FIGHT!! FIGHT!! FIGHT!!

Oh, wait a second... can't do that anymore, now that I'm a moderator.... Darn!


Well, I think I see the valid points of both sides of the argument, and I think the major problem is that Axl_Rose and aiwass have differing definitions of "monster". Basically, I think Axl_Rose feels a monster album is one whose impact is felt long after its release. One that not only has strong sales, airplay, popularity, but also artistic integrity and innovation, etc.

But, according to aiwass, a monster album should be judged solely on artisitic merits and innovation/influence. Actually, major sales/airplay would probably lower its "monster" rating in aiwass' eyes.

I think I lean more towards Axl's definition, which would include albums like Nevermind, Ten, Sgt. Pepper, etc. which were sold well, were totally influential as well as innovative.

And, yes, the definition would include the Backstreet Boys' first album, which I would gladly concede was a "monster"!