I saw them once on the Thunderstruck tour. Angus was still...Young. (terrible, I know). I made the mistake of thinking, A: they would start on time and B: they would only play about 1.5 hrs. I had to split during Hells Bells to catch a ride home . That sucked.

Not Crap.


Rifftastic.

I remember hearing Back in Black for the first time, when i was ten or eleven and being blown away. It really changed my life, and they were the first band i really loved.

you guys who voted crap aren't listening right.

there's a lot in subtlety. and you're totally missing it. and guess what, since some of you were being dicks about not liking 'em, i'm not gonna tell you what you're missing.

only that you're missing it.

not liking ac/dc is like not liking the ramones. to which the only response is, "what the fuck's wrong with you?"

ac/dc=not crap. at all. go listen to their cover of "baby please don't go" and try again.

Not Crap for Maximum Overdrive.

Dylan wrote:They will forever hold a special place in my heart, no matter how many Rubin-fucked records they make.

By the way, I have heard three different interpretations of the beginning of "For Those About To Rock" - which one do you favour?

1st & 2nd string, round about the 12th fret
1st and 2nd string, open B
1st & 3rd string, 12th fret-ish

In my mind's ear, it's not an open string, and the interval seems farther apart than one string--you know, in terms of timbre, the way a fretted low A seems deeper than a ringing A string.

So I think the third option.

This gets to the genius of the rhythm playing--Malcolm very, very rarely plays more than four strings tops, and most of the time it's two or three.

And he selects the particular strings and voicings and his chord positioning very deliberately.

And he will play a given riff two or three different ways depending on where it is in the song--intro build-up, post-chorus comedown, rave-up part. Often the rhythm is the same, but he will add a note, play it farther up the neck, play a previously fretted note on an open string, etc.

Not even getting into his picking technique, muting, etc. It's extremely sophisticated playing.

You can learn most of what there is to know about playing hard rock rhythm guitar by listening carefully to all of Back in Black. It's basically all there. And he continues to get it right on every record, even when the songs are not up to snuff. He's absolutely terrific.

Boring, pudgy-pubescent, stodgy, retardedly-fanned CRAP.

zero.

One day somebody 'cool' will dare to point out that Angus Young is actually very, very far from being an interesting writer/player and *pop* the weird 'AC/DC as a ubiquitous name-to-check band bubble' will burst.

Is Steve single handedly responsible for AC/DC being one of those bands that people like? I can't remember anybody (apart from the metal-for-life folk) ever listening to AC/DC when I was younger, and then bam suddenly everybody's a (retrospective) fan.

Weird.

CRAP.

I've never been able to get my head their canonical status in the rock world either. I've never found them to be anything more than a pedestrian hard rock band with a few catchy riffs here and there. I need a psychotician to explain how it all works. Does anyone have Daniel Dennet's pager number?

Adam CR wrote:One day somebody 'cool' will dare to point out that Angus Young is actually very, very far from being an interesting writer/player..

He isn't particularly. Malcolm Young (who writes most of the stuff BTW) on the other hand is up there with Keef for minimal rhythmic brilliance.

Adam CR wrote:Is Steve single handedly responsible for AC/DC being one of those bands that people like?

No.

Adam CR wrote:I can't remember anybody (apart from the metal-for-life folk) ever listening to AC/DC when I was younger, and then bam suddenly everybody's a (retrospective) fan.

This statement rivals even me for sweepingly dumb generalisations, but anyway, Blow Up Your Video was one of the first albums I ever owned. One of the first. The rest were really embarassing.

Also, they hadn't made a decent record for many many years until Stiff Upper Lip. Which is...pretty good.

Adam CR wrote:Weird.

Not really. The reason people like AC/DC is not just what they do, but the slavish devotion to doing one pretty simple thing really well, over and over and over again, year in, year out. I am convinced this is the way to be wildly successful in any field. You've got a secret recipe for pizza that makes it really popular? After a while don't go: "Aw, shite. I'm bored, and listless with my pizza success. I think next year's secret recipe will be 'darker' and more 'me'. " They've never got bored of it, and so neither has the audience.

How many bands have gotten more successful after losing their frontman? I know that success is not a great metric in measuring bands, but usually bands get worse when they continue on with a new front man. Witness Deep Purple.

I imagine that those who think AC/DC are crap love a band I detest.

rocker654 wrote:I imagine that those who think AC/DC are crap love a band I detest.

The Smiths?