I don't know if this was already said because I didn't read the entire post but at the very least it's publicity. Win or lose he's getting exposure. It genius.
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
When did they ever confess they are a parody of a metal band? They aren't even metal at all. Obviously, he has the talent to enter the rock world, as he's been playing the biggest stages in the world since the 70s. You don't sell millions of albums based only on your stage show.
As for the last part about people who "loyally and generously" giving the band money over the years seeing things different, that's a big passive aggressive, eh? We are blinded by fanboyism and money spent? Gimme a break. They're not even in my top favorite bands. I just enjoy the bands material up until '78, and when people say he can't play/is talentless, it's just ridiculous and shows a person's ignorance along with probably a good helping of jealousy.
I hate Jaco's music and see nothing genius about it, I don't go dumping on him. But when it's a Gene thread, it's fine for everybody to pile on.
I don't buy this argument. Yes - there are some icons that wouldn't pack a local bar now and there are some that are still completely relevant and absolutely would attract the same attention and reverence. Rush and Queen as examples are two bands that in their prime would still be totally up to par today.You don't know what he can or can't do. He did what was apropos
and there's genius behind that whether you agree or not. 99.9999% of music is for entertainment value and saying they were mediocre is totally myopic. They were the best there was in THEIR market. Geddy Lee is mediocre compared to Victor Wooten. Sid Vicious is mediocre compared to Gene Simmons. Hendrix was mediocre compared to Steve Vai. Want more examples? There are quite a few "icons" that if they came out today wouldn't even pack a local bar. That's an invalid argument.
Wow! A full blown ad hominem attack directed at somebody because they're not impressed by somebody you're claiming you're also not impressed by? That takes some serious mental acrobatics, don't you think?
Ok…just to clear the air…
Sorry if my opinion upset you. But we are all entitled to have our own. If you choose to throw a pile of personal insults my way by suggesting my comments are motivated by things like "jealousy," "passive aggression" (you might want to look that up btw - it doesn't mean what you appear to think it does) and that I'm basically an "ignorant" person just because you happen to disagree with me, I'll try to live with that.
However, I don't happen to care for Kiss music or Gene Simmons for the reasons I've given. And I don't consider him "a genius" in any sense that I can think of. If that still somehow bothers you, I'm sorry you feel that way about it. Perhaps there will be something we can both agree on at some other time.
Cheers!![]()
That's kinda what I was saying. Queen and Rush undoubtedly but Hendrix and Bob Dylan? I doubt it.I don't buy this argument. Yes - there are some icons that wouldn't pack a local bar now and there are some that are still completely relevant and absolutely would attract the same attention and reverence. Rush and Queen as examples are two bands that in their prime would still be totally up to par today.
In ANY era KISS were not a great band - and neither were the Sex Pistols. In the latter's case that was kind of the whole point though. In the case of KISS is was an entire brand marketing that had never been seen before. The talent was almost secondary to the image.
I'm not here to just dump on Gene. What he and KISS did was brilliant as far as the whole package went. I think legions of kids in the 70's knew about the band without even hearing a lick of their music. I guess that alone is genius.
As far as us agreeing in the future, who cares? We are two random strangers on the internet.
Shocking.
It's never bothered me that Gene's gone out and done everything in his power to make a lot of money. I think he's an astute businessman.
However, this makes me question his sanity...
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
That gesture is also the deaf people's sign for "I love you" in sign language. I haven't found proof that his request was denied, but I heard on the radio that it was because of the deaf sign. Besides, how do you trademark a hand gesture that's been in use by millions of people worldwide, and how do you prove you came up with it?
Isn't that Paul in the front?
Lennon wore the round glasses.
obviously Ringo on the right, Harrison on the left
![]()