My previous post was on the hair metal genre. Originally this post was suppose to be that one, a discussion of the genre and and analysis of sorts of who is a hair band and who is not. I got sidetracked onto a much interesting topic about the ability of the genre to revive itself. So now i will focus on the topic of who I consider the "hair bands" who I see as often mislabeled.
First, the bands that got lumped in by accident. One thing that I found interesting about this genre is the number of bands that got lumped in. There are probably several reasons, I have a few theories. The bands these bands toured with; if you are an up and coming band, an example would be Tesla, and get an opportunity to open for a big band, Poison, you take that opportunity. Unfortunately, you get labeled as something you might not sonically be like. I use Tesla and Poison, because they did in fact tour together, and they could not be further apart, outside of the lone fact that they make a form of hard rock music. A second reason is that labels signed up as many of these hard rock/metal bands as they could, so the label had more control over the marketing of the band which led to further confusion over the band's genre. These factors I think result in the mislabeling. But, I want to help set the record straight on these bands.
1. Guns N Roses - this band gets labeled as a hair band from time to time. The reason, I think, is that in the Welcome to the Jungle video. lead singer Axl Rose does his hair up and puts on heavy amounts of makeup, looking like a typical L.A. hair band. But, this is the only time in the band's career he appears like this. Everyone else is dressed in a gypsy-like manner, jeans and t-shirts, Axl included. Almost every album they released had a parental advisory, they controversial, (see G'N'R Lies), they were incredibly diverse musically (the Illusion albums), they were full of attitude and anger and they were really dangerous (causing riots in Montreal and St. Louis). The band was never a hair band, but somehow gets labeled as one.
2. Def Leppard - A little tougher to defend, but I think it can be done. Lep was one of the biggest bands of the decade, making a very poppy hard rock sound. But it is tough to call the band a hair band, they were just a big band. Pyromania and Hysteria combined to sell 22 million + in the U.S. since their releases, an amazing feat. The Lep members are similar to GNR in the sense that they just didn't have that hair metal look, no one had big hair, no makeup, and clothing was really pretty simple. The band's first 2 albums are clearly metal albums specifically NewWaveOfBritishHeavyMetal (NWOBHM) which is akin to Iron Maiden, which is not a hair band. Pyromania had elements of the NWOBHM and Hysteria's producer, Mutt Lange wanted to create the hard rock version of Michael Jackson's Thriller. So, I come to the conclusion that Def Lep cannot be labeled a hair band.
3. Jackyl - Not well known as the first 2, but a band that is grossly mislabeled. The band came out in 1992, a time in which hair bands were dead, but this band went onto sell 1 million copies of their debut and their followup went gold in 1994 and they played Woodstock. They did write some pretty nasty and dirty songs (Dirty Little Mind, Down on Me, I could never touch you like you do), but the band is really more of a combination of a Southern Rock and Metal band. A tough band to define; the band loves the South, from 'Redneck Punk' to 'Dixieland', to 'Dumb Ass County Boy', not typical of hairbands. They really don't have any ballads song. Most of their songs represent a sense of work hard, play hard attitude, motorcycle riding, be loud and be proud.
4. Skid Row - Such a great band that had a hugely successful album, that is a hair album. But, after that self titled debut and power ballads, the band's true colors appeared. A pure metal band. Slave to the Grind (1991) was a heavy metal band, the album went from talking about typical hair band topics into social commentary. Poverty (Livin on a Chain Gang) political unrest (Slave to the Grind, The Threat) political corruption (Monkey Business) and drug abuse (Wasted Time). The band toured with Guns N Roses and Metallica for this album and followed this album with an even heavier album in 1995. The band was mis-labeled because of their first album, when they were clearly much heavier and had more to offer.
5. Tesla - The final band I want to talk about. This one, out of all of the above mentioned bands seems to be most mislabeled. The band is from Sacramento CA, probably the biggest band besides Deftones to come out of the city. The band's sound is not hair metal, it is really tough to label. There is alot of talent and several of their early releases contain both electric and acoustic guitar parts playing together or alternating between the two. The band was a not glam at all, I mean the lead singer drove a cement truck for a living before the band. The band was named after Nikolai Tesla, considered by many the inventor of the radio, and had songs and albums named after the debate of Tesla (the man) concerning who invented the radio. My point, who writes a song about this, who would right a song about Edison, who would do a cover of Five Man Electric Band's "Signs". The answer is a. Tesla, and b. not a hair band.
There are few other bands that can be debated as well, but I felt that these 5 were the most critical since they were almost all very successful and had been mislabeled far too often. There is one band that defines the genre, but there are key elements. The look (big hair/makeup), the sound(metal, but poppy/catchy, and power ballads)(strong 70s influence), the subject matter (girls, partying, drinking and more girls), the attitude (I am a rock star, I am king od my world), and the clothing(spandex/leather, black and then a lot of bad colors like neons). Thus for some reason or another all of the above mention bands cannot be labeled as a hair bands.
No comments:
Post a Comment