In praise of Appetite for Destruction, a timeless album

Sporky

A great shame he didn't do the same for top hats. 

Philly_Q

Danny1969 said:

Philly_Q said:

Danny1969 said:

The strange thing thing is they rejected Bob Clearmountain as a mix engineer because they though he would put too much of an eighties sheen on it but then ended up with a very eighties sounding record without any of the 3D depth that makes some better mixed eighties records still sound good today. 

I think they made a wise choice, if it had turned out anything like his Free remixes.

Bob used to turn up now and then on Gearslutz. One day someone mentioned those Free mixes and he put his hands up and said yeah he regrets those now but at the time samples were a new mix tech and he overdid it. 

Think about the many, many records he did get spot on though !

Fair point.  The Free remixes sprang immediately to mind because I actually bought that album and thought WTF...?

I'm sure he's done sterling work on many other albums, but skimming very quickly through his enormous list of mixing credits, there's very little in the hard rock field (except Bon Jovi, who I guess just about scrape in as a rock band).  There's also very little I've actually heard, not that I'd be in a position to judge his work. 

darthed1981

imalrightjack said:

darthed1981 said:

It depends very much when you grew up doesnt it?

For me AFD is a great album from the past, got it on vinyl, but will never mean as much to me as it does someone who was 18 when it came out.

It’s a bit like explaining Oasis in the mid 90s to people who werent there.

It isn’t that it reminds me of childhood or has dewy-eyed nostalgia attached to it. I love it because it’s a great, timeless rock record, akin to classics like Led Zeppelin, The Doors and many more that I discovered later in life, long after they were released. 

I don't think rock music has passed that test yet, to be honest, of being "timeless", though arguably AFD has stood the test of time way better than most late-80s rock, or at least SCOM has.

Certainly they do well on streaming - SCOM has 2.5 billion plays on Spotify, and 4 more GNR songs are over a billion - however if you look at AFD the album, like a lot of classic albums, the less famous tracks go all the way down to a fairly measly 34 million streams... so is AFD timeless, or are a couple of tracks off it timeless?

Mozart stayed in the repertoire for centuries... with rock music it's a bit different because recordings are readily available and basically free… but when there is such a staggering quantity of new music... will people feel the need to look back?

When the boomer generation dies off... will people still listen to it in large numbers?  Apart from a few people on the fringe, how much do old blues masters catch the popular consciousness.. at least in years when vampire movies about the blues don't get nominated for all the Oscars... when was the last time any of us listened to big band recordings from the early 50s?

You'd be amazed how many younger people these days haven't heard of the Beatles - always surprises me.

It's an interesting topic, to be sure.

RocknRollDave

Danny1969 said:

The strange thing thing is they rejected Bob Clearmountain as a mix engineer because they though he would put too much of an eighties sheen on it but then ended up with a very eighties sounding record without any of the 3D depth that makes some better mixed eighties records still sound good today. 

There's a couple of songs I like, Night train is great,  as is Mr Brownstone. 

Like Oasis though, they got a lot of people playing guitar which is very much a good thing. 

See, compared to some music of the era (of thereabouts) like Warrant, Love/ Hate, Motley Crue etc, I think AFD sounds massively less 80’s, and significantly less dated as a result.

Nerine

RocknRollDave said:

Danny1969 said:

The strange thing thing is they rejected Bob Clearmountain as a mix engineer because they though he would put too much of an eighties sheen on it but then ended up with a very eighties sounding record without any of the 3D depth that makes some better mixed eighties records still sound good today. 

There's a couple of songs I like, Night train is great,  as is Mr Brownstone. 

Like Oasis though, they got a lot of people playing guitar which is very much a good thing. 

See, compared to some music of the era (of thereabouts) like Warrant, Love/ Hate, Motley Crue etc, I think AFD sounds massively less 80’s, and significantly less dated as a result.

Yep. Totally agree with this. There’s nothing wrong with the sound of AFD, really. 

Sporky

darthed1981 said:

Certainly they do well on streaming - SCOM has 2.5 billion plays on Spotify, and 4 more GNR songs are over a billion - however if you look at AFD the album, like a lot of classic albums, the less famous tracks go all the way down to a fairly measly 34 million streams... so is AFD timeless, or are a couple of tracks off it timeless?

Mozart stayed in the repertoire for centuries... 

To be fair some of Mozart's B-sides weren't that great.

StefB

CaseOfAce said:

And THE last guitar hero Slash single handedly resurrected the Les Paul and made it mainstream again.  We've got him to blame for the endless hide glue, 59 bursts, Gibson resissue yadda yadda.. discussions on forums such as this. Prior to this it was all single humbucker super strats with floyd roses in wacky colours due to Van Halen dominating guitar culture.

I think Gary Moore had quite a big hand in that too with the mystique surrounding Greeny in the wake of Still Got The Blues.  I'd have said Gary's cohort were probably more interested in hide glue and long tenons than Slash's.

Philly_Q

RocknRollDave said:

Danny1969 said:

The strange thing thing is they rejected Bob Clearmountain as a mix engineer because they though he would put too much of an eighties sheen on it but then ended up with a very eighties sounding record without any of the 3D depth that makes some better mixed eighties records still sound good today. 

There's a couple of songs I like, Night train is great,  as is Mr Brownstone. 

Like Oasis though, they got a lot of people playing guitar which is very much a good thing. 

See, compared to some music of the era (of thereabouts) like Warrant, Love/ Hate, Motley Crue etc, I think AFD sounds massively less 80’s, and significantly less dated as a result.

I don't really notice '80s production unless it's got electronic drum sounds or cheesy synths, so it sounds OK to me. 

But I never think of Guns N' Roses as part of the hair metal scene, although they had elements of that image for a while, in the early days.  GNR were more sort of sleaze rock than hair metal, they had the Les Pauls and Gretsches rather than Jacksons and Kramers, and they looked like Aerosmith or Hanoi Rocks.  They definitely had a throwback '70s element to both their sound and look.

Nowadays I think of GNR as a classic rock band, I guess, and in that sense they don't seem or sound dated, or stuck in 1987.  Whereas hair metal - which I still love, by the way - is very much of its time.

axisus

Philly_Q said:

RocknRollDave said:

Danny1969 said:

The strange thing thing is they rejected Bob Clearmountain as a mix engineer because they though he would put too much of an eighties sheen on it but then ended up with a very eighties sounding record without any of the 3D depth that makes some better mixed eighties records still sound good today. 

There's a couple of songs I like, Night train is great,  as is Mr Brownstone. 

Like Oasis though, they got a lot of people playing guitar which is very much a good thing. 

See, compared to some music of the era (of thereabouts) like Warrant, Love/ Hate, Motley Crue etc, I think AFD sounds massively less 80’s, and significantly less dated as a result.

I don't really notice '80s production unless it's got electronic drum sounds or cheesy synths, so it sounds OK to me. 

But I never think of Guns N' Roses as part of the hair metal scene, although they had elements of that image for a while, in the early days.  GNR were more sort of sleaze rock than hair metal, they had the Les Pauls and Gretsches rather than Jacksons and Kramers, and they looked like Aerosmith or Hanoi Rocks.  They definitely had a throwback '70s element to both their sound and look.

Nowadays I think of GNR as a classic rock band, I guess, and in that sense they don't seem or sound dated, or stuck in 1987.  Whereas hair metal - which I still love, by the way - is very much of its time.

100% agree with you there.

idiotwindow

I'm in my late-50s and can honestly say I have never listened to Appetite for Destruction though, oddly, I do know (and quite like) Duff McKagan's recent solo albums. I had a huge appetite for rock music growing up but switched to classical music in the second half of the '80s and Guns N' Roses (and many other bands of that time) passed me by.

If I remember, maybe I'll give the album a listen next time I'm driving somewhere and can't decide on what to listen to.

stickyfiddle

darthed1981 said:

 

Certainly they do well on streaming - SCOM has 2.5 billion plays on Spotify, and 4 more GNR songs are over a billion - however if you look at AFD the album, like a lot of classic albums, the less famous tracks go all the way down to a fairly measly 34 million streams... so is AFD timeless, or are a couple of tracks off it timeless?

AFD is timeless as a whole, but most people just listen to whatever the algorithm gives them, and the algorithm inherently gives them things that are already popular.  

Philly_Q

stickyfiddle said:

darthed1981 said:

Certainly they do well on streaming - SCOM has 2.5 billion plays on Spotify, and 4 more GNR songs are over a billion - however if you look at AFD the album, like a lot of classic albums, the less famous tracks go all the way down to a fairly measly 34 million streams... so is AFD timeless, or are a couple of tracks off it timeless?

AFD is timeless as a whole, but most people just listen to whatever the algorithm gives them, and the algorithm inherently gives them things that are already popular.  

I think that depends what else you listen to.  Yesterday the Spotify algorithm presented me with tracks by Orang-Utan and Ancient Grease, a couple of British bands who released their respective one-and-only albums, to no fanfare whatsoever, around 1970.

stickyfiddle

Philly_Q said:

stickyfiddle said:

darthed1981 said:

Certainly they do well on streaming - SCOM has 2.5 billion plays on Spotify, and 4 more GNR songs are over a billion - however if you look at AFD the album, like a lot of classic albums, the less famous tracks go all the way down to a fairly measly 34 million streams... so is AFD timeless, or are a couple of tracks off it timeless?

AFD is timeless as a whole, but most people just listen to whatever the algorithm gives them, and the algorithm inherently gives them things that are already popular.  

I think that depends what else you listen to.  Yesterday the Spotify algorithm presented me with tracks by Orang-Utan and Ancient Grease, a couple of British bands who released their respective one-and-only albums, to no fanfare whatsoever, around 1970.

Ok fine. To clarify somewhat, it gives you things are already popular with other people listening to the things that you already listen to. 

Point is every fucker* on the planet has a playlist with SCOM on it, but fewer have NightTrain and far fewer have Michelle

* yes I'm sure some of you don't but you know what I mean

Philly_Q

^^ I wasn't really arguing your basic point, I was just impressed by some of the cool stuff the algorithms come up with.

imalrightjack

Philly_Q said:

RocknRollDave said:

Danny1969 said:

The strange thing thing is they rejected Bob Clearmountain as a mix engineer because they though he would put too much of an eighties sheen on it but then ended up with a very eighties sounding record without any of the 3D depth that makes some better mixed eighties records still sound good today. 

There's a couple of songs I like, Night train is great,  as is Mr Brownstone. 

Like Oasis though, they got a lot of people playing guitar which is very much a good thing. 

See, compared to some music of the era (of thereabouts) like Warrant, Love/ Hate, Motley Crue etc, I think AFD sounds massively less 80’s, and significantly less dated as a result.

I don't really notice '80s production unless it's got electronic drum sounds or cheesy synths, so it sounds OK to me. 

But I never think of Guns N' Roses as part of the hair metal scene, although they had elements of that image for a while, in the early days.  GNR were more sort of sleaze rock than hair metal, they had the Les Pauls and Gretsches rather than Jacksons and Kramers, and they looked like Aerosmith or Hanoi Rocks.  They definitely had a throwback '70s element to both their sound and look.

Nowadays I think of GNR as a classic rock band, I guess, and in that sense they don't seem or sound dated, or stuck in 1987.  Whereas hair metal - which I still love, by the way - is very much of its time.

Same.

Has anybody listened to the guitar isolated?  I just created a version using Logic Stem Spitter that is just the guitars (which are helpfully already panned).  So many parts I'd never heard, some of Slash's work on It's So Easy having strong Metallica-leanings!

If anybody wants them, let me know.

imalrightjack

I’ve just tried live at Paris again. Nah. Matt Sorum is awful. The most plodding, leaden, repetitive drummer ever. No groove. Adler was brilliant. Listen to Rocket Queen at the Ritz and look at his totally into demeanour. 

The video takes me back to seeing them at Wembley with Izzy then Gateshead Arena. Both times, despite being under 18, I thought they were a bloated, boring mess with an endless number of extra band mates adding absolutely fuck all, in fact detracting from what made them great. 

Fair to say my Guns story was from love to hate quite quickly! Well, not hate - but a total feeling of being letdown.  

Rough in places but this is great. I wish the 1988 one existed in this quality. 

 https://archive.org/details/gnr-the-ritz-1991-1080-p-hd

RocknRollDave

imalrightjack said:

I’ve just tried live at Paris again. Nah. Matt Sorum is awful. The most plodding, leaden, repetitive drummer ever. No groove. Adler was brilliant. Listen to Rocket Queen at the Ritz and look at his totally into demeanour. 

The video takes me back to seeing them at Wembley with Izzy then Gateshead Arena. Both times, despite being under 18, I thought they were a bloated, boring mess with an endless number of extra band mates adding absolutely fuck all, in fact detracting from what made them great. 

Fair to say my Guns story was from love to hate quite quickly! Well, not hate - but a total feeling of being letdown.  

Rough in places but this is great. I wish the 1988 one existed in this quality. 

 https://archive.org/details/gnr-the-ritz-1991-1080-p-hd

Totally agree!
Hiring Sorum was the end of GnR for me.

lustycourtier

As Ive got older Ive liked Izzys playing more. His Solos hhve more swing to them, but he didnt have the hat so isnt as well respected. Its also interesting hearing the bits where slash is using his hotter Jackson. You can hear the Floyd Rose, if that makes sense.  

Redlester

rDanny1969 said:

The strange thing thing is they rejected Bob Clearmountain as a mix engineer because they though he would put too much of an eighties sheen on it but then ended up with a very eighties sounding record without any of the 3D depth that makes some better mixed eighties records still sound good today. 

There's a couple of songs I like, Night train is great,  as is Mr Brownstone. 

Like Oasis though, they got a lot of people playing guitar which is very much a good thing. 

No, I don't think Bob Clearmartin was ever in the frame for mixing Appetite. Thompson and Barbiero were always first choice for that I think. 

Bob Clearmartin had the first go at mixing the UYI albums, but these were passed over and Bill Price took over, and those mixes were released. 


A real range of view throughout this thread. All I can say is that for those of us that were around and into guitar based music at the time, Appetite was the one. 

Stuckfast

I don't think I have ever listened to AfD all the way through, weirdly. I can remember friends going to Donington when GnR appeared for the first time and reporting that there was a big buzz about them. I don't think they were ever all that edgy or extreme though. Thrash metal was already big at that point and GnR were very radio friendly compared to the likes of early Metallica.