lemex
All Messed Up
Posts: 110
|
Post by lemex on Aug 12, 2012 11:59:53 GMT 2
I listened to Lulu, really didn't like it. But to me, you can't be a 'great band' when you haven't made an objectively good album in 20 years and not mostly on tour (think Bobby Dylan).
As much as I personally don't like Manson, yeah, they deserve an honorable mention at least.
|
|
|
|
Post by trashcanman on Aug 12, 2012 20:49:10 GMT 2
Manson is really more of a solo artist seeing that only the drummer has stuck around, I think. Also, dude has what two, three "good" albums tops? Manson has "flash in the pan" written all over him.
You can definitely be a great band based on your career output rather than just current events (Stones/Eagles). Metallica made 5 of the biggest and most respected American rock albums ever and inspired an entire genre that persists in it's popularity even today and even after they took an artistic nosedive, they've remained massive sellers. Hell, even their covers albums are hits. Are there really more than a few bands who can say that?
|
|
lemex
All Messed Up
Posts: 110
|
Post by lemex on Aug 12, 2012 21:48:39 GMT 2
I see your point but I was thinking in terms of cultural impact more than anything else. I honestly think Manson as a musician sucks hard. All of his good songs are either covers or written by Trent Reznor. All of his purely Manson stuff sucks.
|
|
|
|
Post by trashcanman on Aug 13, 2012 20:10:11 GMT 2
Yeah, I was never a fan aside from his Sweet Dreams cover. To be one of the "best" bands in American history, I'd expect much more than just offending a bunch of baby boomers by exaggerating what Alice Cooper had been doing for three decades already and ripping off Ministry.
|
|
