"History of Rock and Roll"?! What happened to "rhythm and blues"? This has definitely run off road. Have you tried Google Maps? If you're not in an off-road vehicle, I'm pretty sure you're stuck by now.
@@jjohnston7837 it’s amazing how many people are kind of missing the point on some of these tracks. You may not like the songs chosen, but that doesn’t stop it from having been one of the biggest hard rock tracks of the time. This series isn’t about what any of the best songs of that decade were, but more roughly a transition between the beginnings and ends of each decade from even if they’re not really the best representations of those scenes. There’s a difference between preference and what was.
Another one where I'll be interested to see Carl's take - more than a few times he's used songs I would not have thought of, yet in the discussion, his choice makes sense. I'm really enjoying this journey, both as someone who grew up with most of this music and in watching your first-time reactions from a very different perspective - I was exposed more to classical in my earlier years than you were to rock, and while I am a musician, I am almost entirely self-taught, with some definite gaps in my knowledge of theory that you (along with several other RUclipsrs) have helped fill! My thanks and encouragement - you are producing some of my favorite music-related content!
I'm 53, and Crue went downhill after Theater of Pain, I'd have never started her out on the noise which is Dr. Feelgood, they were rubbish by that time in their careers. She would probably like Homesweet Home off of Theater of Pain, or perhaps In the Beginning/Shout at the Devil even, but past TOP the band was just noise in my opinion.
What you are missing is Punk Rock of the late 70s. Many of the music venues stopped booking live punk rock bands because of the violence. With live music switching to pop and glam rock.
Not sure how you may ask your listeners, not to write anything here but questions, because from a Rock & Roll fan's perspective, it is so incredibly wonderful to listen and watch you go through all these changes while listening to this "new" music (your perspective). I feel that this is what most commenters are feeling - THE OVERWHELMING WONDERFULLY DELIGHTFUL WAY you respond to "our" music ("our" means all the Rock-Heads like me out here in the Either with our own multiverse of perspectives). Just, . . . Absolutely, . . . Delightful!
You missed the point entirely. You can comment all you want here. It's just in replying to her comment that she just wants Questions Only so that she can then address them later in a separate video.
The section you thought was the beginning of the solo is a refrain of the introduction, with a bit of guitar noise over the top. Then the singer’s shout of “Guitar!” marks the beginning of the actual solo.
If I wanted someone to get a bad perception of rock music, I would have chosen this and a few others that were presented earlier. There was so much incredible music to present, these just seem like the most simple mainstream perceptions of rock. Its far more deep and I think we should instead look at what was truly innovative and artistic. Its more like a pop culture TV rock show perception...
100% agree ! For the 80's there were better examples like Talking Heads, Kate Bush, Tears for Fears, The Cars, Depeche Mode, Peter Gabriel, even early Metallica.... but The Go-Go's and Mötley Crüe ????😲 for me it is a real enigma!!!
@@a.k.1740 and if you look at the 70s, " the knack"? What, a one hit wonder?. 70's had Kansas, Jethro Tull, King Crimson, Magma, Yes, Rush, Frank Zappa, Mahavishnu Orchestra, Soft Machine, Frank Marino, P Funk, Ohio Players, Tower of Power, ZZ Top, Brand X, early Bruce Springsteen, Billy Joel. Elton John, Grand Funk Railroad, The Who, Led Zeppelin, Allan Holdsworth, Maceo Parker, Van Halen, Tom Waits, and on and on. I could go on for hours...
@@antidote7I agree once again! Lynyrd Skynyrd and The Knack are far from being bad bands but absolutely not representative of the 70s on a planetary scale. This selection is a complete mystery.
@@a.k.1740 I do think Skynard is at least a far better pick than the Knack, who was a one hit wonder. But even with Skynard, southern rock had hoards of great acts too, Allman Brothers likely the biggest, then there was Marshall Tucker, The Outlaws, Molly Hatchet etc...
@@antidote7 I still have the impression that Southern Rock was not something very popular in Europe and the United Kingdom. It remained a specific musical style in the United States, not really elsewhere.
The voice taking more of a backseat is probably a bi-product of the he guitar virtuoso culture that sprung up among these sub-genres of rock. “The riff” becomes a focal point, and the guitar solo could even get its own announcement from the vocalist. The guitarists in many of these bands are often seen as a sort of idol of their own alongside the frontman for the band.
I don't remember the thumping bass from this song. Not nearly as much as this sounded. I think Amy's EQ settings are set for some other genera of music. The vocals are much louder with different EQ setting.
The Crüe, eh? I'll confess, like many others, I don't really understand some of the selections. That said, my opinion is worth just enough to get me in my own trouble! I'm happy you're a good sport, and at least interested and curious. For my part, I am enjoying your reactions. I don't think there's a "wrong" way, and I'm happy to watch you explore this YOUR way. :) There are many many classically trained rock musicians. Some of them are absolutely god-like virtuosos... Many of THOSE have just as much fun on a crunchy groove as they do blasting through Paganini runs with an overdrive pedal. Keep at it! "one of us... one of us....." :) *Congrats on the little one, too!
Carl is letting her down with his picks. I wouldn't even ask her to listen to anything by Crue past Theater of Pain, because everything past TOP was rubbish then, and still rubbish now.
This was the title track off their return album. The singer had gone through years of rehab after killing a friend in a drunk driving accident. He thought writing an album with an anti-substance abuse message would be the way to get back in everyone's good graces. The garbled sounding voice at the end of the guitar solo is an affect called the Heil Talk-box, where the guitar tone is piped through a surgical hose and aimed into the mouth of the guitarist, who would further shape the sound by mouthing the sounds and words they want the guitar to speak.
"dr. feelgood" was the nickname of a doctor who dispensed his own amphetamine concoction to hollywood actors and washington dc politicians in the 1950's and 1960's. many of the movies from that era feature actors who were under the influence of his special "treatments," which enabled them to be more lively when in front of the camera. jfk and marilyn monroe were among his customers.
Hi Amy, My main question is, technical aspects aside, are you finding emotional content within these songs? If so, what is it? And can you break down how the artists’ choices convey it? I realize that might be unrealistic. First listens may be mostly deer-in-headlights moments. I’d be glad to know what you think of all of these pieces after you have had some time to listen repeatedly and absorb. In a similar vein, I would really like to see you choose a piece of classical music (or any music) that really makes you personally feel something, and then dissect it enough to show us how the musician creates that emotion. What choices were made that successfully created the feeling? Which choices are critical and which don’t matter so much? On the flipside, where you are stuck trying to interpret a first impression, I can imagine it is next to impossible to feel any feelings while simultaneously identifying why. Getting a music theory dissection of how emotional effects are produced sonically would be awesome. Here’s an example (and I’m curious what you think of this). I don’t know the music theory, but feeling-wise, to me, Dr. Feelgood really does feel like the “glam” (or “glamour”) rock in that it conveys that sense of striking poses and grabbing the spotlight. The different instruments are like different supermodels outrageously grabbing the spotlight for a time and then passing it on to another. It starts with that very heavy sound, which runs long enough that the listener has gotten somewhat acclimated by the time the next instrument arrives to enter the spotlight, which is then seized by the main riff - in which each iteration ends with those inescapable two notes that just sound like somebody mugging for a camera. When the lyrics start, the song itself is about someone’s identity - another glamour thing - with the lyrical content following a status-seeking “big shot.” And the powerful-for-nefarious-reasons nature of that identity (drug dealer) is reinforced by the powerful, dark sound. Also, that lyrical content is delivered in pulses emphasizing a litany of status symbols at the end of most lines. Blah blah blah hood, blah blah blah Hollywood, blah blah blah primered flames, blah blah blah powdered goods, blah blah blah in the game, blah blah blah doing okay, blah blah blah Mexican mob, blah blah blah candycaine. The pattern feels like, “Now look at THIS! Now look at THIS! Now look at THIS!” Very flash. And then when the chorus hits, the emphasis of the music and the lyrics line up and stick the identity chants (“Dr. Feelgood” and “all right”) at that flashy end of the riff. So the song feels like several layers of “reposition…PHOTO…reposition…PHOTO…” The fact that the band itself was its own embodiment of that flash just adds another layer. Having a music theory breakdown of how to construct such effects would be great. Again, though, you might have to do it with pieces you know well, because identifying emotional content in alien songs on first listen is a tall order. Has anything you’ve listened to so far made it into a personal playlist that you listen to recreationally? Thanks for all your thought, Don
By the time the album "Dr. Feelgood" came out in 1989 Glam Metal was obsolete, so I don't understand why Motley Crue was chosen. The right choice should have been "Welcome To The Jungle" by Guns N Roses off their debut album "Appetite For Destruction" (1987), which essentially killed Glam Metal causing metal to get serious.
Dr. Feelgood was a #1 album in 1989 and Gun's n' Roses started out glam themselves in 87' if anything Glam in 89' was the peak, nany, many albums going multiplatinum and award shows just filled with Hard Rock Performances. It was 91' when Mtv got a new President and changed programming and you had the Grunge faze of 91-94.
@@tonyponchopeters GNR weren't glam rock. They never had their hair blown out to the moon and wearing makeup to resemble women. Just having long hair doesn't equal glam. By that standard Metallica was glam. By 1989 Motley Crue changed their look dropping their S&M inspired outfits and looking feminine. From 1987-92 should be declared the Post-Glam Metal Era.
@@vonVile Really, Google is your friend. Look up the 1987 Gun's pics. Gun's released their Appetite for Destruction "Masterpiece" in 1987 and the first single 'It's so Easy' did nothing, Welcome to the Junglze had huge "Buzz" but Mtv only played it after midnight. It wasn't until Late 1988 that the 'Sweet Child of Mind' video hit and blew up the album. I lived all of the 80's as a teen and can tell you what the real popular culture was at the time. I really hope you're NOT telling people your 'Wikipedia's' truth rather then people that lived it.
@@tonyponchopeters "It's So Easy" wasn't released in the US as a single, only in the UK. Their first US single was WTTJ. You need to go rewatch the video to understand it's plot. It's about Axl coming to LA to become a rockstar. It shows him being brainwashed into the corporate image of being a glam metal band, which isn't true to himself and in the end he rejects it.
"so I don't understand why Motley Crue was chosen." The guys from Mötley Crüe are considered starting the genre, so it certainly makes more sense to choose it. "GNR weren't glam rock" Gun's n' Roses were, were generally considered and were marketed as Glam "Metal" band, and had the same audience base and hanged out with same people as the other Glam "Metal" bands.
The guitarist Mick Mars was pretty much the only person with any talent in this band, frankly. He was in blues bands in the early 70's including Whitehorse, but never hit it big. Without him, Crue would never have made it in the world of glam rock. Back when they released their first album, we called them 'posers' where I grew up.
In reality, the one member of this band that’s actually decent technically would be the drummer Tommy Lee… Mick Mars is technically quite mediocre, however his virtues are mostly his fabulous tone, and ability to come up with fantastic and memorable hooks for riffs. The bassist Sixx was more like the visionary founder of the band and not necessarily above musical mediocrity either, and the singer Vince Neil was definitely the personality of the band back in the day.
@@TheRetroManRandySavage Nikki Sixx self professed that he'd never touched a bass before; in fact, he tried to steal one from a music store and accidentally grabbed a 6 string Les Paul to bring to practice. They purposefully mixed the bass very light in most of their songs because he didn't know what he was doing.
Great reaction Amy! I never cared for this song, but at the same time didn't listen to it enough to find out why. Thank you for putting in the work for me. 😄
Motley Crue might be a decent generalized representation of late 80s"hair metal" (the phrase was adopted years after the fact as a term of derision), but they are a terrible band. They could barely play their instruments and the singer is torture to listen to. The band attracted the most lunk-headed of fans. Which makes sense as they were complete bone heads themselves. It's unfortunate because they were such a huge band, but the production is doing most of the work here. The lyrics are profoundly insipid. Though both bands had the same kind of image and in-your-face attack, there is a world of difference between Motley Crue and a band like Van Halen, who were amazing musicians, and though David Lee Roth was not much of a singer, his lyrics had incredible wit and subtle sympathy for the characters in the songs. Motley Crue, by comparison, are pure room temperature IQ level stuff.
I'm thinking he may have picked this as a demonstration of hair metal and the effects MTV and other things were having on making the music more banal (I hope). If this song gets introduced in the 70s with just radio and no video, it goes absolutely nowhere.
As far as I’m concerned this fast forward speed version of the History of Rock is pretty much baffling; for the most part I don’t get the point at all.
@@flyingintheface6139 Oh I’m aware, but still I don’t get the point of most of the selections, or their extreme scarcity, if the intention is to provide Amy with a first overview of the history of Rock throughout the decades. That’s just me right now, maybe Karl has a unique interesting approach that will be revealed in due time ;)
Motley Crüe, like most bands from that era, are showmen, with a ring leader directing the band, and the lead guitarist as the bipolar opposite creating the tension that made the music explode. Think about others, like Steve Tyler and Joe Perry from Aerosmith, David Lee Roth and Eddie from Van Halen, Axl Rose and Slash from Guns ‘n’ Roses. It was out there, loud and proud. I love the grunge period that followed as well, but it was a lot more introspective and introverted, like music during the late 80’s was a big star that went supernova, then became the black hole which was Grunge.
I think what Karl is doing, is taking her on a quick Journey of the evolution and all the genres that branched out in such a short time. The interesting thing that Amy will find out is that all the different styles that she heard did not just evolve into a newer sound, all of those sounds and genres still exists between the beginning and today. Rock is still being created using each and every style she has heard from every genre every branch of that tree is all still in use. So it evolved yes, but every recipe and every ingredient is still used in that cookbook of rock and roll everyday.
After checking this reaction and listening to her talking about how the rock music was changing in the late 80’s. At that time I was rocking this song, it was all over the top. Everyone was so happy with the heavy sound, including me. And nobody knew that, looks like this was a beginning of making a burial 🪦 to the. guitar solos in the Rock 🎸 history. All of us were focused in those super heavy sounds that the Glam metal was producing and nobody saw ( because we were too young and hungry for technologies) the dead of the vinyl records, the last exhale of the good music (1990). Everybody was focused in the new decade, the CD’s 💿 revolution and the 2000’s THE FUTURE There were a few examples of groups that survived because they were under the radar, they kept underground and battling fiercely against all odds. Today…….. you don’t have to think about solos WHAT’S THAT ‼️‼️‼️ You don’t need that sh…….. The new generation has borne with square ears 👂, so …….. you don’t need to think in good music equipments with Dolby Lab with two or three channels, all the music for only one speaker. Bravo MUSIC INDUSTRY
I honestly feel Too Fast For Love has not aged well. There are a few good songs on there but, there’s a lot of mediocre tracks. I find myself skipping through it these days before losing all interest. I loved that album when I was a kid. Shout At The Devil is far far better and is a bona fide classic. I’m still not tired of that album nearly 40 years later. If I was going to add a second best album it would be Dr. Feelgood, though even that album, like literally every other Motley Crue album is heavy on half baked phoned in mediocrities. I consider myself a Crue fan, have seen them live several times and own their entire discography but, I’m always amazed they got as big as they did when there were more deserving bands that should have got more commercial attention, like Iron Maiden.
One of my favorite things that differentiates rock from other genres is the balance of voice and instrumentation. Many other pop genres, the music is crafted around the vocal to showcase the voice. Of course it needs to sound good, and expand on the tone and intention of the lyrics and expression, but songs tend to be very voice-centric. With rock, it tends to be more about the band as a whole using their different mediums in tandem, everyone getting their little feature supported by the others, the interplay of them. The voice is another instrument in the band. There are exceptions, naturally, and the singer is usually the part people identify most with, but one very cool thing about rock fans is that we often know the whole band. Their names, their history, we can identify their styles even if they do a feature elsewhere or move on to a different band after a while, because they're JUST as important as the singer. If the group changes a member, it changes how they sound. The Red Hot Chili Peppers, you can distinctly hear from album to album when they switched guitarists. The Aerosmith album that didn't have Joe Perry on guitar is distinct in their catalogue (and didn't sell as well because of it). Once you identify his style, you can tell when a song is featuring Travis Barker on drums, even across genres. Whereas, just as an example, I like Adele, but I couldn't tell you who a single person in her backing band is or if they've changed over the years. Neither is better or worse, but I like the equity of rock.
Not really funny, it's the most annoying side of Rock 'business'. How embarrassing and stupid, that so many rock 'musicians' couldn't resist to just reproduce their own cliches over and over again (even musically btw)
@@minddriver6358 It's not the business. It's the musicians. People in their early 20s with rebel tendencies suddenly fall into a ton of money. Most grew up poor or without a lot of money so they have no sense of investing or saving. They buy the things they want and find out they still have a ton of money left. They have a lot of time on their hands and tend to be emotionally stunted. So they fall into the solace of drugs to pass the time and "feel" good since they don't have the personal tools yet stop looking for outside stimulation for self-fulfillment. They are young, dumb and have enough money to blow through what would normally stop a person from choosing "live fast, die hard" over "pump the brakes and get a grip".
"The music was so heavy, so loud, so dominant..." Yeah, that's hard rock for ya. Great pick. Very groovy. I know most people would consider this trash, but I love this stuff. There are a few bands still making music like this under the banner of melodic rock. Long may it continue.
Well said. To the people calling this genre trash, explain how "Back In Black" is the 2nd best selling album of all time, and "Appetite For Destruction" is the best selling debut album of all time. These are NOT best selling of their genre, they are best selling of ALL genres. If that many people like it, than it's by definition....good.
@@minddriver6358 - I'd love to see those "smart" trashers get on these instruments and try to play it. They can't bc it's usually always non-musicians who trash in the snobby manner.
@@dustinjones8887 >If that many people like it, than it's by definition....good. Many people also like pop-music, doesnt make it a good music. Today majority of people like rap, doesnt make it a good music. Doesnt make it even music in the first place. Im a metalhead myself (even though my favorite band AC/DC is not metal but apart from them i listen to metal only) but i at least i can accept the fact that this kind of music is trash. Lol. "Many people like it" is not an argument, majority always like trash because majority is trash, living in trash. And the fact that someone can't play some complex metal riffs and solos doesnt make them good either. Many solos from metal are just cacophony. Hard to play but its still a mixture of random noises.
@@MrSernyak - Actually, it is a great argument. I was talking about how Back In Black and Appetite are in the tops of best sellers of all time. Now you come to me and say AC/DC is your favorite band? LOL...okay then. Name a rap album that sold over 30 or 40 million. Or even 20 million? Hasn't happened. My point was simple, if AC/DC is the 2nd best selling album of all time and Appetite is the best selling debut album of all time, then it is by definition good. I stand by that. ----btw, I've been over 400 concerts in my life, from Joan Baez to Megadeth ----from Winton Marsalles to Amon Amarth. ---from Cyndi Lauper to Metallica. Love your metal, dude. I'm with you. But perhaps you should expand your horizons, or at the very least, refrain from saying everything else sucks. You're basically wearing a sticker on your forehead that says "I have no perspective at all".
Granted, rock fans are an opinionated bunch, and everyone will have their own opinions about what the crucial tracks are. BUT COME ON. Here are just some of the artists Amy has NOT listened to so far: the Rolling Stones, Chuck Berry, Bob Dylan, Jimi Hendrix, David Bowie, the Velvet Underground, Iggy Pop, Talking Heads, the Clash. Here are some of the artists she HAS listened to: Xathrites (huh?), the Knack, Helloween, Blind Guardian (again, huh?), Nightwish, and something called Caligula's Horse. Amy is a good sport and gives great comments, but this track selection is downright perverse, and gives a distorted impression of what is generally considered important in rock. Good luck "unpacking" Motley Crue; there's nothing there.
I will disagree on one point only. You feel that the 80s glam metal scene in LA was trash, but it was important . Motley Crue is arguably the biggest band to come out of that scene. musically, maybe uninteresting but culturally interesting for the genre.
@@mikekarena If they want to touch on '80s hair metal as a thing that existed and made a splash at the time, that's fine. But should she be listening to this before Gimme Shelter or Like a Rolling Stone? That's my main beef.
She has listened something suggested to her by people or her husband, but this on was a part of her quick journey of history of rock where Karl gives has been choosing two important songs from each decade to talk about how rock music developed how it developed. Two song per decade is of course very little to give idea for rock's development in one decade, but there are something I would've picked differently in this series. At least Jimi Hendrix at 60s because he was such an influence in electric guitar which is obviously very important instrument in rock. Also from 70s I would've chose another song to be something heavier like maybe Black Sabbath to give an idea that heavier music started there. Now Amy heard first a bit heavier song from 80s at which time there were a lots of metal bands.
Next time you come to the 80s, I suggest listening to Nik Kershaw's The Riddle. An excellent example of the most ambitious of the 80s, but still also the catchiest hits of that decade.
Hey Karl, she's obviously not digging the heavy metal/hard rock, I don't blame her. So far it seems like she has responded more favorably to the softer stuff, easy listening, and maybe progressive, but there hasn't been much of that yet to tell for sure. I don't know if it's her strict classical upbringing, but you will notice she doesn't seem to be truly enjoying any of it yet; most of us who enjoy such music would be nodding our head to the beat, tapping the table and maybe playing a little air instruments. I see none of that with Amy yet.
I love this song from the moment it first came out. I, however; have never noticed the reduced presence of the vocals before. I’ve always thought of this song as party music. At least if was playing at every party I went to in the 80’s. Appreciate you making me look at my favorites differently.
I always had my stereo eq set for "the perfect sound". I never noticed reduced presence of vocals in this song before. Actually when she started playing the song, I thought "wow, she's got the bass cranked up".
Been loving your videos! Especially your Pink Floyd videos. Although it's a bit lesser known band, I highly recommend looking into the song 'Change' by King Gizzard & The Lizard Wizard. Keep up the quality work you put in!
Motley Crue is by product of the Sunset Strip Scene in LA which was kind of started by VanHalen. The rhythm guitar has a chunky riff which kind of leads off and then in the chorus the guitar has a slight funk influence.
Interesting song choice! It’s difficult to encapsulate any particular era with one song, which is okay! Here’s an experiment: Do a series where you only analyze a band’s fifth best song and see if the chat goes out of their mind for not going in a prescribed order. Keep it random! You have one of the best music channels on RUclips. I always look forward to your videos.
Allot (most?) rock songs, hard rock songs, are driven by Guitar. This drives the song. That is why it is dominate and/or equal to the vocals. If you don't like heavy guitar and able to appreciate guitar solos then that cuts out a huge swath of enjoyment you will ever get from Rock.
I think in rock and metal there is an inherint desire to continously push the envelope and find ones own expression, while at the same time paying homage to those Who came before and gave you the inspiration in the first place. Im not saying this doesnt apply to other genres, I just have a feeling that it is particularly present in rock/metal
Taking a look at the decades From the 50's till now. It shows that in the beginning of each decade. Music is one way, but by the end of that decade. Everything changes by leaps and bounds. And most of it is all down to recording technique's that evolved as the music evolved. Better and better recording equipment is being made, better and hotter guitar amps, and microphones are being used. And most of all. Vocal styles really changed. It's all rock n roll at it's core, but the styles and sounds of it changed as time progressed. Back when the Beatles quit touring cause they could not hear theirselves on stage, cause the PA System was lacking in size and power. To where they can now blow roof's off large arena's is a huge leap. With every advent of better equipment (be it recording, on stage playing, or front of house sound) It help to take the music being made to the next level.
Different for sure, you went from "pop rock" with the Go-Go's, to "hard rock" / "heavy metal" with Mötley Crüe. Switching from the Go-Go's to Mötley Crüe is definitely a switch. The "feel" is so different between the upbeat cheerful pop music, and the heavy forward driving sound of metal.
I would describe Motely Crue as Hair Metal or as already was stated, Glam Metal. I liked them when I was a teen, but they are one of the 80's bands - and there were a lot of them - where I look back and wonder why.
When you ask why it went this way rather than something like in the 70s... well, they did both, and many more. Rock development isn't a line, it is a tree. There are so many sub-genres of rock at this point it's nearly impossible to keep track of, even if you are a fan. Some have fizzled out, some have kept going and spawned more branches. Mötley Crüe was part of a sub-genre called hair or glam metal, which burned very brightly and then fizzled out over the 80s to 90s. This loud, in your face, party vibe was reacted to with Grunge, which I presume you will be exposed to shortly in the history series, likely with Nirvana, which went in a very different direction that was much more gritty and raw. but there was also Industrial (which you've heard a bit of with Rammstein, but Nine Inch Nails is more typical) and concurrently with this there was Thrash Metal still going (like Metallica), and so on.
I mean I don’t think this is the best song to represent what that particular era was. There are plenty of other Mötley Crüe Santa would fit the bill better or even other hair metal band. But hey you do you. Actually though just to add. Once you get into the 90s you cannot cannot cannot ignore smells like teen Spirit. You cannot pick in Obscura song with that one. That brought a sea change in American music
If you only had a few songs to show someone that exemplified the 1980s would you choose "Dr Feelgood" and "My Lips are Sealed" - I wouldn't. Not at all good examples imo. Neither would be in my top 1000 and hair metal was not a highly significant genre imo. If people insist on including hair metal at all (I'd ignore it) there are much better examples than this Motley Crue mayhem :)
In all fairness to Karl, no one could pick out just two songs to properly represent an entire decade or rock, and someone would always think the choices were bad ones no matter who picked them.
I love your analogy of the little guy singing in the chair or whatever it was :-) This is around when the almost-heavy-metal bands actually started going mainstream, although I call this hard rock. In heavy metal, often the instruments are as important (or more important) than the vocals. I do think this was a good choice for one of the two 80s songs, even though I don't like this song. (This reminded me why I could never like this band - the high-pitched and weird whiny vocals of the singer is a turnoff for me that I could never get past.)
They are dumb and cheesy, but I cannot bring myself to hate them. Kickstart My Heart is a far better song in my book, but this one almost perfectly epitomizes a dismal trend in rock that prompted Grunge.
They stumbled across the globe string out and drunk while the drummer had a 360° rotating kit. I would think that speaks to their prowess as musicians. The sound and the style was all record company produced. I will say that their first album had some tremendous songs -- bangers if you will -- that stand up. And each of the 5 main albums all have a few songs where their talent outs from behind the hair, make-up and heroin.
As a born Southern Californian I reserve the right to "hate" Motley Crue and Joe Montana. Doesn't really mean I hate either, those "hates" are earned. I reserve the right to share a nice vintage if I run into any of the mentioned. But yeah, certain situations call for certain measures. That's when having a deep musical knowledge is a plus. Motley Crue, Social Distortion, No Doubt, or Common Sense, may you find a use for them all.
I’m looking forward to Amy and Carl’s discussion, mostly because I am quite intrigued byCarl’s rationale for his picks. As much as I despised most of the music typical of that dreadful decade, he could have chosen better examples of what it had to offer than The Go Gos or Motley Crue.
Since when did popularity indicate quality ? There are many artists and bands that were/are great and popular but also there were/are great bands and artists who weren't popular.
You're studying 80s Rock and your teacher gives you "Or Lips are Sealed" and "Dr. Feelgood"?!?!? You need a different teacher! His explanation better be good.
I starts to feel uncomfortable now to see what Karl chose as second choice. It drives me away from watching this video. It was initially a good idea to about the popdecades, but this turns out in a farce, unfortunately.
When the only personal opinion given on the song is "It's interesting" and "I want to understand how it got this way", that says it all 😁 I myself would be hard pressed to say anything really positive about this track, except that there are instruments and a singer, and that I am proud that I managed to listen to it until the end. Otherwise, to know a bit where it comes from, I think you should listen to Aerosmith and Van Halen who started in the 70's. Without being a special fan of these bands, it seems to me that they still had greater skills in songwriting.
one of my favorite songs and favorite bands of all time, I was really hoping we'd get to something like this once you got to the 80's and this selection did not disappoint
Her friend Carl seems to be the recommender. This is the "late 80's" chapter, so they picked a hard rock/heavy metal song since The Go Go's were rep of the early 80's. Motley is a valid choice and a number of songs from the 87 album or 89 album would've worked too. When there are many choices, I guess they just picked one. It's a nice choice.
I noticed that there are three main kinds of people in you tube comments. Mindless adulators, mindless complainers, and mindless requesters. I'm probably the last two.
The sampling of rock history that you're getting is simply too shallow to provide an answer to the question of "how did we get to this point." To accurately answer that question you'd need many more data points, and you'd probably also want to follow individual lines of development, because some of your samples are from unrelated lines, despite all being generally in the rock (or at least pop) genre. It's still a useful and valuable exercise, of course, but probably not satisfying for addressing some of the questions you're asking.
I love some Crue, however Shout at the devil was their best album. Vince sounded great for the band IN THE STUDIO, live he was hit or miss (mainly miss).
I have times when I'm focused that I like a little Crue, but I think this was a terrible choice. Nick Mar's is certainly talented, but Motley was not known for their musical compositions. Going from the poppish Go Go's to Motley Crue is not a good jump, Carl you should do some new wave, Thompson Twins, ABC, Simple Minds. There is some wonderful, well composed songs from that era. Plus this song was released in 1989, and it really did not come into it's own for a while, so I almost consider it living in the 90's...
Even though I can appreciate the quality of some of the compositions of the New Wave bands you mention, especially Simple Minds, I could never get past the vocal style of any of them, from The Cure, Duran Duran, Spandau Ballet, etc., etc. No rational explanation. I just hate it.
Since you're in the 80's, do your ears a favor and check out some XTC. "Senses Working Overtime" is a great 80's Classic, and has a lot to digest. Check out XTC
It is hard not to think that if her first introduction to rock was this history of rock that she would have thrown in the towel by now. It's not that these are bad songs. So far I think since the 60s it has been Twist and Shout, the Boxer, Southern Man, My Sharona, Our Lips are Sailed, and Dr Feelgood. I like most of these songs, and dislike only one. But they are all kind of simple standard pop songs. Fortunately she has already heard bands like Pink Floyd, Queen, Jethro Tull, and better Beatles songs etc. The problem with the two songs for a decade approach is that one can get the impression that the 70's in rock was not much different thatn the 60s because the two songs chosen were not that much different. Here one gets the idea that the late 80's was much heavier than what came before based on a band whose importance lies not in being heavier than what came before, but in combining catchy pop elements to existing heavy metal tropes. Motley Crue is mostly a throwback to the 70's metal band Kiss. They were part of a calculation that if you took heavy metal sounds, made the band members suitable for celebrity magazines, and gave it catchy choruses then it was possible to get girls to listen to heavy metal music. And the doubling of the potential audience was a great draw to record companies. Def Leppard had shown that earlier in the decade.
I kind of figured Carl would pick something from hair metal or glam metal, to represent the late 80s. I think King Edward, having been accused often of being the biological father of this type of music, would demand a paternity test. But this is worth listening to. And then listen to "I'm the One", "Sinner's Swing", or "The Full Bug" by VH from 1978-82 era, and you'll notice the difference in their ability to swing while playing heavy rock, and how it started to devolve and get played more straight up by later bands.
The more I listen to this series the more convinced I am that it should be subtitled a history of American rock. Motley Crue are a Def Leppard tribute act anyhow.
@@williamwallace5857 Yes this series. Amy has analysed the bands you mention as stand alone tracks or as part of the whole album "The Wall" series. However this "history of rock music" series has covered the following bands... The Beatles, Simon & Garfunkel, Lynyrd Skynyrd, The Knack, The Go Go's and Motley Crue. Only one of those isn't American, and they had such huge success in America that they might as well have been. Huge non-American bands that wrote the history of rock have been overlooked. Where are the Stones, Led Zeppelin, The Who, Deep Purple, Black Sabbath, U2? It's all very bizarre.
@@radman8321 It's really tough to choose only two songs for every decade. Otherwise we'd have to have at least one per year and a new episode every day. I think Karl is making the best of what little time is available to get there.
@@ArturdeSousaRocha I appreciate the difficulties, but there is a world of rock outside of North America. I'm enjoying the series anyway, and I do appreciate that any history of anything is just one version of history. Every historian tells a different tale. It's just this last selection has tipped me over the edge, there is nothing to commend it at all.
Yes, there has been a very clear North American perspective so far. I am hoping that when they start going into detail there will be an appropriate amount of attention given to the great non-American bands!
The vocals being set further back has much more to do with the production than the band itself. But it's a technique that's used a lot in hard rock and heavy metal to give the impression that the band is loud. It's a more live sounding mix, where you imagine the roar of the guitar amps and the beating of the drums overpowering the singer. Motley Crue is not a band that I care for, though there is a lot of interesting chromaticism and chord voicings in their songs. My issue is that they represent all the debauchery people associate with rock n roll that has made it so difficult for the genre to be taken seriously as an artform. Motley is the poster child for the "sex, drugs, and rock n roll" party lifestyle...and they're proud of it. And I personally would rather listen to something with substance.
Interesting choice for the first 80s song... Ahh the 80s.. I was brought up in the 80s and did listen to this and a lot of the other "hair metal" or glam metal bands as they were called (and they are not really metal at all).. And the music was more like pop music with loud guitars than traditional rock about as basic as you can get technically speaking. And dont get me wrong, I loved a lot of it at the time but it hasnt aged well at all compared to the 60s and 70s rock. I would have started with Sweet Child o Mine by Guns n Roses. Pretty much the a typical 80s rock song. Motley Crue came too late and as has been mentioned on another post, the only real talent in that band was the guitar player. They didnt last that long.
Same here. Like most teenagers at the time, I was listening to the Crue, Def Leppard, and a bunch of other lesser known bands (Faster Pussycat, Bullet Boys, LA Guns, anyone?). But, it really didn't age well. I would much rather listen to George Thorogood or ZZ Topp now. Metallica's about the only 80's Heavy Metal band that I still enjoy listening too and nothing of theirs after the 80's lol.
@@michaelb1761 90s will be interesting too.. Alternative/Indi/Grunge rock stage where they were the opposite of what came preciously as everyone was sick of the big hair, makeup and skin tight spandex look and power ballads. Instead it was baggy jumpers and jeans and tshirts with depressing lyrics and dark sounds... Being there at the time its easy to understand why and how we got from one phase to the next.
I know she has already listened to VanHalen, but if you wanted to give her an example of good 80's heavy metal they have at least a dozen great songs. If you would have strayed away from "hair" metal, Metallica would have actually given her some meat to talk about.
I'd bet that one thing your reacting to here is the amount of "compression" used in the mix - it's compression in the sense that it reduces the dynamic range of the music in specific ways - one result of this is that the vocals and instruments "sit" very close together.
You should listen to “Diary of a Madman” by Ozzy. Other reactors with classical background were impressed with the composition which includes classical influences and unusual time signature
An album from August 89 to talk about music from the 80S? Shout at the Devil would have been a better choice. Priest and Maiden were the big guys of heavy metal with Screaming for Vengeance, Defenders of the Faith and Number of the Beast, Piece of Mind. Breezing over the 80s with the GO GOs and Dr Feelgood is just weird. You are not having a very good "journey".
Great choice!! Yes, Motley Crue is quintessential 80's--super good 80's. As for the mix, I've always viewed hard rock/metal voices and instruments on equal footing. I guess if you're used to the voices being prominent, it may sound like this voice taking a back seat. But I hear it as the singer, bass, guitar and drums all recorded on equal footing in the mixing. LOVE that she chose Motley Crue!!
I was a teenager in the 1980s and I though I didn't like Rock and Roll because of bands like Motley Crue. Then I discovered the great bands from the 60s. In my opinion, the late 70s and early 80s were dreadful, except for Reggae, Punk, New Wave and the New Romantics. Even some Disco songs were OK, but most mainstream "Rock" was pretty bad.
To me this one has always seemed like one of their more "artistic" songs. It's about the seedy, sleazy, dangerous world of a drug dealer and the music literally evokes an appropriately evil image of violence and flames. Vince Neil's snarling vocals compliment that image very well.
Please write here your questions ONLY.
What do you think of so many people saying the picks for songs are not really representative of the eras?
"History of Rock and Roll"?! What happened to "rhythm and blues"? This has definitely run off road. Have you tried Google Maps? If you're not in an off-road vehicle, I'm pretty sure you're stuck by now.
@@jjohnston7837 She isn't the one picking the songs. Also, no need to be this rude. I also despise Motley Crue, but not enough to act like this
@@gabrielcaldini The music Carl is picking is "rude".
@@jjohnston7837 it’s amazing how many people are kind of missing the point on some of these tracks. You may not like the songs chosen, but that doesn’t stop it from having been one of the biggest hard rock tracks of the time. This series isn’t about what any of the best songs of that decade were, but more roughly a transition between the beginnings and ends of each decade from even if they’re not really the best representations of those scenes. There’s a difference between preference and what was.
I think it would be fair to say Motley Crue is not known for their vocals as much as their drums and guitars. That said, it's a great song.
"How did we end up here?" about sums it up.
It's Friday night and Amy is reviewing Motley Crue! What a time to be alive!
To quote Vince Neil: Friday night and I need a fight,my motorcycle and switchblade knife.
Another one where I'll be interested to see Carl's take - more than a few times he's used songs I would not have thought of, yet in the discussion, his choice makes sense. I'm really enjoying this journey, both as someone who grew up with most of this music and in watching your first-time reactions from a very different perspective - I was exposed more to classical in my earlier years than you were to rock, and while I am a musician, I am almost entirely self-taught, with some definite gaps in my knowledge of theory that you (along with several other RUclipsrs) have helped fill! My thanks and encouragement - you are producing some of my favorite music-related content!
Amy is putting much more brain in this than Mötley Crüe thenselves.
You don’t say!?
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 very true, vince sings it "he cha un derr cawin dorror fegud"
Very good analysis Pablo love it
I'm 53, and Crue went downhill after Theater of Pain, I'd have never started her out on the noise which is Dr. Feelgood, they were rubbish by that time in their careers. She would probably like Homesweet Home off of Theater of Pain, or perhaps In the Beginning/Shout at the Devil even, but past TOP the band was just noise in my opinion.
😂
What you are missing is Punk Rock of the late 70s. Many of the music venues stopped booking live punk rock bands because of the violence. With live music switching to pop and glam rock.
also glam rock from uk and usa in the 70s
My favorite Motley Crue song... the bassline and drums at the beginning is soooo good.
Not sure how you may ask your listeners, not to write anything here but questions, because from a Rock & Roll fan's perspective, it is so incredibly wonderful to listen and watch you go through all these changes while listening to this "new" music (your perspective). I feel that this is what most commenters are feeling - THE OVERWHELMING WONDERFULLY DELIGHTFUL WAY you respond to "our" music ("our" means all the Rock-Heads like me out here in the Either with our own multiverse of perspectives). Just, . . . Absolutely, . . . Delightful!
You missed the point entirely. You can comment all you want here. It's just in replying to her comment that she just wants Questions Only so that she can then address them later in a separate video.
How else would you describe American rock n roll other than heavy and loud!!! LOVE IT!!
Love hearing Vince described as "this lively little person"😅
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
😂😂😂😂😂😂
Right😂😂😂
“Lively” is certainly a description….
4:41 Vince is a very small person in the front seat?
The section you thought was the beginning of the solo is a refrain of the introduction, with a bit of guitar noise over the top. Then the singer’s shout of “Guitar!” marks the beginning of the actual solo.
I don't think Motley Crue themselves have ever broken down their music quite like this😋
I seriously doubt they would know how to. Mick Mars is the only real musician in the band.
I'd bet they'd love to see this breakdown of their music, though!
@@dgu4644 dont think they care lol.
If I wanted someone to get a bad perception of rock music, I would have chosen this and a few others that were presented earlier.
There was so much incredible music to present, these just seem like the most simple mainstream perceptions of rock. Its far more deep and I think we should instead look at what was truly innovative and artistic.
Its more like a pop culture TV rock show perception...
100% agree ! For the 80's there were better examples like Talking Heads, Kate Bush, Tears for Fears, The Cars, Depeche Mode, Peter Gabriel, even early Metallica.... but The Go-Go's and Mötley Crüe ????😲 for me it is a real enigma!!!
@@a.k.1740 and if you look at the 70s, " the knack"? What, a one hit wonder?.
70's had Kansas, Jethro Tull, King Crimson, Magma, Yes, Rush, Frank Zappa, Mahavishnu Orchestra, Soft Machine, Frank Marino, P Funk, Ohio Players, Tower of Power, ZZ Top, Brand X, early Bruce Springsteen, Billy Joel. Elton John, Grand Funk Railroad, The Who, Led Zeppelin, Allan Holdsworth, Maceo Parker, Van Halen, Tom Waits, and on and on.
I could go on for hours...
@@antidote7I agree once again! Lynyrd Skynyrd and The Knack are far from being bad bands but absolutely not representative of the 70s on a planetary scale. This selection is a complete mystery.
@@a.k.1740 I do think Skynard is at least a far better pick than the Knack, who was a one hit wonder.
But even with Skynard, southern rock had hoards of great acts too, Allman Brothers likely the biggest, then there was Marshall Tucker, The Outlaws, Molly Hatchet etc...
@@antidote7 I still have the impression that Southern Rock was not something very popular in Europe and the United Kingdom. It remained a specific musical style in the United States, not really elsewhere.
The voice taking more of a backseat is probably a bi-product of the he guitar virtuoso culture that sprung up among these sub-genres of rock.
“The riff” becomes a focal point, and the guitar solo could even get its own announcement from the vocalist.
The guitarists in many of these bands are often seen as a sort of idol of their own alongside the frontman for the band.
And maybe the fact that Vince Neil is a god awful singer.
I think it was just result of battle of egos, two narcissists having even bigger ego than attention-seeking histrionic.
I don't remember the thumping bass from this song. Not nearly as much as this sounded. I think Amy's EQ settings are set for some other genera of music. The vocals are much louder with different EQ setting.
Congratulations on your wonderful new baby!!!
Well this is going to be quite interesting!
The Crüe, eh? I'll confess, like many others, I don't really understand some of the selections. That said, my opinion is worth just enough to get me in my own trouble! I'm happy you're a good sport, and at least interested and curious. For my part, I am enjoying your reactions. I don't think there's a "wrong" way, and I'm happy to watch you explore this YOUR way. :) There are many many classically trained rock musicians. Some of them are absolutely god-like virtuosos... Many of THOSE have just as much fun on a crunchy groove as they do blasting through Paganini runs with an overdrive pedal. Keep at it! "one of us... one of us....." :) *Congrats on the little one, too!
Meanwhile, AC/DC hasn’t been touched.
Carl is letting her down with his picks. I wouldn't even ask her to listen to anything by Crue past Theater of Pain, because everything past TOP was rubbish then, and still rubbish now.
They played my Jr high school .
The first album was recorded and produced at the Cement Hill recording studio in Nevada City , Ca.
This was the title track off their return album. The singer had gone through years of rehab after killing a friend in a drunk driving accident. He thought writing an album with an anti-substance abuse message would be the way to get back in everyone's good graces.
The garbled sounding voice at the end of the guitar solo is an affect called the Heil Talk-box, where the guitar tone is piped through a surgical hose and aimed into the mouth of the guitarist, who would further shape the sound by mouthing the sounds and words they want the guitar to speak.
"dr. feelgood" was the nickname of a doctor who dispensed his own amphetamine concoction to hollywood actors and washington dc politicians in the 1950's and 1960's.
many of the movies from that era feature actors who were under the influence of his special "treatments," which enabled them to be more lively when in front of the camera.
jfk and marilyn monroe were among his customers.
Hi Amy,
My main question is, technical aspects aside, are you finding emotional content within these songs? If so, what is it? And can you break down how the artists’ choices convey it?
I realize that might be unrealistic. First listens may be mostly deer-in-headlights moments. I’d be glad to know what you think of all of these pieces after you have had some time to listen repeatedly and absorb.
In a similar vein, I would really like to see you choose a piece of classical music (or any music) that really makes you personally feel something, and then dissect it enough to show us how the musician creates that emotion. What choices were made that successfully created the feeling? Which choices are critical and which don’t matter so much?
On the flipside, where you are stuck trying to interpret a first impression, I can imagine it is next to impossible to feel any feelings while simultaneously identifying why.
Getting a music theory dissection of how emotional effects are produced sonically would be awesome.
Here’s an example (and I’m curious what you think of this). I don’t know the music theory, but feeling-wise, to me, Dr. Feelgood really does feel like the “glam” (or “glamour”) rock in that it conveys that sense of striking poses and grabbing the spotlight. The different instruments are like different supermodels outrageously grabbing the spotlight for a time and then passing it on to another.
It starts with that very heavy sound, which runs long enough that the listener has gotten somewhat acclimated by the time the next instrument arrives to enter the spotlight, which is then seized by the main riff - in which each iteration ends with those inescapable two notes that just sound like somebody mugging for a camera.
When the lyrics start, the song itself is about someone’s identity - another glamour thing - with the lyrical content following a status-seeking “big shot.” And the powerful-for-nefarious-reasons nature of that identity (drug dealer) is reinforced by the powerful, dark sound.
Also, that lyrical content is delivered in pulses emphasizing a litany of status symbols at the end of most lines. Blah blah blah hood, blah blah blah Hollywood, blah blah blah primered flames, blah blah blah powdered goods, blah blah blah in the game, blah blah blah doing okay, blah blah blah Mexican mob, blah blah blah candycaine. The pattern feels like, “Now look at THIS! Now look at THIS! Now look at THIS!” Very flash.
And then when the chorus hits, the emphasis of the music and the lyrics line up and stick the identity chants (“Dr. Feelgood” and “all right”) at that flashy end of the riff.
So the song feels like several layers of “reposition…PHOTO…reposition…PHOTO…”
The fact that the band itself was its own embodiment of that flash just adds another layer.
Having a music theory breakdown of how to construct such effects would be great. Again, though, you might have to do it with pieces you know well, because identifying emotional content in alien songs on first listen is a tall order.
Has anything you’ve listened to so far made it into a personal playlist that you listen to recreationally?
Thanks for all your thought,
Don
it's hard to think of it as a great piece of music,,, but amy you do a good job
Amy's lack of indulgence in snobbery and gatekeeping is what makes her a treasure and delight to view.
By the time the album "Dr. Feelgood" came out in 1989 Glam Metal was obsolete, so I don't understand why Motley Crue was chosen.
The right choice should have been "Welcome To The Jungle" by Guns N Roses off their debut album "Appetite For Destruction" (1987), which essentially killed Glam Metal causing metal to get serious.
Dr. Feelgood was a #1 album in 1989 and Gun's n' Roses started out glam themselves in 87' if anything Glam in 89' was the peak, nany, many albums going multiplatinum and award shows just filled with Hard Rock Performances. It was 91' when Mtv got a new President and changed programming and you had the Grunge faze of 91-94.
@@tonyponchopeters GNR weren't glam rock. They never had their hair blown out to the moon and wearing makeup to resemble women. Just having long hair doesn't equal glam. By that standard Metallica was glam.
By 1989 Motley Crue changed their look dropping their S&M inspired outfits and looking feminine.
From 1987-92 should be declared the Post-Glam Metal Era.
@@vonVile Really, Google is your friend. Look up the 1987 Gun's pics. Gun's released their Appetite for Destruction "Masterpiece" in 1987 and the first single 'It's so Easy' did nothing, Welcome to the Junglze had huge "Buzz" but Mtv only played it after midnight. It wasn't until Late 1988 that the 'Sweet Child of Mind' video hit and blew up the album. I lived all of the 80's as a teen and can tell you what the real popular culture was at the time. I really hope you're NOT telling people your 'Wikipedia's' truth rather then people that lived it.
@@tonyponchopeters "It's So Easy" wasn't released in the US as a single, only in the UK. Their first US single was WTTJ.
You need to go rewatch the video to understand it's plot. It's about Axl coming to LA to become a rockstar. It shows him being brainwashed into the corporate image of being a glam metal band, which isn't true to himself and in the end he rejects it.
"so I don't understand why Motley Crue was chosen."
The guys from Mötley Crüe are considered starting the genre, so it certainly makes more sense to choose it.
"GNR weren't glam rock"
Gun's n' Roses were, were generally considered and were marketed as Glam "Metal" band, and had the same audience base and hanged out with same people as the other Glam "Metal" bands.
The guitarist Mick Mars was pretty much the only person with any talent in this band, frankly.
He was in blues bands in the early 70's including Whitehorse, but never hit it big.
Without him, Crue would never have made it in the world of glam rock.
Back when they released their first album, we called them 'posers' where I grew up.
Definitely the spandex and egg white crowd lol
Interesting to hear Micks solo record...
Why would they have not made it?
Nikki sixx wrote the vast majority of their songs, not mick.
In reality, the one member of this band that’s actually decent technically would be the drummer Tommy Lee…
Mick Mars is technically quite mediocre, however his virtues are mostly his fabulous tone, and ability to come up with fantastic and memorable hooks for riffs.
The bassist Sixx was more like the visionary founder of the band and not necessarily above musical mediocrity either, and the singer Vince Neil was definitely the personality of the band back in the day.
@@TheRetroManRandySavage Nikki Sixx self professed that he'd never touched a bass before; in fact, he tried to steal one from a music store and accidentally grabbed a 6 string Les Paul to bring to practice. They purposefully mixed the bass very light in most of their songs because he didn't know what he was doing.
Great reaction Amy! I never cared for this song, but at the same time didn't listen to it enough to find out why. Thank you for putting in the work for me. 😄
Motley Crue might be a decent generalized representation of late 80s"hair metal" (the phrase was adopted years after the fact as a term of derision), but they are a terrible band. They could barely play their instruments and the singer is torture to listen to.
The band attracted the most lunk-headed of fans. Which makes sense as they were complete bone heads themselves. It's unfortunate because they were such a huge band, but the production is doing most of the work here. The lyrics are profoundly insipid.
Though both bands had the same kind of image and in-your-face attack, there is a world of difference between Motley Crue and a band like Van Halen, who were amazing musicians, and though David Lee Roth was not much of a singer, his lyrics had incredible wit and subtle sympathy for the characters in the songs.
Motley Crue, by comparison, are pure room temperature IQ level stuff.
Snob.
I'm thinking he may have picked this as a demonstration of hair metal and the effects MTV and other things were having on making the music more banal (I hope). If this song gets introduced in the 70s with just radio and no video, it goes absolutely nowhere.
As far as I’m concerned this fast forward speed version of the History of Rock is pretty much baffling; for the most part I don’t get the point at all.
I wondered about that too. Apparently, they're going to backtrack and cover more later.
@@flyingintheface6139 Oh I’m aware, but still I don’t get the point of most of the selections, or their extreme scarcity, if the intention is to provide Amy with a first overview of the history of Rock throughout the decades. That’s just me right now, maybe Karl has a unique interesting approach that will be revealed in due time ;)
I love the play by play: "I hear a vocal." "I hear a guitar." Shockingly, there's no mention at all about the MVP of the Crue: Tommy Lee.
Motley Crüe, like most bands from that era, are showmen, with a ring leader directing the band, and the lead guitarist as the bipolar opposite creating the tension that made the music explode. Think about others, like Steve Tyler and Joe Perry from Aerosmith, David Lee Roth and Eddie from Van Halen, Axl Rose and Slash from Guns ‘n’ Roses. It was out there, loud and proud. I love the grunge period that followed as well, but it was a lot more introspective and introverted, like music during the late 80’s was a big star that went supernova, then became the black hole which was Grunge.
I think what Karl is doing, is taking her on a quick Journey of the evolution and all the genres that branched out in such a short time.
The interesting thing that Amy will find out is that all the different styles that she heard did not just evolve into a newer sound, all of those sounds and genres still exists between the beginning and today. Rock is still being created using each and every style she has heard from every genre every branch of that tree is all still in use.
So it evolved yes, but every recipe and every ingredient is still used in that cookbook of rock and roll everyday.
After checking this reaction and listening to her talking about how the rock music was changing in the late 80’s.
At that time I was rocking this song, it was all over the top. Everyone was so happy with the heavy sound, including me. And nobody knew that, looks like this was a beginning of making a burial 🪦 to the. guitar solos in the Rock 🎸 history.
All of us were focused in those super heavy sounds that the Glam metal was producing and nobody saw ( because we were too young and hungry for technologies) the dead of the vinyl records, the last exhale of the good music (1990).
Everybody was focused in the new decade, the CD’s 💿 revolution and the 2000’s THE FUTURE
There were a few examples of groups that survived because they were under the radar, they kept underground and battling fiercely against all odds.
Today…….. you don’t have to think about solos WHAT’S THAT ‼️‼️‼️
You don’t need that sh……..
The new generation has borne with square ears 👂, so …….. you don’t need to think in good music equipments with Dolby Lab with two or three channels, all the music for only one speaker.
Bravo MUSIC INDUSTRY
Their first two albums, Too Fast For Love & Shout At The Devil, were their best 🤘
Dr Feelgood was around the time I started losing interest, though I feel when they started having bigger hits.
I honestly feel Too Fast For Love has not aged well. There are a few good songs on there but, there’s a lot of mediocre tracks. I find myself skipping through it these days before losing all interest. I loved that album when I was a kid. Shout At The Devil is far far better and is a bona fide classic. I’m still not tired of that album nearly 40 years later. If I was going to add a second best album it would be Dr. Feelgood, though even that album, like literally every other Motley Crue album is heavy on half baked phoned in mediocrities. I consider myself a Crue fan, have seen them live several times and own their entire discography but, I’m always amazed they got as big as they did when there were more deserving bands that should have got more commercial attention, like Iron Maiden.
Definitely, the first albums rocked before the big lipstick ballad era. Oh the humanity. Thank goodness for thrash.
One of my favorite things that differentiates rock from other genres is the balance of voice and instrumentation. Many other pop genres, the music is crafted around the vocal to showcase the voice. Of course it needs to sound good, and expand on the tone and intention of the lyrics and expression, but songs tend to be very voice-centric. With rock, it tends to be more about the band as a whole using their different mediums in tandem, everyone getting their little feature supported by the others, the interplay of them. The voice is another instrument in the band. There are exceptions, naturally, and the singer is usually the part people identify most with, but one very cool thing about rock fans is that we often know the whole band. Their names, their history, we can identify their styles even if they do a feature elsewhere or move on to a different band after a while, because they're JUST as important as the singer. If the group changes a member, it changes how they sound. The Red Hot Chili Peppers, you can distinctly hear from album to album when they switched guitarists. The Aerosmith album that didn't have Joe Perry on guitar is distinct in their catalogue (and didn't sell as well because of it). Once you identify his style, you can tell when a song is featuring Travis Barker on drums, even across genres. Whereas, just as an example, I like Adele, but I couldn't tell you who a single person in her backing band is or if they've changed over the years.
Neither is better or worse, but I like the equity of rock.
Not a fan of the band, but this song kicks butt... loved it since I was a little kid
Yeah there's usually one or two songs I like by bands I don't like.
Not a MC fan but Kickstart My Heart is great.
@@gminor6288 - Me neither, but I do quite like 'Live Wire' 🙂
The funny part is both this band and the Go-Go were known for drug filled sex laden hotel room and back stage outrageous behavior.
Not really funny, it's the most annoying side of Rock 'business'. How embarrassing and stupid, that so many rock 'musicians' couldn't resist to just reproduce their own cliches over and over again (even musically btw)
@@minddriver6358 It's not the business. It's the musicians. People in their early 20s with rebel tendencies suddenly fall into a ton of money. Most grew up poor or without a lot of money so they have no sense of investing or saving. They buy the things they want and find out they still have a ton of money left. They have a lot of time on their hands and tend to be emotionally stunted. So they fall into the solace of drugs to pass the time and "feel" good since they don't have the personal tools yet stop looking for outside stimulation for self-fulfillment. They are young, dumb and have enough money to blow through what would normally stop a person from choosing "live fast, die hard" over "pump the brakes and get a grip".
Our lips are sealed
"The music was so heavy, so loud, so dominant..."
Yeah, that's hard rock for ya. Great pick. Very groovy. I know most people would consider this trash, but I love this stuff. There are a few bands still making music like this under the banner of melodic rock. Long may it continue.
Well said. To the people calling this genre trash, explain how "Back In Black" is the 2nd best selling album of all time, and "Appetite For Destruction" is the best selling debut album of all time. These are NOT best selling of their genre, they are best selling of ALL genres. If that many people like it, than it's by definition....good.
@@dustinjones8887 "0f course 10 people are always more stupid than 1" ( to quote Heiner Müller, who said this about "germans" actually)
@@minddriver6358 - I'd love to see those "smart" trashers get on these instruments and try to play it. They can't bc it's usually always non-musicians who trash in the snobby manner.
@@dustinjones8887 >If that many people like it, than it's by definition....good.
Many people also like pop-music, doesnt make it a good music. Today majority of people like rap, doesnt make it a good music. Doesnt make it even music in the first place. Im a metalhead myself (even though my favorite band AC/DC is not metal but apart from them i listen to metal only) but i at least i can accept the fact that this kind of music is trash. Lol. "Many people like it" is not an argument, majority always like trash because majority is trash, living in trash. And the fact that someone can't play some complex metal riffs and solos doesnt make them good either. Many solos from metal are just cacophony. Hard to play but its still a mixture of random noises.
@@MrSernyak - Actually, it is a great argument. I was talking about how Back In Black and Appetite are in the tops of best sellers of all time. Now you come to me and say AC/DC is your favorite band? LOL...okay then. Name a rap album that sold over 30 or 40 million. Or even 20 million? Hasn't happened. My point was simple, if AC/DC is the 2nd best selling album of all time and Appetite is the best selling debut album of all time, then it is by definition good. I stand by that. ----btw, I've been over 400 concerts in my life, from Joan Baez to Megadeth ----from Winton Marsalles to Amon Amarth. ---from Cyndi Lauper to Metallica. Love your metal, dude. I'm with you. But perhaps you should expand your horizons, or at the very least, refrain from saying everything else sucks. You're basically wearing a sticker on your forehead that says "I have no perspective at all".
Granted, rock fans are an opinionated bunch, and everyone will have their own opinions about what the crucial tracks are. BUT COME ON. Here are just some of the artists Amy has NOT listened to so far: the Rolling Stones, Chuck Berry, Bob Dylan, Jimi Hendrix, David Bowie, the Velvet Underground, Iggy Pop, Talking Heads, the Clash. Here are some of the artists she HAS listened to: Xathrites (huh?), the Knack, Helloween, Blind Guardian (again, huh?), Nightwish, and something called Caligula's Horse. Amy is a good sport and gives great comments, but this track selection is downright perverse, and gives a distorted impression of what is generally considered important in rock. Good luck "unpacking" Motley Crue; there's nothing there.
I will disagree on one point only. You feel that the 80s glam metal scene in LA was trash, but it was important . Motley Crue is arguably the biggest band to come out of that scene. musically, maybe uninteresting but culturally interesting for the genre.
@@mikekarena They did nothing that Def Leppard hadn't already done.
@@mikekarena If they want to touch on '80s hair metal as a thing that existed and made a splash at the time, that's fine. But should she be listening to this before Gimme Shelter or Like a Rolling Stone? That's my main beef.
@@ajmell7 I agree with you 100%
She has listened something suggested to her by people or her husband, but this on was a part of her quick journey of history of rock where Karl gives has been choosing two important songs from each decade to talk about how rock music developed how it developed. Two song per decade is of course very little to give idea for rock's development in one decade, but there are something I would've picked differently in this series. At least Jimi Hendrix at 60s because he was such an influence in electric guitar which is obviously very important instrument in rock. Also from 70s I would've chose another song to be something heavier like maybe Black Sabbath to give an idea that heavier music started there. Now Amy heard first a bit heavier song from 80s at which time there were a lots of metal bands.
Next time you come to the 80s, I suggest listening to Nik Kershaw's The Riddle. An excellent example of the most ambitious of the 80s, but still also the catchiest hits of that decade.
They could produce this sound live and heavy rock as Angus Young from AC/DC said it's pushing air which made live concerts amazing .
This selection does a great disservice to the decade.
Hey Karl, she's obviously not digging the heavy metal/hard rock, I don't blame her. So far it seems like she has responded more favorably to the softer stuff, easy listening, and maybe progressive, but there hasn't been much of that yet to tell for sure.
I don't know if it's her strict classical upbringing, but you will notice she doesn't seem to be truly enjoying any of it yet; most of us who enjoy such music would be nodding our head to the beat, tapping the table and maybe playing a little air instruments. I see none of that with Amy yet.
37 years ago on this day Metallica's Master of Puppets album was released.
Damn, I thought you were going to listen to the actual Dr Feelgood band with Wilco Johnson. Roxette or something. I was a teeny bit disappointed.
Great choice, the song is loud and aggressive, that's what hard rock should sound like
LOL @ stopping in the middle of the guitar solos ... Precious! 😛
I love this song from the moment it first came out. I, however; have never noticed the reduced presence of the vocals before. I’ve always thought of this song as party music. At least if was playing at every party I went to in the 80’s. Appreciate you making me look at my favorites differently.
I always had my stereo eq set for "the perfect sound". I never noticed reduced presence of vocals in this song before. Actually when she started playing the song, I thought "wow, she's got the bass cranked up".
Been loving your videos! Especially your Pink Floyd videos. Although it's a bit lesser known band, I highly recommend looking into the song 'Change' by King Gizzard & The Lizard Wizard. Keep up the quality work you put in!
Motley Crue is by product of the Sunset Strip Scene in LA which was kind of started by VanHalen. The rhythm guitar has a chunky riff which kind of leads off and then in the chorus the guitar has a slight funk influence.
There's something about hard rock and heavy metal...... volume up is nearly a requirement!
Low spark of High Heeled Boys by the super group Traffic!
Interesting song choice! It’s difficult to encapsulate any particular era with one song, which is okay! Here’s an experiment: Do a series where you only analyze a band’s fifth best song and see if the chat goes out of their mind for not going in a prescribed order. Keep it random! You have one of the best music channels on RUclips. I always look forward to your videos.
Now I remember why I don't listen to them.
May I recommend Motley Crue's "Shout at the Devil"? Their break through hit
Allot (most?) rock songs, hard rock songs, are driven by Guitar. This drives the song. That is why it is dominate and/or equal to the vocals. If you don't like heavy guitar and able to appreciate guitar solos then that cuts out a huge swath of enjoyment you will ever get from Rock.
I think in rock and metal there is an inherint desire to continously push the envelope and find ones own expression, while at the same time paying homage to those Who came before and gave you the inspiration in the first place. Im not saying this doesnt apply to other genres, I just have a feeling that it is particularly present in rock/metal
It would sound much better in stereo. Bob Rock produced this song. And the stereo mix is amazing.
Taking a look at the decades From the 50's till now. It shows that in the beginning of each decade. Music is one way, but by the end of that decade. Everything changes by leaps and bounds. And most of it is all down to recording technique's that evolved as the music evolved. Better and better recording equipment is being made, better and hotter guitar amps, and microphones are being used. And most of all. Vocal styles really changed. It's all rock n roll at it's core, but the styles and sounds of it changed as time progressed. Back when the Beatles quit touring cause they could not hear theirselves on stage, cause the PA System was lacking in size and power. To where they can now blow roof's off large arena's is a huge leap. With every advent of better equipment (be it recording, on stage playing, or front of house sound) It help to take the music being made to the next level.
Different for sure, you went from "pop rock" with the Go-Go's, to "hard rock" / "heavy metal" with Mötley Crüe.
Switching from the Go-Go's to Mötley Crüe is definitely a switch.
The "feel" is so different between the upbeat cheerful pop music, and the heavy forward driving sound of metal.
One thing though. motley was not heavy metal. They were Glam metal
I would describe Motely Crue as Hair Metal or as already was stated, Glam Metal. I liked them when I was a teen, but they are one of the 80's bands - and there were a lot of them - where I look back and wonder why.
@@Shawn-mo6dh
Glam Metal is a subgenre of Heavy Metal.
So, your statement is as accurate as saying "that's not a dog, it is a terrier"
@@aliquida7132 no Glam metal and heavy metal are very different. Example.: Metallica heavy metal. Poison: Glam
@@michaelb1761 no such thing as hair metal that is a insult. There's heavy metal and Glam metal, motley was Glam.
When you ask why it went this way rather than something like in the 70s... well, they did both, and many more. Rock development isn't a line, it is a tree. There are so many sub-genres of rock at this point it's nearly impossible to keep track of, even if you are a fan. Some have fizzled out, some have kept going and spawned more branches. Mötley Crüe was part of a sub-genre called hair or glam metal, which burned very brightly and then fizzled out over the 80s to 90s. This loud, in your face, party vibe was reacted to with Grunge, which I presume you will be exposed to shortly in the history series, likely with Nirvana, which went in a very different direction that was much more gritty and raw. but there was also Industrial (which you've heard a bit of with Rammstein, but Nine Inch Nails is more typical) and concurrently with this there was Thrash Metal still going (like Metallica), and so on.
I mean I don’t think this is the best song to represent what that particular era was.
There are plenty of other Mötley Crüe Santa would fit the bill better or even other hair metal band.
But hey you do you.
Actually though just to add. Once you get into the 90s you cannot cannot cannot ignore smells like teen Spirit. You cannot pick in Obscura song with that one.
That brought a sea change in American music
These are not picked by her.
@@dago87able
Actually not just making this comments to her but to everyone involved with this particular series. Hopefully Vlad and Carl is well.
@@1massboy Got you. The ones in this particular series are picked by Karl.
If you only had a few songs to show someone that exemplified the 1980s would you choose "Dr Feelgood" and "My Lips are Sealed" - I wouldn't. Not at all good examples imo. Neither would be in my top 1000 and hair metal was not a highly significant genre imo. If people insist on including hair metal at all (I'd ignore it) there are much better examples than this Motley Crue mayhem :)
In all fairness to Karl, no one could pick out just two songs to properly represent an entire decade or rock, and someone would always think the choices were bad ones no matter who picked them.
Please help me know why I haven’t seen back in black on this channel yet.
I love your analogy of the little guy singing in the chair or whatever it was :-) This is around when the almost-heavy-metal bands actually started going mainstream, although I call this hard rock. In heavy metal, often the instruments are as important (or more important) than the vocals. I do think this was a good choice for one of the two 80s songs, even though I don't like this song. (This reminded me why I could never like this band - the high-pitched and weird whiny vocals of the singer is a turnoff for me that I could never get past.)
They are dumb and cheesy, but I cannot bring myself to hate them. Kickstart My Heart is a far better song in my book, but this one almost perfectly epitomizes a dismal trend in rock that prompted Grunge.
@Ganjiblob Flankis I couldn't hate this band. I just wouldn't go out of my way to listen. I agree that song is better.
They stumbled across the globe string out and drunk while the drummer had a 360° rotating kit. I would think that speaks to their prowess as musicians. The sound and the style was all record company produced. I will say that their first album had some tremendous songs -- bangers if you will -- that stand up. And each of the 5 main albums all have a few songs where their talent outs from behind the hair, make-up and heroin.
As a born Southern Californian I reserve the right to "hate" Motley Crue and Joe Montana. Doesn't really mean I hate either, those "hates" are earned. I reserve the right to share a nice vintage if I run into any of the mentioned. But yeah, certain situations call for certain measures. That's when having a deep musical knowledge is a plus. Motley Crue, Social Distortion, No Doubt, or Common Sense, may you find a use for them all.
This is priceless!
I’m looking forward to Amy and Carl’s discussion, mostly because I am quite intrigued byCarl’s rationale for his picks. As much as I despised most of the music typical of that dreadful decade, he could have chosen better examples of what it had to offer than The Go Gos or Motley Crue.
I totally agree! Carl isn't doing a good job picking songs to introduce her too in my humble opinion.
Guns N Roses would probably be a better example, and there's plenty of better 80's bands than them.
I'm so interested to see Anthony Bourdain eat at McDonald's.
I think McDonald's is a little high quality for Crue. Maybe White Castle or prepacked Jimmy Dean burgers or something.
I have a feeling not many of your viewers were metal heads. This song, good or not, was hugely popular with lots of radio play.
It's not metal, it's hard rock.
This is definitely not metal!
I don't think it really counts as rock music at all, it's just obnoxious noise.
@@jamesmcdonald2680 potaito/potauto. . . a subjective opinion as to what defines the difference.
Since when did popularity indicate quality ? There are many artists and bands that were/are great and popular but also there were/are great bands and artists who weren't popular.
@@n.d.m.515 Two wrong spellings of potato. Must be a relative of Dan Quayle.
You're studying 80s Rock and your teacher gives you "Or Lips are Sealed" and "Dr. Feelgood"?!?!? You need a different teacher! His explanation better be good.
You are correct, but in all fairness to Karl no one could pick out just two songs out of millions to represent an entire decade.
I starts to feel uncomfortable now to see what Karl chose as second choice. It drives me away from watching this video. It was initially a good idea to about the popdecades, but this turns out in a farce, unfortunately.
I have said for decades that Motley set the pace for the 80's with the album Too Fast For Love.
Ooof, this dude does not abide MC. I will catch your next video.
When the only personal opinion given on the song is "It's interesting" and "I want to understand how it got this way", that says it all 😁 I myself would be hard pressed to say anything really positive about this track, except that there are instruments and a singer, and that I am proud that I managed to listen to it until the end.
Otherwise, to know a bit where it comes from, I think you should listen to Aerosmith and Van Halen who started in the 70's. Without being a special fan of these bands, it seems to me that they still had greater skills in songwriting.
one of my favorite songs and favorite bands of all time, I was really hoping we'd get to something like this once you got to the 80's and this selection did not disappoint
You might like Home Sweet Home by Motley Crew
How do you choose which songs to listen to? Apologies if you've already addressed this but I'm very curious. This is an interesting selection.
Her friend Carl seems to be the recommender. This is the "late 80's" chapter, so they picked a hard rock/heavy metal song since The Go Go's were rep of the early 80's. Motley is a valid choice and a number of songs from the 87 album or 89 album would've worked too. When there are many choices, I guess they just picked one. It's a nice choice.
I noticed that there are three main kinds of people in you tube comments. Mindless adulators, mindless complainers, and mindless requesters. I'm probably the last two.
The sampling of rock history that you're getting is simply too shallow to provide an answer to the question of "how did we get to this point." To accurately answer that question you'd need many more data points, and you'd probably also want to follow individual lines of development, because some of your samples are from unrelated lines, despite all being generally in the rock (or at least pop) genre. It's still a useful and valuable exercise, of course, but probably not satisfying for addressing some of the questions you're asking.
I love some Crue, however Shout at the devil was their best album. Vince sounded great for the band IN THE STUDIO, live he was hit or miss (mainly miss).
I have times when I'm focused that I like a little Crue, but I think this was a terrible choice. Nick Mar's is certainly talented, but Motley was not known for their musical compositions. Going from the poppish Go Go's to Motley Crue is not a good jump, Carl you should do some new wave, Thompson Twins, ABC, Simple Minds. There is some wonderful, well composed songs from that era. Plus this song was released in 1989, and it really did not come into it's own for a while, so I almost consider it living in the 90's...
Even though I can appreciate the quality of some of the compositions of the New Wave bands you mention, especially Simple Minds, I could never get past the vocal style of any of them, from The Cure, Duran Duran, Spandau Ballet, etc., etc. No rational explanation. I just hate it.
Do Meshuggah. Any song will do, but my favorite is "Concatenation." : )
Since you're in the 80's, do your ears a favor and check out some XTC. "Senses Working Overtime" is a great 80's Classic, and has a lot to digest. Check out XTC
Well, I personally liked that one a lot better than the Helloween one a while ago! 😄
It is hard not to think that if her first introduction to rock was this history of rock that she would have thrown in the towel by now. It's not that these are bad songs. So far I think since the 60s it has been Twist and Shout, the Boxer, Southern Man, My Sharona, Our Lips are Sailed, and Dr Feelgood. I like most of these songs, and dislike only one. But they are all kind of simple standard pop songs. Fortunately she has already heard bands like Pink Floyd, Queen, Jethro Tull, and better Beatles songs etc.
The problem with the two songs for a decade approach is that one can get the impression that the 70's in rock was not much different thatn the 60s because the two songs chosen were not that much different. Here one gets the idea that the late 80's was much heavier than what came before based on a band whose importance lies not in being heavier than what came before, but in combining catchy pop elements to existing heavy metal tropes. Motley Crue is mostly a throwback to the 70's metal band Kiss. They were part of a calculation that if you took heavy metal sounds, made the band members suitable for celebrity magazines, and gave it catchy choruses then it was possible to get girls to listen to heavy metal music. And the doubling of the potential audience was a great draw to record companies. Def Leppard had shown that earlier in the decade.
A song with absolutely no dynamic diversity, except for the fade-out.
Whenever you do the grunge era, definitely check out "Oceans" by Pearl Jam
I kind of figured Carl would pick something from hair metal or glam metal, to represent the late 80s. I think King Edward, having been accused often of being the biological father of this type of music, would demand a paternity test.
But this is worth listening to. And then listen to "I'm the One", "Sinner's Swing", or "The Full Bug" by VH from 1978-82 era, and you'll notice the difference in their ability to swing while playing heavy rock, and how it started to devolve and get played more straight up by later bands.
Love this song, the story of the Crews Heroin dealer..
The more I listen to this series the more convinced I am that it should be subtitled a history of American rock. Motley Crue are a Def Leppard tribute act anyhow.
'This series' ? Pink Floyd, The Beatles, Genesis are all British and so are Def Leppard for that matter.
@@williamwallace5857 Yes this series. Amy has analysed the bands you mention as stand alone tracks or as part of the whole album "The Wall" series.
However this "history of rock music" series has covered the following bands... The Beatles, Simon & Garfunkel, Lynyrd Skynyrd, The Knack, The Go Go's and Motley Crue. Only one of those isn't American, and they had such huge success in America that they might as well have been. Huge non-American bands that wrote the history of rock have been overlooked. Where are the Stones, Led Zeppelin, The Who, Deep Purple, Black Sabbath, U2?
It's all very bizarre.
@@radman8321 It's really tough to choose only two songs for every decade. Otherwise we'd have to have at least one per year and a new episode every day. I think Karl is making the best of what little time is available to get there.
@@ArturdeSousaRocha I appreciate the difficulties, but there is a world of rock outside of North America.
I'm enjoying the series anyway, and I do appreciate that any history of anything is just one version of history. Every historian tells a different tale.
It's just this last selection has tipped me over the edge, there is nothing to commend it at all.
Yes, there has been a very clear North American perspective so far. I am hoping that when they start going into detail there will be an appropriate amount of attention given to the great non-American bands!
The vocals being set further back has much more to do with the production than the band itself. But it's a technique that's used a lot in hard rock and heavy metal to give the impression that the band is loud. It's a more live sounding mix, where you imagine the roar of the guitar amps and the beating of the drums overpowering the singer.
Motley Crue is not a band that I care for, though there is a lot of interesting chromaticism and chord voicings in their songs. My issue is that they represent all the debauchery people associate with rock n roll that has made it so difficult for the genre to be taken seriously as an artform. Motley is the poster child for the "sex, drugs, and rock n roll" party lifestyle...and they're proud of it. And I personally would rather listen to something with substance.
Interesting choice for the first 80s song... Ahh the 80s.. I was brought up in the 80s and did listen to this and a lot of the other "hair metal" or glam metal bands as they were called (and they are not really metal at all).. And the music was more like pop music with loud guitars than traditional rock about as basic as you can get technically speaking. And dont get me wrong, I loved a lot of it at the time but it hasnt aged well at all compared to the 60s and 70s rock. I would have started with Sweet Child o Mine by Guns n Roses. Pretty much the a typical 80s rock song. Motley Crue came too late and as has been mentioned on another post, the only real talent in that band was the guitar player. They didnt last that long.
"Pop music with loud guitars" sounds like a good description to me.
Same here. Like most teenagers at the time, I was listening to the Crue, Def Leppard, and a bunch of other lesser known bands (Faster Pussycat, Bullet Boys, LA Guns, anyone?). But, it really didn't age well. I would much rather listen to George Thorogood or ZZ Topp now. Metallica's about the only 80's Heavy Metal band that I still enjoy listening too and nothing of theirs after the 80's lol.
@@michaelb1761 90s will be interesting too.. Alternative/Indi/Grunge rock stage where they were the opposite of what came preciously as everyone was sick of the big hair, makeup and skin tight spandex look and power ballads. Instead it was baggy jumpers and jeans and tshirts with depressing lyrics and dark sounds... Being there at the time its easy to understand why and how we got from one phase to the next.
I know she has already listened to VanHalen, but if you wanted to give her an example of good 80's heavy metal they have at least a dozen great songs. If you would have strayed away from "hair" metal, Metallica would have actually given her some meat to talk about.
She did a lot of Metallica songs, also one by Megadeth
I'd bet that one thing your reacting to here is the amount of "compression" used in the mix - it's compression in the sense that it reduces the dynamic range of the music in specific ways - one result of this is that the vocals and instruments "sit" very close together.
haven´t listened to any Mötley Crüe in 30 years or so, and this here reminded me, why.
Never listened to these guys, but if it wasn't for the title I would think I was listening to Aerosmith.
Steven Tyler just rolled over in his grave, oh wait he's not dead, well he looks half dead and takes offense. Back in the Saddle buries this garbage.
You should listen to “Diary of a Madman” by Ozzy. Other reactors with classical background were impressed with the composition which includes classical influences and unusual time signature
Photograph by def leppard is a great 80s rock song.👍
Umm, no it isn't.
No problem, I stopped long before the middle.
An album from August 89 to talk about music from the 80S? Shout at the Devil would have been a better choice. Priest and Maiden were the big guys of heavy metal with Screaming for Vengeance, Defenders of the Faith and Number of the Beast, Piece of Mind. Breezing over the 80s with the GO GOs and Dr Feelgood is just weird. You are not having a very good "journey".
Great choice!! Yes, Motley Crue is quintessential 80's--super good 80's. As for the mix, I've always viewed hard rock/metal voices and instruments on equal footing. I guess if you're used to the voices being prominent, it may sound like this voice taking a back seat. But I hear it as the singer, bass, guitar and drums all recorded on equal footing in the mixing. LOVE that she chose Motley Crue!!
You're really lowering your standards with this 80's poser hair metal nonsense.
I was a teenager in the 1980s and I though I didn't like Rock and Roll because of bands like Motley Crue. Then I discovered the great bands from the 60s. In my opinion, the late 70s and early 80s were dreadful, except for Reggae, Punk, New Wave and the New Romantics. Even some Disco songs were OK, but most mainstream "Rock" was pretty bad.
To me this one has always seemed like one of their more "artistic" songs. It's about the seedy, sleazy, dangerous world of a drug dealer and the music literally evokes an appropriately evil image of violence and flames. Vince Neil's snarling vocals compliment that image very well.