrass style. They also do one of KISS covers that was kinda funny.. and have since also done original material as well. But they have some humorous stuff:

Originally Posted by The Virgin

what? i don't understand you. farming is for vegetables, not for meat. if ou disagree with a farming practice, you disagree on a vegetable. unless you have a different definition of farming.