Off Topic Messages

Fri Sep 02, 2005 8:18 am

Well if I really had a choice between the two to see with the Stones... I would pick ZZ Top! lol :lol: Frankly both of them are not my cup of tea anymore. Cool songs about death?? :roll: As for Motley just check out their live album Entertainment or Death... if you like that and think that is tight, you would problably like them in concert. Too me the Motley of 2005... looks and sounds like a nightmare... not in a good way. lol Like I stated it is basicly a right of passage for Metallica fans to call them sellouts all throughout their career... so that is nothing new.

JEFF d
Elvis fan

Fri Sep 02, 2005 1:08 pm

They will be playing in Brazil....but still I prefer to watch Elvis The Concert :cry: :cry:

Fri Sep 02, 2005 2:52 pm

JEFF d wrote:Well if I really had a choice between the two to see with the Stones... I would pick ZZ Top! lol :lol: Frankly both of them are not my cup of tea anymore. Cool songs about death?? :roll: As for Motley just check out their live album Entertainment or Death... if you like that and think that is tight, you would problably like them in concert. Too me the Motley of 2005... looks and sounds like a nightmare... not in a good way.

JEFF d
Elvis fan


oh well...

can't please 'em all!!! :wink:

Fri Sep 02, 2005 6:08 pm

Sorry mink! I know you like them! I'm not sure what it is that rubs me the wrong way about Motley, I just don't like Vince Niel and Nikki Sixx, Tommy of course is a hoot, and Mick is like something out of the Adams family! Hey they have some good songs, I just don't really like Vince's voice, and that 6th grade satanic BS also rubs me the wrong way. No biggie... I'm sure I would still enjoy seeing them open for the Stones! :wink:

JEFF d
Elvis fan

Fri Sep 02, 2005 6:51 pm

There was nothing satanic about Motley Crue. It was all just an image.

Hit Parader 1983-"This album has absolutely nothing to do with the devil. We're about as anti-Satan as you can get" he explained. "We're trying to say that the devil is any authority that tells you what you can do and what you can't do. It can be your parents, it can be your teachers, or it can be your boss. We're saying shout at that **** - don't let 'em get you down. That's our philosophy. It's got "absolutely nothing to do with the devil- believe me."

As far as Vince...I can't imagine Shout at The Devil without him...matter of fact, I can't imagine Crue either. He makes them on all levels. As far as Tommy, he is my least favorite because he was the most spoiled and had the most money. All the others had extremely hard lives. Tommy reminds me of so many rich friends that just craved attention because they weren't getting it at home.

Metallica...I never said they were sell out until they actually did with the Black Album. It just doesn't have the punch of the formers, and I remember it like it was yesterday being bitterly dissapointed. The worst part is that F.U.C.K. from Van Halen came around that time too..and it was a double wammy.

But do you know who started the debuts at #1. Motley Crue with Dr. Feelgood. They were the last gasp of heavy metal until the Illusion albums for me. I would take that album over Wherever I May Roam crap anyday.

Everytime I hear that Of Wolf and Man, I just want to get a gun. What the hell were they thinking? They went from "Dear mother dear father..what has this hell you have put me through"....to (in a prissy falsetto voice)..."I Hunt...therefore I am!!!"

Jeff I loved the band...absolutely loved them. The only thing I can say about that album is that it wasn't nearly as bad as the "LOAD" of crap that came after. It just kep getting worse.

Hell even Megadeth wimped out around that time with that Train of Consequence crap. It reminds me of the Video game crash of the 80's or the death of the 50's sound. Seattle didn't really kill heavy metal, they killed themselves by putting out wimpy garbage!

Listening back to the Crue's albums, they are the only ones that I completely missed. Them losing Vince is the only thing that hurt them. If he would have stayed, they would have kept on being a force. When I listen back Motley Crue, Generation Swine, and New Tatoo....I missed out, because I had counted them out. It really was a shame.

The sad part is that I had started listening to Nirvana and forgot about what real rock was. Who the hell want to listen to shoot yourself in the head music. The more I listened, the more I realized that I was getting away from Rock N Roll.

Sat Sep 03, 2005 2:39 pm

genesim wrote:There was nothing satanic about Motley Crue. It was all just an image.

Hit Parader 1983-"This album has absolutely nothing to do with the devil. We're about as anti-Satan as you can get" he explained. "We're trying to say that the devil is any authority that tells you what you can do and what you can't do. It can be your parents, it can be your teachers, or it can be your boss. We're saying shout at that **** - don't let 'em get you down. That's our philosophy. It's got "absolutely nothing to do with the devil- believe me."

As far as Vince...I can't imagine Shout at The Devil without him...matter of fact, I can't imagine Crue either. He makes them on all levels. As far as Tommy, he is my least favorite because he was the most spoiled and had the most money. All the others had extremely hard lives. Tommy reminds me of so many rich friends that just craved attention because they weren't getting it at home.

Metallica...I never said they were sell out until they actually did with the Black Album. It just doesn't have the punch of the formers, and I remember it like it was yesterday being bitterly dissapointed. The worst part is that F.U.C.K. from Van Halen came around that time too..and it was a double wammy.

But do you know who started the debuts at #1. Motley Crue with Dr. Feelgood. They were the last gasp of heavy metal until the Illusion albums for me. I would take that album over Wherever I May Roam crap anyday.

Everytime I hear that Of Wolf and Man, I just want to get a gun. What the hell were they thinking? They went from "Dear mother dear father..what has this hell you have put me through"....to (in a prissy falsetto voice)..."I Hunt...therefore I am!!!"

Jeff I loved the band...absolutely loved them. The only thing I can say about that album is that it wasn't nearly as bad as the "LOAD" of crap that came after. It just kep getting worse.

Hell even Megadeth wimped out around that time with that Train of Consequence crap. It reminds me of the Video game crash of the 80's or the death of the 50's sound. Seattle didn't really kill heavy metal, they killed themselves by putting out wimpy garbage!

Listening back to the Crue's albums, they are the only ones that I completely missed. Them losing Vince is the only thing that hurt them. If he would have stayed, they would have kept on being a force. When I listen back Motley Crue, Generation Swine, and New Tatoo....I missed out, because I had counted them out. It really was a shame.

The sad part is that I had started listening to Nirvana and forgot about what real rock was. Who the hell want to listen to shoot yourself in the head music. The more I listened, the more I realized that I was getting away from Rock N Roll.


oh well...

can't please 'em all!!! :wink: LOL

JEFF d
Elvis fan

Sat Sep 03, 2005 4:13 pm

I can be pleased, when good material is put out.

You ever heard the saying "dance with the girl that you brought"

Metallica smelled money and started toning down their sound to be more radio friendly. They lost their base, and never got it back after the short term pop fans liked them and then discarded them.

Van Halen and Megadeth did it as well. This crash not only made way for the dreary Seattle sound, but it also made way for the likes of Garth Brooks and Hip Hop.

The heavy hitters weren't delivering or breaking up and "metal" as we knew it died.

Bon Jovi, Poison, or Def Leppard were headed for death anyway, but a band like Motley Crue was there from the beginning of the 80's and was continuing to put out strong music. Though as Nikki Sixx said "sometimes you can overshoot your audience when being cutting edge". No Crue album sounded alike. They had a sound that could not be matched....and still can't.

The tragedy is that like many other bands, without the original members their careers will be stagnate. It just isn't the same when the chemistry is offset. The self title MOTLEY CRUE album with Carabi was not necessarily a misstep, but without Vince to bring it together, it left the band in a weird position. The stark change with Generation Swine was too big a step. This is a shame, because the album took a few years to grow on me and it would have been easier had Vince been there for the offset album. Even Vince's solo effort had promise, but also had the same problem. He belonged in Crue and Crue needed him in return.

Sun Sep 04, 2005 5:19 am

genesim wrote:
I can be pleased, when good material is put out.
You ever heard the saying "dance with the girl that you brought"


That could be said about any band that goes big... the Dr Feelgood album you site as going to #1, sounds nothing like early Motley. Just listen to their first CD and then listen to Dr. Feelgood. The same could be said about MC smelling money... so what? Alot of those songs on Dr. Feelgood are flat out pop songs. I didn't realize rock bands were not in the game to make money! :lol: :lol:

Metallica smelled money and started toning down their sound to be more radio friendly. They lost their base, and never got it back after the short term pop fans liked them and then discarded them.

Van Halen and Megadeth did it as well. This crash not only made way for the dreary Seattle sound, but it also made way for the likes of Garth Brooks and Hip Hop.


Again Metallica smelled money(as you put it), any release is always a crap shoot, they had a big number of years with that album, good for them. Who in rock and roll isn't in it for the money? Motley Crue??? :roll: :roll: Don't think so... everyone is.

The heavy hitters weren't delivering or breaking up and "metal" as we knew it died.

Bon Jovi, Poison, or Def Leppard were headed for death anyway, but a band like Motley Crue was there from the beginning of the 80's and was continuing to put out strong music. Though as Nikki Sixx said "sometimes you can overshoot your audience when being cutting edge". No Crue album sounded alike. They had a sound that could not be matched....and still can't.


Bon Jovi & Def Leppard are still touring and recording last I checked, so I don't know how they are dead, even Poison opened up for KISS' last North American tour. So those bands still have a fan base that can still keep them going. You say that how can a band like Metallica go from singing "cool songs about death", to doing a song like "Of Wolf and Man"(which is a good song IMO). How can Motley Crue go from doing songs like "Looks That Kill", to songs like "Without You" or "Glitter"... Oh yea it's personal growth for them! :lol: :lol: :lol:

The tragedy is that like many other bands, without the original members their careers will be stagnate. It just isn't the same when the chemistry is offset. The self title MOTLEY CRUE album with Carabi was not necessarily a misstep, but without Vince to bring it together, it left the band in a weird position. The stark change with Generation Swine was too big a step. This is a shame, because the album took a few years to grow on me and it would have been easier had Vince been there for the offset album. Even Vince's solo effort had promise, but also had the same problem. He belonged in Crue and Crue needed him in return.


Carabi, was a better vocalist than Neil, MC just couldn't made any money with him(because their fan base refused to have him)... soooo GUESS who they bring back.

JEFF d
Elvis fan

Thu Sep 08, 2005 6:47 am

Corabi, a better vocalist than Neil?

na, definetely disagree with that one Jeff!!!

now, I give John and his talent his due, but damn, Vince has definetely got more of a distinctive style and one that he can claim his own.

I think in certain songs he is jus brilliant as a vocalist. you can hear the progression growing as the Crue moved thru the 80's, and by the time the band got to Dr. Feelgood, (great album by the way), there was jus no turnin' back...

There could never be a Motley Crue without Vince Neil because he had such a strong presence, not just image wise, but the whole damn sound!!!

I will admit, jus like many other singers, Vince has definetely had some off nights and not all his vocals were right on, but IMHO, he got the job done 95% of the time and that's ok by me.

Thu Sep 08, 2005 7:04 am

Back on topic for a second...the new Stones album is really quite good.

Thu Sep 08, 2005 7:12 am

I was gonna pick it up yesterday, but put it back for sum reason.

I jus didn't feel to inclined about getting in line and making the effort... :?

maybe this weekend I'll reconsider and make the purchase...

thanks John...

Thu Sep 08, 2005 7:36 am

Jeff I dont agree at all. There is such a thing as natural progression versus all complete sell out.

Dr. Feelgood in many respects was actually harder edged. Case in point..Kickstart My Heart as well as the title track.

Metallica on the other hand had toned down their style and resorted to nothing that head banged. The tempo changed, at it was obvious. Jason Newstead is nothing compared to Cliff.

Though for the record there is ONE song that captured the old Metallica style on the Black album..and that was My Friend Of Misery. The rest was p*ssy sell out crap that was obviously made for the masses. Nothing wrong with ballads, but geez give SOMETHING for the rockers to chew on.

As far as Motley, the original unit could not be bettered.

Def Leppard no longer has their original guitarist Steve Clarke and that obviously hurt their sound. Same goes for Poison and the ongoing fights with C.C. who is obviously the bands backbone..though I would never put either band in the class of Motley. They were the true original metal band of the 80's and all the way to now, they didn't sell out. Forward progression buddy.

What exactly is the "Motley" sound anyway? EVERY album has a distinctive sound. Theatre of Pain sounds nothing like Shout..and so on. Dr. Feelgood is arguebly their finest album and the highest seller to back it up.

Sorry to get off topic though. Just one of my favorites and arguebly the best rock band of the 80's that originated there. Just my opinion.

Thu Sep 08, 2005 11:01 am

genesim wrote:
Jeff I dont agree at all. There is such a thing as natural progression versus all complete sell out.


That's is just your opinion. Fact is that both of these bands toned down their sound to gain a wider audience. But for you is a "progression" for Motley Crue, while its a total sellout for Metallica... PLEASE!

Dr. Feelgood in many respects was actually harder edged. Case in point..Kickstart My Heart as well as the title track.


Harder edged than what? Their earlier albums? What I think is so ironic is that you site over and over how Motley are the kings of 80s metal because this particular album went to #1... yet you grip about Metallica going more mainstream(in your eyes)? Also look at who produced both of these CDs.

Metallica on the other hand had toned down their style and resorted to nothing that head banged. The tempo changed, at it was obvious. Jason Newstead is nothing compared to Cliff.


Totally disagree, if you can accept and toned down in sound Motley Crue... why is it such a horror when Metallica, changes around their sound? I would think speed metal can only have so many variations at best! lol At least they didn't resort to flat out pop songs like "Don't Go Away Mad, Just Go Away" or "Without You" OR "Home Sweet Home".

Though for the record there is ONE song that captured the old Metallica style on the Black album..and that was My Friend Of Misery. The rest was p*ssy sell out crap that was obviously made for the masses. Nothing wrong with ballads, but geez give SOMETHING for the rockers to chew on.


Try sinking your teeth into "Holier Than Thou" then, I'm not Metallica apologist... I'm not even a huge fan of theirs and like I said Motley made a great 80s metal album with "Shout"... but to say Motley are some kind of metal gods or some such foolishness because they had a first hard rock #1... with an album that is pretty much a Bob Rock produced sell out, is sorta silly... but keep telling yourself that like a mantra, your good at that.

As far as Motley, the original unit could not be bettered.

Def Leppard no longer has their original guitarist Steve Clarke and that obviously hurt their sound. Same goes for Poison and the ongoing fights with C.C. who is obviously the bands backbone..though I would never put either band in the class of Motley. They were the true original metal band of the 80's and all the way to now, they didn't sell out. Forward progression buddy.


These are obviously your opinions... but to claim these bands "dead" is just plain false. They have been able to sustain careers both in the studio on on the road... despite the changes that have gone on in there respective groups. Unlike Motley Crue who could not make it fly with out Vince, so they had to bring him back even though they hate him. To actually suggest that Motley Crue is a progressive band... is silly at best. :lol: "First Band On The Moon", "Hell On High Heels", "Punched In The Teeth By Love"... Progressive??? :lol: :lol: COME ON! "Unforgiven II" is a masterpiece next to this stuff! LOL

What exactly is the "Motley" sound anyway? EVERY album has a distinctive sound. Theatre of Pain sounds nothing like Shout..and so on. Dr. Feelgood is arguebly their finest album and the highest seller to back it up.


Yes... the sound changed dramaticly with each album because the were gettin more and more comercial with each album... and each producer they chose. Bob Rock being the culmination of their distictive sound. :lol: Their best album indeed. :roll:

Sorry to get off topic though. Just one of my favorites and arguebly the best rock band of the 80's that originated there. Just my opinion.


I'm glad you like them, hey that's great! I even like some of their stuff... but to just dismiss Metallica for some of the same sins that Motley Crue did(first as you like to state so often) is to just have blinders on.

Take what you want from who you want... and leave the rest behind!

I know its only Rock and Roll but I like it!

JEFF d
Elvis fan

Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:38 pm

Funny how Bob Rock produced several wimp albums after the fact. There were others before Motley, but it wasn't till after they hit that the trend happened.

Before you howl, I do not characterize Bon Jovi as a "metal" band.

I repeat, what was so toned down about Motley? Because they made a ballad? You site Home Sweet Home as "selling out" yet, besides the fact of it being the first big time succesful ballad which set the standard for all others aftewards, you would have to forget "On With The Show" on their very first album.

It is obvious that Metallica lost their edge, and like so many, they smelled the money and simply kept milking it and taking everything they worked for away. In other words the quick route. Motley Crue was far from going that way, and for proof positive look at Primal Scream and Anarchy in the U.K.(STELLAR COVER by the way from a true American hard edged band) that came after Dr. Feelgood. Their problems were personality conflicts not from smelling too much money...been there done that during Theatre Of Pain. Metallica had never seen such fame...most people didn't even know who the they were till "One". 2 million in sales does not mean much when compared with Motley having success as early as Shout and having a double platinum album after their first tour. Metallica took much longer. Justice was the last gasp of air they had as any real artists. Though they have sky rocketed since, that doesn't mean their quality went anywhere. I'll never understand to this day how that piece of crap black album did so well.

I also want to note that you make fun of the New Tatoo album, but you do ignore the fact that Tommy Lee was not present, and that is why it remains their worst selling album to this day. Though I still like it, Motley it is not. Same goes for the Motley Crue self titled album. But again, YES absolutely better then anything from the Black album onward from Metallica the sell outs.

But yes, Jeff I do agree we all have opinions. I'll take Motley over Metallica anyday, even at Metallica's very best. I had set the band down for a while but when I bought Song to Crash your Car to, even my least favorite album Theatre Of Pain had resonance. I didn't regret the purchase and promptly got the second box set. So much material I had missed along the way.

Thu Sep 08, 2005 7:42 pm

I'm curious if you have even actually ever actually listened to "Load", "ReLoad", or "St. Anger" CDs? Or just heard the singles off the respective CDs on TV, or snippets on the internet.

JEFF d
Elvis fan

Thu Sep 08, 2005 8:10 pm

Load is exaclty what I said before...a complete Load of "bloody semen" sh*t. There is nothing redeeming about the album the crap King Nothing down to the Until It Sleeps single make me wonder why I even liked the band to begin with.

Hero of the Day despite having a hot girl in the video makes me think that Metallica's next venture will be them doing Disco classics or a Christmas album. Though I don't care about isolated behavior(as you are sure to point out with Kiss which is hardly the same because they were "sell outs" from the word go), I at the same time have to have something to sink my teeth into. There is a difference between growing at a normal rate and letting the money get to you.

Believe me I had a roomate (when I went back to school)that went on and on about this album and I listened to it from beginning to end on several car rides as well as blasting it around the dorm. I gave it a full chance until I finally couldn't take it no more.

ReLoad was even worse especially with respects to that Unforgiven II crap. But be that as it may, I did secretly borrow this cd because I have a curiosity for sequals. There just wasn't anything redeaming about that album either...if that is what you want to call it. I seem to remember a song called Bad Seed, but most of it is a blur.

As for St. Anger....no interest. I have heard enough to show me that Metallica had lost in all fronts. Even the sh*t b-Sides that came from the Garage Days album were horrible.

Like I said, without the original band it is like AC/DC without Bon or Van Halen without Dave. The chemistry is gone and there is nothing left to look forward to. The sound died of Metallica with Cliff Burton or Dave Mustaine...take your pick.

The sh*t they are producing now is nothing compared to Ride or Master.

As for Motley, they have produced some very good songs and when they are riding on 4 wheels they are very good indeed. I don't care what the sales were, Generation Swine was a very good album. It is one of my favorites and was unfortunately over the listeners heads after the pitstop with Carobi. Still I enjoy all the albums, even if not ranked with their best.

Thu Sep 08, 2005 8:22 pm

From all music guide.com-"Metallica(black album) is a good, but not quite great, album, one whose best moments deservedly captured the heavy metal crown, but whose approach also foreshadowed a creative decline. "

No truer words were spoken. When I first heard the album all I could think was.....man this is kind of boring! I was so dissapointed after running out and blindly buying it. Kill Em All it was not....it was more like Cotton candy...sweet at first, but far from a filling meal.

Same thing happened to AC/DC and Van Halen and possibly Black Sabbath.

You have the "edge" of the band taken away from either conflict or death. Then you have one successful album afterwards, then the rest of the career is downhill to never recover. This is an undeniable pattern. Far too many times the credit goes to the re-incarnation as opposed to what got them there to begin with. Most of the buyers of the new found success are passive fans that will abandon them at the first signs of the new fad.

Though to me, Van Halen's 2 songs with Dave were better then anything that was put out for the last 20 years from the Hagar/Charone days.

Thu Sep 08, 2005 11:33 pm

genesim wrote:
From all music guide.com-"Metallica(black album) is a good, but not quite great, album, one whose best moments deservedly captured the heavy metal crown, but whose approach also foreshadowed a creative decline. "


Could you give me the complete link to that all music guide.com... I would like to read what they have to say about Dr. Feelgood. :wink: I don't really see how this review you posted is scathing.

Though to me, Van Halen's 2 songs with Dave were better then anything that was put out for the last 20 years from the Hagar/Charone days.


That I will agree with you on, but I'm not really sure why you have put Van Halen into the mix here. :?

JEFF d
Elvis fan

Fri Sep 09, 2005 1:47 am

I didn't say the review was bad, but indicative of what was to come. I myself hate the black album...not from the standpoint of it being a horrible album.....but it being a horrible METALLICA album. I expected more from such a promising band.

As far as bringing Van Halen into the mix, I outlined the reason why. I sited examples of how the heart of a band is ripped out by either death of fighting. It was a great example to illustrate the problems that Metallica had as well. Cliff was heavily involved with alot of Justice so I still felt the "presence"...and it shows. Hell the album is great just for the contribution on To Live Is to Die. But as I said, just like the other bands...the first album after was the beginning of the decline. Damn dude do you read? :lol:

The link is allmusic.com. Though I will save you the trouble:

Dr. Feelgood review 4.5 stars out of 5:

Mötley Crüe's albums were a lot like episodes of Married With Children in the sense that they may not be great works of art but can be darn entertaining. With Bob Rock serving as producer, the L.A. headbangers savor the joys of trashy, unapologetically decadent fun on Dr. Feelgood — an album that makes no pretense at being anything else. While nothing here is quite as commanding as "Shout at the Devil," "Wild Side," or "Live Wire," such hook-oriented MTV smashes as "Kickstart My Heart," the amusing "Don't Go Away Mad (Just Go Away)," and the title song are infectious and hard to resist, and helped make this the best-selling Mötley Crüe album ever, as well as providing their first Top Ten singles. Unfortunately, the album would be lead singer Vince Neil's last album with the band. Neil's departure — and pop-metal's decline in popularity in the mid-'90s — proved to be severe blows to Mötley Crüe. [In 1999, the Crüe remastered and reissued Dr. Feelgood on their own Motley/Beyond label with bonus tracks.]

*****

Perhaps Jeff the departure of Motley was the other way around and they were the severe blow. It certaintly looks like it when you consider where heavy metal went after them!! To me the album was the last of real rock album of the decade and the last gasp from the supposed "hair bands". Good show indeed.

Too bad they don't mention the songs Time For Change and Same Old Situation.

I have fond memories going to Texas being bored out of my mind...then bam HERE IS A DEBUT OF MOTLEYS FIRST SINGLE DR. FEELGOOD.

Buddy this is pre-NWA's...Dopeman song. Listening to the demo, it is easy to see where the song could have went.

Fri Sep 09, 2005 2:39 am

Genesim... just I suspected that allmusic.com also gave the so called "Black" album a 4.5 out of 5

I guess my whole point in all of this is that you cherish Motley Crue as some sort of inovaters, when truth is they have sold out just as much as anyone... nothing wrong with that! You even said that KISS were a sell out band from the get go... you'll get no arguement there either. I guess I just don't get why it's so horrible that Metallica "sold out" and sold millions of CDs in the 90s. Especially when that is what you use as a bar as to how good or relevant a band is... i.e. Motley Crue having the first hard rock #1 CD, that seems to impress you so much. Metallica at least never lowered themselves to wearing pink leotards and garter belts. :lol: :lol:

Oh well... live and let rock!

JEFF d
Elvis fan

Fri Sep 09, 2005 3:41 am

Dude that stuff was part of the show. We all wanted to wear that sh*t at the time....I still do. :lol: Just kidding..no really.

Metallica in the 90's gave way to the grunge sh*t that destroyed everything that was rock.

Give me the "pink" any day over that later 90's Metallica garbage.

As far as Crue going #1 being the reason...no, it was good songs.

Like I said, all this is my opinion. Just trying to make a basis for it. There were alot of Metallica fans that came later, so there are obviously 10 mill + that disagree with me.

Though I take the upbeat kick ass partying music over the depressing crap that I think every facet of the 90's stood for.

Hell even Motley's darkest album Shout had "Knock Em Dead Kid".

Damn all this talk, I'm gonna rock to some more Motley. They were innovators though.."sell out" or not. I feel they were the most important rock band of the 80's and all hair bands including Metallica should bow down to the Crue!

F*ck I miss good rock.

Fri Sep 09, 2005 6:38 am

http://www.riaa.com

Metallica 57 million units sold(holy sh*t!)
Van Halen 56.5 million units
Motley Crue 22.5 million units
KISS 19 million

I guess "selling out" really worked out for them! I honestly figured their numbers would be more neck and neck with Motley. None of these numbers are anything to sneeze at, I couldn't believe they had actually sold even more than Van Halen! lol

57 million albums sold... ALL must bow to the mighty METALLICA!! lol :lol: :lol:

JEFF d
Elvis fan

Fri Sep 09, 2005 7:17 am

Jeff jeff...do you understand what the sound scan era is? That is why Dr. Feelgood debuted at #1.

Take a look at their stats. Isn't it funny how Metallica went from one million in sales to 10 million in a couple of years time.

R.I.A.A. is a bunch of bullsh*t and always has been.

If you are so naive as to think KISS is stuck at 19 million you are gravely mistaken. Motley hasn't been certified platinum in almost 10 years! BULLSH*T

Take a look at the date of cirtifications and see where Van Halen and Metallica garnered most of their sales.

You get certified for what you pay for.

Oh wait, you must be one of those that believes Garth had outsold Elvis Presley as well.

But hey, if it is about sales...ask the average person who ANYONE in Metallica is as compared to Motley Or KISS. Lets go further in asking who has influenced more people...etc.

Fri Sep 09, 2005 7:37 am

JEFF d wrote:www.riaa.com

Metallica 57 million units sold(holy sh*t!)
Van Halen 56.5 million units
Motley Crue 22.5 million units
KISS 19 million

I guess "selling out" really worked out for them! I honestly figured their numbers would be more neck and neck with Motley. None of these numbers are anything to sneeze at, I couldn't believe they had actually sold even more than Van Halen! lol

57 million albums sold... ALL must bow to the mighty METALLICA!! lol :lol: :lol:


seriously, I think those stats are way outdated Jeff!!!

I have calculated Motley's units sales from other CRUE fan sites and their album totals are up in the 45 Million range...

Fri Sep 09, 2005 7:46 am

Yeah and KISS had estimates in the 75 million range.

The facts are that until soundscan you just couldn't trust sales in the ma and pa store age.

I often wondered how albums stalled at a million in the 70's and 80's when I knew damn well that people were still buying the product.