"KISS has played to more people in more countries than The Beatles did."
[/QUOTE] [/QUOTE]and if the beatles had kept going it'd be the other way around - i am not even to a Beatle fan but i admire them for having standards as human beings and artists .... they knew that being a massive commercial joke (ie. KISS) would just be to embarrassing .... they could have been singing She Loves You till they were in their 60s but they did not because they didnt have to [/QUOTE] [/QUOTE] [/QUOTE]magically all four beatles are alive tomorrow and announce a gig. Kiss announce a gig in the same day. i dont even need to joke about who would sell more tickets, more shows.[/QUOTE] [/QUOTE] [/QUOTE]"Having 4 lps in the top 100 in the U.S. trumps 9 lps in Argentina." [/QUOTE] [/QUOTE] [/QUOTE]says who!?!?!? that is even the most retarded thing i have ever seen... funny how the biggest bands in history arent even from america but you would like us to think the american charts mean more :D LOL[/QUOTE] [/QUOTE] [/QUOTE]"Cultural impact cannot be measured in numbers."[/QUOTE] [/QUOTE]Sir GH is right and skip is wrong. End of stories.[/QUOTE]
Holly2003 · Member since
The Teletubbies could tour as "Kiss" no one would notice the difference.
And the Teletubbies could beat Kiss in a fight.
andreas_mercury · Member since
"Being HIV+ didn't help either." [/QUOTE]CUNT until now i had thought you were just funny troll with your Kiss thing no one could really like them this much .... you have crossed that line in making HIV jokes in your worthless post......[/QUOTE]
The Real Wizard · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]skip wrote:[/b]
[b] [/b]KISS sold out more shows at the Budokan than The Beatles did. Nothing will change that.
[/QUOTE]
What does that ultimately prove? That their tour promoter had the benefit of being in 1978 instead of 1966 and was able to book a few more nights?
The reason why The Beatles couldn't book more than a couple nights at the Budokan is because it was a sacred hall that was used only for martial arts. They were the first band to play there, and were harshly criticized by Japanese traditionalists for playing the shows. They couldn't start off by playing a dozen nights. It was conceptually impossible, nor was it considered usual at the time for a band to play more than a couple nights anywhere in the world.
So if you want to remove historical perspective, then yes, Kiss sold more tickets. But to gloat that Kiss played more nights, as if it is somehow a statement of greater popularity or revenue under equal circumstances, is just a ridiculously ignorant statement to make.
ParisNair · Member since
[QUOTE][b]Sir GH wrote:
[/b]The reason why The Beatles couldn't book more than a couple nights at the Budokan is because it was a sacred hall that was used only for martial arts. They were the first band to play there, and were harshly criticized by Japanese traditionalists for playing the shows. They couldn't start off by playing a dozen nights. It was conceptually impossible, nor was it considered usual at the time for a band to play more than a couple nights anywhere in the world.[/QUOTE]Interesting history. Thanks!
Mr Skip, Kiss is your fav band, so obviously IYO they are the greatest. Fine, but many people on this board don't agree with that, and you keep ignoring the argument that musically Queen is far superior. Instead, you keep posting stats and figures and tour dates which don't mean much if not taken in the proper perspective.
Obviously a lot of people love Kiss, but many think they are crap. Why don't you just let it rest.
andreas_mercury · Member since
and also, Bee Gees outsold KISS and have far better vocal talents, the members of kiss (all 258 of them and their replacements and clones) have never been even able to have half the ability to sing in close harmony as well as Bee Gees did, even if their disco years music was to me harsh and annoying ... kiss are the worlds most profitable lucky accident, no one really likes them that much and if they do its only because they grow up with them. [/QUOTE] [/QUOTE]and LOL to your budoken argument. like Sir GH says the beatles were lucky to get their two nights because in the establishment in japan was against it you are such a cultural ignorant fool to not realize that 10 years of the west impact on japan would make it so fucking easy for a famous band to book several nights[/QUOTE] [/QUOTE] [/QUOTE]and your childish "nothing can ever change it" nonsense guess what, if the beatles had had a reunion in 19 78, they would have outsold kiss in japan, in any country to any venue, and nothing would change it. to you it only matters it didnt happen, but that is like winning a race only because every other competetor fell over - you might be the slow runner but thats okay, "I might have lost but i didn't" so you act like you are the best runner that ever competed[/QUOTE] [/QUOTE] [/QUOTE]and i have seen kiss unplugged the best bit of that is to the crowd's reaction when ace and criss get to sing lines of Rock and Roll all night ... your band is only worth watching when the original members join back, fool ....[/QUOTE]
ParisNair · Member since
By the way, is it true that Queen refused to let Kiss open for them?
skip · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]andreas_mercury wrote: [/b]
"KISS has played to more people in more countries than The Beatles did."
[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]
>>and if the beatles had kept going it'd be the other way around
The thing is they didn't. They didn't even tour after 1966.
>>- i am not even to a Beatle fan but i admire them for having standards as human beings and artists ....
Like how John Lennon used to beat Yoko Ono or how he abandoned Julian. He sure was a model citizen.
They were all fucked up drug addicts. Paul's still a pot head.
>>they knew that being a massive commercial joke (ie. KISS) would just be to embarrassing .... they could have been singing She Loves You till they were in their 60s but they did not because they didnt have to
KISS is a massive commercial success.
The Beatles didn't sing that shitty song "She Loves You" while they were in their 60s because two of them are dead.
[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]
>>magically all four beatles are alive tomorrow and announce a gig. Kiss announce a gig in the same day. i dont even need to joke about who would sell more tickets, more shows.
[/QUOTE]
Thing is The Beatles have been dead since 1970. KISS just completed a successful worldwide tour and will
be touring worldwide in 2010.
[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]
"Having 4 lps in the top 100 in the U.S. trumps 9 lps in Argentina."
[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]
>>says who!?!?!? that is even the most retarded thing i have ever seen... funny how the biggest bands in history arent even from america but you would like us to think the american charts mean more :D LOL
[/QUOTE]
The American charts do mean more because America has a higher population, which results in higher record sales.
You really don't know anything about the music industry. Do some reading before posting your ignorance next time.
[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]
>>"Cultural impact cannot be measured in numbers."
[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]
Sir GH is right and skip is wrong. End of stories.
[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]
Record sales, concert ticket sales, and other musicians acknowledging a band as being an influence on their music
can all be measured.
skip · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]Holly2003 wrote: [/b]
The Teletubbies could tour as "Kiss" no one would notice the difference.
And the Teletubbies could beat Kiss in a fight.[/QUOTE]
It's evident that you're a high school drop out.
I'll bet you're blond, too.
skip · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]andreas_mercury wrote: [/b]
"Being HIV+ didn't help either."
[/QUOTE]
CUNT until now i had thought you were just funny troll with your Kiss thing no one could really like them this much .... you have crossed that line in making HIV jokes in your worthless post......
[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]
Fuck you, asshole.
If Freddie hadn't been an alcoholic, coke head maybe he would have had the common
sense to put a rubber on his cock and made his husbands wear one too.
andreas_mercury · Member since
"other musicians acknowledging a band as being an influence on their music can all be measured." [/QUOTE]you dont want to measure that in this case because the beatles > kiss i am not even that fond of beatles but you will never find a majority of people to pick Kiss before beatles. ever. will not happen. sounds like maybe YOU need to learn rock history.....[/QUOTE]
andreas_mercury · Member since
"If Freddie hadn't been an alcoholic, coke head maybe he would have had the common sense to put a rubber on his cock and made his husbands wear one too." [/QUOTE]you are an ignorant cunt [/QUOTE]
andreas_mercury · Member since
"The thing is they didn't. They didn't even tour after 1966." [/QUOTE] [/QUOTE]you keep saying "thing is they didnt" or dumb shit like that .... so, so stupid!! xD beatles were, are and forever are going to be bigger than kiss, in any century, you sure would love for that not to be true. whats funniest is you probably didnt copy-paste that list of dates on last page, you probably typed it from memory Gene. :D[/QUOTE]
skip · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]Sir GH wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]skip wrote:[/b]
[b][/b]KISS sold out more shows at the Budokan than The Beatles did. Nothing will change that.
[/QUOTE]
>>What does that ultimately prove? That their tour promoter had the benefit of being in 1978 instead of 1966 and was able to book a few more nights?
It proves KISS beat The Beatles. Nice thing to put on their resumes.
>>The reason why The Beatles couldn't book more than a couple nights at the Budokan is because it was a sacred hall that was used only for martial arts. They were the first band to play there, and were harshly criticized by Japanese traditionalists for playing the shows. They couldn't start off by playing a dozen nights. It was conceptually impossible, nor was it considered usual at the time for a band to play more than a couple nights anywhere in the world.
So if you want to remove historical perspective, then yes, Kiss sold more tickets. But to gloat that Kiss played more nights, as if it is somehow a statement of greater popularity or revenue under equal circumstances, is just a ridiculously ignorant statement to make.
No need to be jealous. LOL
[/QUOTE]
skip · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]ParisNair wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE][b]Sir GH wrote:
[/b]The reason why The Beatles couldn't book more than a couple nights at the Budokan is because it was a sacred hall that was used only for martial arts. They were the first band to play there, and were harshly criticized by Japanese traditionalists for playing the shows. They couldn't start off by playing a dozen nights. It was conceptually impossible, nor was it considered usual at the time for a band to play more than a couple nights anywhere in the world.[/QUOTE]
>>Interesting history. Thanks!
Mr Skip, Kiss is your fav band, so obviously IYO they are the greatest. Fine, but many people on this board don't agree with that, and you keep ignoring the argument that musically Queen is far superior. Instead, you keep posting stats and figures and tour dates which don't mean much if not taken in the proper perspective.
Obviously a lot of people love Kiss, but many think they are crap. Why don't you just let it rest.
I guess you've never heard the song "Pain Is So Close To Pleasure" and every song on "Hot Space"
(with the exception of "Under Pressure). Queen wasn't musically superior. They had their share
of shitty songs and lps.
I'll let it rest when I feel like it. It's douchebags like yourself who keep adding your bullshit to the
threads I post. I posted KISS concert information. I wasn't looking for anyone's opinion. If you
don't like KISS don't read the fucking thread.
