Originally Posted by kane

I have a secondary question for this thread. I've read a lot of responses that say something like, "They put out a couple of great records then nothing since." Or "good earlier on, but suck now." So I ask:" Can you forgive the sins of the present and still celebrate the past?" What I mean is this. If a band makes 1 or 2 amazing records then doesn't do much for years and years, does it diminish the brilliance of those 1 or 2 records. That is 1 or 2 records that most bands would never put out.

Most bands have about a 3-6 year period where they do their best work. There are very few acts ever that maintain their genius through all of their career. If they put out a couple of legendary albums during that high point, then the rest of their career only put out mediocre stuff does it diminish the quality of those other great records?

Here is an example. Guns n Roses puts out Appetite for Destruction. In my opinion it is one of the all time greatest rock records ever made. After that they were never really the same. Lies Lies Lies has a few good moments, but not many. The same is with the Use Your Illusion discs (actually Slash even says if you listen to the Illusion discs you will hear the sound of a band breaking up.) Then they had the punk cover album which kind of sucked and supposedly a Axl is putting out a new album soon (they have been saying that for a decade now) and it is most likely going to blow. So do all of these lackluster followups make Appetite any less of a masterpiece?