Unpopular Green Day Opinions

[Spike]

They haven't sold any cds according to zack so they aren't making music... only music that shows talent is those who sells millions of records...

In Zack's theory Green Day is talented but someone like Bon Jovi or Rihanna is even more talented...

But it's true, why do you think One Direction have won so many awards?

[Z J]

Its writing music it don't matter if it for a garage band or a world band its still writing music...

But your comment just screams idiotic...

thanks for the personal attack that's just what I hope for when I come on GDC!!

Ad hominems scream idiotic, how ironic.

Yes it is. Writing music is writing music, and if you believe that there's a difference in writing for a band like Green Day and writing for, say, Pinhead Gunpowder, then that only works on the premise that you believe Green Day are sell-outs and only write music that they think will sell well. And that just isn't the case, their style hasn't even changed that much from the early days. Green Day are successful because they write great songs and have had fantastic marketing. If they hadn't had the marketing, they probably wouldn't have been so successful, but the songs would still have been just as good because they'd have been written by the same people. Your comment basically suggests that you could be the best songwriter in the history of the world, but if you don't have mainstream success (which can happen for an infinite number of reasons), you're not a good songwriter. It just doesn't add up.

when you sum up my comment with "it basically says" then I think you're missing what I'm saying.

So to defend myself from your schoolyard-style retorts, I'll say this:

1. Green Day did not start popular. They weren't rich. They put punk in a place where it wasn't allowed (the mainstream). Billie's talent helped put them there. Jason merely joined an already great band.

2. Billie's creativity MADE Green Day popular and THAT is why I think it matters that Green Day has had more success then one of Jason's bands. I don't think record sales necessarily equal talent but when we're talking about how good a person is at writing rock music, the person that is able to appeal to a broader crowd for a longer period of time is the more talented person, that being Billie.

3. I don't know where in the hell you got that I was calling Green Day sellouts. That was nonsense.

4. WhiteTim personal attacks on a forum for discussion and from an adult no less are out of line.

5. Hermione I call them side bands because they get far less attention from their creators. Not because of quality of music although it is plausible that quality could take a hit due to less attention

6. I do listen to their side projects. The Foxboro Hot Tubs album has some great songs but I just consider it another Green Day album honestly. Just changed it up a bit. Same people.

7. I hate One Direction and please when I'm talking about sales I mean in relation to the impact the music has. Green Day is in a different realm. As is all rock music. I consider it a testament to a bands ability when they're able to impact the mainstream while maintaining their identity.

8. Bon Jovi are good at what they do. They are not necessarily my style but I respect what they were able to do singing (mostly) rock music. However, they aren't nearly as impactful as Green Day. I mention sales as making an impact but it isn't the only way to make an impact. I think we all can agree One Direction is not really respected with in the music industry. Same with most of this top 40 music that is smothering the charts

I hope I cleared any misconceptions up. But if you still feel like calling me an idiot, so be it

[Flyingdonutz]

What is tremelo picking?

Picking really really really fast on one string. Gives a really cool effect. See the 2nd half of the East Jesus Nowhere solo.

[Z J]

But it's true, why do you think One Direction have won so many awards?

yep definitely what I meant. Classic strawman argument

[Flyingdonutz]

Billie Joe is a far far far better guitarist and songwriter than Jason. As far as technicality goes Billie has been playing for a very very long time as I'm sure Jason has as well, but Billie has written a very fair share of great guitar solos. More than Jason anyway. But as far as overall talent goes? Billie has a very Angus Young-ish ear for a great riff. Part of the reason they've been such a successful band.

99 percent of people with over 50 million records sold are fantastic musicians. Just sayin'.

[Fuzz]

I think many of you are writing Jasons' ability off because he plays as the support in Green Day. But he's an exceptional musician, just because he can play what Billie Joe writes doesn't mean he isn't really damn good in his own right. I remember talking with Jason Freese a couple years ago and he said one of his biggest highlights of touring with Green Day was to be able to spend time playing music with Jason on the tour bus. Actually both he and Jeff Matika talked about just how great he is. His role in Green Day is not in the limelight, because that's not where he wants to be. But it's pretty silly to judge his abilities solely based on that.

[WhiteTim]

thanks for the personal attack that's just what I hope for when I come on GDC!!

Ad hominems scream idiotic, how ironic.

when you sum up my comment with "it basically says" then I think you're missing what I'm saying.

So to defend myself from your schoolyard-style retorts, I'll say this:

1. Green Day did not start popular. They weren't rich. They put punk in a place where it wasn't allowed (the mainstream). Billie's talent helped put them there. Jason merely joined an already great band.

2. Billie's creativity MADE Green Day popular and THAT is why I think it matters that Green Day has had more success then one of Jason's bands. I don't think record sales necessarily equal talent but when we're talking about how good a person is at writing rock music, the person that is able to appeal to a broader crowd for a longer period of time is the more talented person, that being Billie.

3. I don't know where in the hell you got that I was calling Green Day sellouts. That was nonsense.

4. WhiteTim personal attacks on a forum for discussion and from an adult no less are out of line.

5. Hermione I call them side bands because they get far less attention from their creators. Not because of quality of music although it is plausible that quality could take a hit due to less attention

6. I do listen to their side projects. The Foxboro Hot Tubs album has some great songs but I just consider it another Green Day album honestly. Just changed it up a bit. Same people.

7. I hate One Direction and please when I'm talking about sales I mean in relation to the impact the music has. Green Day is in a different realm. As is all rock music. I consider it a testament to a bands ability when they're able to impact the mainstream while maintaining their identity.

8. Bon Jovi are good at what they do. They are not necessarily my style but I respect what they were able to do singing (mostly) rock music. However, they aren't nearly as impactful as Green Day. I mention sales as making an impact but it isn't the only way to make an impact. I think we all can agree One Direction is not really respected with in the music industry. Same with most of this top 40 music that is smothering the charts

I hope I cleared any misconceptions up. But if you still feel like calling me an idiot, so be it

Wait you think Green Day is more impactful than Bon Jovi is this why Bon Jovi still sells out tours in 2013... and is ranked 3rd highest paid entertainer of 2013...

And I didn't attack you just your statement writing songs are different for huge bands and small bands when they are not is idiotic... if you can't see that well sorry but writing a song is NOT different be it from Green Day on down to a garage band only difference is one will be heard by majority and one not so much it doesn't affect the QUALITY of the song...

[Z J]

I think many of you are writing Jasons' ability off because he plays as the support in Green Day. But he's an exceptional musician, just because he can play what Billie Joe writes doesn't mean he isn't really damn good in his own right. I remember talking with Jason Freese a couple years ago and he said one of his biggest highlights of touring with Green Day was to be able to spend time playing music with Jason on the tour bus. Actually both he and Jeff Matika talked about just how great he is. His role in Green Day is not in the limelight, because that's not where he wants to be. But it's pretty silly to judge his abilities solely based on that.

It's really all we have to judge him off of, though. Fair or not. Billie inherently has the advantage.

[Spike]

thanks for the personal attack that's just what I hope for when I come on GDC!!

Ad hominems scream idiotic, how ironic.

when you sum up my comment with "it basically says" then I think you're missing what I'm saying.

So to defend myself from your schoolyard-style retorts, I'll say this:

1. Green Day did not start popular. They weren't rich. They put punk in a place where it wasn't allowed (the mainstream). Billie's talent helped put them there. Jason merely joined an already great band.

2. Billie's creativity MADE Green Day popular and THAT is why I think it matters that Green Day has had more success then one of Jason's bands. I don't think record sales necessarily equal talent but when we're talking about how good a person is at writing rock music, the person that is able to appeal to a broader crowd for a longer period of time is the more talented person, that being Billie.

3. I don't know where in the hell you got that I was calling Green Day sellouts. That was nonsense.

4. WhiteTim personal attacks on a forum for discussion and from an adult no less are out of line.

5. Hermione I call them side bands because they get far less attention from their creators. Not because of quality of music although it is plausible that quality could take a hit due to less attention

6. I do listen to their side projects. The Foxboro Hot Tubs album has some great songs but I just consider it another Green Day album honestly. Just changed it up a bit. Same people.

7. I hate One Direction and please when I'm talking about sales I mean in relation to the impact the music has. Green Day is in a different realm. As is all rock music. I consider it a testament to a bands ability when they're able to impact the mainstream while maintaining their identity.

8. Bon Jovi are good at what they do. They are not necessarily my style but I respect what they were able to do singing (mostly) rock music. However, they aren't nearly as impactful as Green Day. I mention sales as making an impact but it isn't the only way to make an impact. I think we all can agree One Direction is not really respected with in the music industry. Same with most of this top 40 music that is smothering the charts

I hope I cleared any misconceptions up. But if you still feel like calling me an idiot, so be it

I'm not going to respond point by point because I actually agree with a lot of what you're saying.

But, you did say this:

Writing for a world-class band is not on the same level as writing for a bunch of side bands. You can't pretend it's situation-neutral.

I'm really baffled by that. The only difference between a 'world-class' band and a 'side band' is in commercial success. Take Allister, for example. A lot of people have never heard of them. But take an identical style of songwriting, throw in a female singer, and you've got Paramore's first album. I assume given Paramore's success they'd be considered world-class? At the end of the day, a songwriter is going to be as good at songwriting whether they're successful or not. Sure, songwriting leads to success if you're exceptional, IN SOME CASES, but when has becoming successful led to good songwriting? Never. That's where my bafflement is.

Furthermore, obviously we agree that Billie is an amazing songwriter, and as you say, his songs have appealed to masses of people for years. But his songwriting would still be as good as it would be if Green Day hadn't become successful. If Dookie had bombed and the band had gone nowhere, those songs on Dookie would still be as fantastic as they are. What I'm saying is, there's a lot more to being successful than songwriting, and given that bands like One Direction (I'm sorry, in context it's not a remotely strawman argument), I think that proves that. If you look at bands like Avail or Bodyjar, they're not doing anything different in songwriting terms than Bowling For Soup, yet it's obvious who the biggest of those bands is. Which is down to promotion. So in that respect, it doesn't matter if the band is One Direction, MC Hammer or Bowling For Soup, the impact in relation to sales is all relative to their respective fields. To take that a step further, Green Day are as big as they are entirely through promotion. As ludicrous as it sounds, good songwriting alone gets you nowhere in the music industry.

For what it's worth, I don't recall making any personal attacks on you. If I offended you I'm sorry, and I don't think you're an idiot. Most of your posts in this thread can be taken as proof you're not.

[Z J]

Wait you think Green Day is more impactful than Bon Jovi is this why Bon Jovi still sells out tours in 2013... and is ranked 3rd highest paid entertainer of 2013...

And I didn't attack you just your statement writing songs are different for huge bands and small bands when they are not is idiotic... if you can't see that well sorry but writing a song is NOT different be it from Green Day on down to a garage band only difference is one will be heard by majority and one not so much it doesn't affect the QUALITY of the song...

I think a song that impacts thousands of people as opposed to a song that doesn't is a huge difference.

The only reason Green Day isn't a garage band or still playing at Gilman is because they were a cut above the rest. Good bands, regardless of money, usually find a way. Granted it isn't always the case. The reason I write off those other bands is simply because they are not anyone's first band. They aren't given the attention required to be successful commercially or to write the highest possible quality of music.

You're probably being saracstic; but Also Bon Jovi is more impactful in sales but what they did musically isn't as impressive to me. The way Green Day broke through with their pop-punk style in the post-grunge era is a testament to their ability. Bon Jovi's style is more radio friendly. More pop-driven I think. Green Day's sound is a little more unusual for top 40 radio. I think that is an interesting discussion though.

[Spike]

I think the problem with "impact" is that it's a subjective thing. Most of us here would agree that American Idiot had a massive impact. Simon Cowell would say it's nothing compared to the impact of One Direction. It depends on the crowd and one's personal priorities.

[Z J]

I'm not going to respond point by point because I actually agree with a lot of what you're saying.

But, you did say this:

I'm really baffled by that. The only difference between a 'world-class' band and a 'side band' is in commercial success. Take Allister, for example. A lot of people have never heard of them. But take an identical style of songwriting, throw in a female singer, and you've got Paramore's first album. I assume given Paramore's success they'd be considered world-class? At the end of the day, a songwriter is going to be as good at songwriting whether they're successful or not. Sure, songwriting leads to success if you're exceptional, IN SOME CASES, but when has becoming successful led to good songwriting? Never. That's where my bafflement is.

Furthermore, obviously we agree that Billie is an amazing songwriter, and as you say, his songs have appealed to masses of people for years. But his songwriting would still be as good as it would be if Green Day hadn't become successful. If Dookie had bombed and the band had gone nowhere, those songs on Dookie would still be as fantastic as they are. What I'm saying is, there's a lot more to being successful than songwriting, and given that bands like One Direction (I'm sorry, in context it's not a remotely strawman argument), I think that proves that. If you look at bands like Avail or Bodyjar, they're not doing anything different in songwriting terms than Bowling For Soup, yet it's obvious who the biggest of those bands is. Which is down to promotion. So in that respect, it doesn't matter if the band is One Direction, MC Hammer or Bowling For Soup, the impact in relation to sales is all relative to their respective fields. To take that a step further, Green Day are as big as they are entirely through promotion. As ludicrous as it sounds, good songwriting alone gets you nowhere in the music industry.

For what it's worth, I don't recall making any personal attacks on you. If I offended you I'm sorry, and I don't think you're an idiot. Most of your posts in this thread can be taken as proof you're not.

Yeah the ad hominem thing wasn't you.

Anyway, I believe that Green Day got where they were through their talent. Their sales reflect that. I think that is true of a lot of alternative/rock musicians. Their music is atypical for the mainstream in this day and age. So while I don't consider One Direction to be talented because they sell a lot, I do believe that Green Day's ability is reflected in their sales, if that makes sense.

Success isn't all promotion to me, if Dookie flopped it would have meant Green Day couldn't strike the right chord at the right time. Part luck, but part skill I believe. I believe Green Day's success came from being able to say the right thing at the right time, and they have talent to back it up. They did it again with American Idiot. Would American Idiot have broken through if they were a nobody band? I think it would have. Being able to make punk music attractive to the masses is a skill. Billie mastered that skill. Jason just hasn't.

[WhiteTim]

You're probably being saracstic; but Also Bon Jovi is more impactful in sales but what they did musically isn't as impressive to me. The way Green Day broke through with their pop-punk style in the post-grunge era is a testament to their ability. Bon Jovi's style is more radio friendly. More pop-driven I think. Green Day's sound is a little more unusual for top 40 radio. I think that is an interesting discussion though.

Well I'm not a fan of Bon Jovi cept maybe one or two songs but 200+ million albums sold still to this day sells out huge arenas and somehow is ranked at 3rd highest paid entertainer 2013 (trust I was shocked as fuck to read that) but wanted dead or alive is still a huge song to this day

But Green Day's sound really wasn't that new or out of place on the radio in 1994 after the Nirvana's Pearl Jam's etc sound (not that im saying they are in the same genre...) but Green Day exploded cause of having a good album a good single add in Woodstock (cause Dookie didnt really explode until after that performance) and a little of Kurt dying and folks looking for a new band to cling to...

Sorry if you took my comment as personal I wasn't attacking you personally just the comment as I just feel your downplay of huge bands and small bands eriting difference as idiotic not you personally

[Z J]

I think the problem with "impact" is that it's a subjective thing. Most of us here would agree that American Idiot had a massive impact. Simon Cowell would say it's nothing compared to the impact of One Direction. It depends on the crowd and one's personal priorities.

This is true, it is difficult to look at things 100% objectively but it isn't impossible.

I think bands like Green Day, Nirvana, Radiohead, Led Zeppelin, Michael Jackson, etc. are undoubtedly some of the most impactful musicians of our time

Meanwhile one of my favorite bands, Guns N Roses (pre-breakup), are not on that same level. They kept true rock alive in the late 80's, but they couldn't sustain it.

Idk, I think it is an interesting topic

Well I'm not a fan of Bon Jovi cept maybe one or two songs but 200+ million albums sold still to this day sells out huge arenas and somehow is ranked at 3rd highest paid entertainer 2013 (trust I was shocked as fuck to read that) but wanted dead or alive is still a huge song to this day

But Green Day's sound really wasn't that new or out of place on the radio in 1994 after the Nirvana's Pearl Jam's etc sound (not that im saying they are in the same genre...) but Green Day exploded cause of having a good album a good single add in Woodstock (cause Dookie didnt really explode until after that performance) and a little of Kurt dying and folks looking for a new band to cling to...

Sorry if you took my comment as personal I wasn't attacking you personally just the comment as I just feel your downplay of huge bands and small bands eriting difference as idiotic not you personally

Yeah it does take luck, but honestly who here thinks Dookie was the best Green Day has done? It took a little luck for sure, but just watching the Dookie documentary makes one realize how surprised the record guys were to hear this sound from these snobby kids. And then to go on national TV, do the twitching, headbanging routine and then follow that with a huge mudfight? I'm impressed that that incident made them popular, as I can easily see how people would loathe that type of behavior (not me, I love it). Their message was simple, cleverly put, and melodic as fuck. That was what the public needed, and GD was able to provide it.

And on Bon Jovi I agree, they aren't really my style more the most part. Although I do enjoy a few songs. They resonate with other people clearly. So their impact is real, whether I think they are as good as Green Day or not. It is very impressive how popular they are and how they've sustained it. I think GD's impact was not so being innovative musically but they made a typically non-radio friendly style of music in to something that people of all ages enjoyed. Plus their lyrics are wayyyyy better than Bon Jovi's, IMO

[Spike]

Yeah the ad hominem thing wasn't you.

Anyway, I believe that Green Day got where they were through their talent. Their sales reflect that. I think that is true of a lot of alternative/rock musicians. Their music is atypical for the mainstream in this day and age. So while I don't consider One Direction to be talented because they sell a lot, I do believe that Green Day's ability is reflected in their sales, if that makes sense.

Success isn't all promotion to me, if Dookie flopped it would have meant Green Day couldn't strike the right chord at the right time. Part luck, but part skill I believe. I believe Green Day's success came from being able to say the right thing at the right time, and they have talent to back it up. They did it again with American Idiot. Would American Idiot have broken through if they were a nobody band? I think it would have. Being able to make punk music attractive to the masses is a skill. Billie mastered that skill. Jason just hasn't.

Fair point, I see what you're saying. But we also have to assume that Green Day never wrote music to become successful. If they'd done it for the sake of fame they wouldn't have written something like Dookie. In that respect, there's no difference between writing as nobodies and writing as world-famous musicians. Songs first, fame later, obviously. I'm not saying any of their success was pure luck, obviously they do have amazing talent, but my point was that so do a lot of other bands and things just didn't fall into place for them. Being in the right place at the right time is, in my opinion, at least 70% of the reason bands are successful, the other 30 split between talent and promotion.

[WhiteTim]

This is true, it is difficult to look at things 100% objectively but it isn't impossible.

I think bands like Green Day, Nirvana, Radiohead, Led Zeppelin, Michael Jackson, etc. are undoubtedly some of the most impactful musicians of our time

Meanwhile one of my favorite bands, Guns N Roses (pre-breakup), are not on that same level. They kept true rock alive in the late 80's, but they couldn't sustain it.

Idk, I think it is an interesting topic

Yeah it does take luck, but honestly who here thinks Dookie was the best Green Day has done? It took a little luck for sure, but just watching the Dookie documentary makes one realize how surprised the record guys were to hear this sound from these snobby kids. And then to go on national TV, do the twitching, headbanging routine and then follow that with a huge mudfight? I'm impressed that that incident made them popular, as I can easily see how people would loathe that type of behavior (not me, I love it). Their message was simple, cleverly put, and melodic as fuck. That was what the public needed, and GD was able to provide it.

And on Bon Jovi I agree, they aren't really my style more the most part. Although I do enjoy a few songs. They resonate with other people clearly. So their impact is real, whether I think they are as good as Green Day or not. It is very impressive how popular they are and how they've sustained it. I think GD's impact was not so being innovative musically but they made a typically non-radio friendly style of music in to something that people of all ages enjoyed. Plus their lyrics are wayyyyy better than Bon Jovi's, IMO

Oh yeah I wouldn't debate on lyrics cause imo Billie does write better lyrics

And no Dookie isn't the best now but at the time Dookie was the best (as far as rock went)

[Z J]

Fair point, I see what you're saying. But we also have to assume that Green Day never wrote music to become successful. If they'd done it for the sake of fame they wouldn't have written something like Dookie. In that respect, there's no difference between writing as nobodies and writing as world-famous musicians. Songs first, fame later, obviously. I'm not saying any of their success was pure luck, obviously they do have amazing talent, but my point was that so do a lot of other bands and things just didn't fall into place for them. Being in the right place at the right time is, in my opinion, at least 70% of the reason bands are successful, the other 30 split between talent and promotion.

And that is something that we can never really know for sure. I think Green Day has shown an ability to intentionally put themselves in "the right place at the right time". See: American Idiot. They talked like they knew it would be that big. They wanted to have a sort of "comeback" and they blew it up. It appears to be a skill, to me anyway.

I can only really argue that for Green Day, as there are a ton of specifics I know about their road to success that I don't know about others.

I would also argue that they did want to be successful, that is what set them apart from the rest at Gilman. That's why they pursued a major label deal

[Fuzz]

And that is something that we can never really know for sure. I think Green Day has shown an ability to intentionally put themselves in "the right place at the right time". See: American Idiot. They talked like they knew it would be that big. They wanted to have a sort of "comeback" and they blew it up. It appears to be a skill, to me anyway.

Were you around during that release? They never thought it would be big. They weren't sure which way it was going to go. Until release they thought it might totally flop because people might hate the rock-opera and political direction. They did it because it was exciting for them, not because they were looking for a come-back.

[Z J]

Were you around during that release? They never thought it would be big. They weren't sure which way it was going to go. Until release they thought it might totally flop because people might hate the rock-opera and political direction. They did it because it was exciting for them, not because they were looking for a come-back.

was not, hadn't even heard of them before But I drew that conclusion from watching the documentary and other videos. The way they decided to scrap C &V and Billie said something like "we knew we wanted to do something big".....Maybe they were talking big afterward knowing they had accomplished what they had.

[Fuzz]

was not, hadn't even heard of them before But I drew that conclusion from watching the documentary and other videos. The way they decided to scrap C &V and Billie said something like "we knew we wanted to do something big".....Maybe they were talking big afterward knowing they had accomplished what they had.

big does not equal "huge commercial success". I take that as "something totally different and much more complex than anything we've ever done before"

[Z J]

big does not equal "huge commercial success". I take that as "something totally different and much more complex than anything we've ever done before"

I'll have to look for what it was I saw. I just remember being surprised that they somehow seemed to know how successful it would be. I normally would think it would be the opposite.

Saw something similar about Good Riddance, except it was the producer or something saying he knew after he added the strings that he had a mega-hit on his hands. Never really bought that. If you know what success is going to sound like before you release it then why does Oh Love end up as a lead single still ....Idk just struck me as weird

[munns6691]

Anywayy....

[DookieLukie]

Hmmm...

In regards to everything that has already been said, I don't think you can automatically say Billie writes better guitar parts. Personally, I like what he's written much more over Jason, but using popularity as way to gauge what is better is really askew. Some really sexy riffs exist outside of the public eye; there's just too much music out there for that not to be true.

[Hermione]

It's really all we have to judge him off of, though. Fair or not. Billie inherently has the advantage.

It isn't all we have to judge him off.....we can listen to his work in other bands. Besides even if you think we should only judge him for his work in Green Day, surely we should take into account his role in Green Day when doing that. His role is being a back up guitarist in support of Billie, doesn't he makes a good job of that role?

[Guest]

It isn't all we have to judge him off.....we can listen to his work in other bands. Besides even if you think we should only judge him for his work in Green Day, surely we should take into account his role in Green Day when doing that. His role is being a back up guitarist in support of Billie, doesn't he makes a good job of that role?

Pretty sure anyone with a few years of guitar playing experience could stand in the corner and play power chords for 2 hours

This discussion has gotten pretty far from my original point, which was that adding Jason to the band, while a nice gesture, ultimately adds nothing to Green Day's sound.