Page 1 of 1

L.A. Guns - s/t or C&L?

Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2025 8:47 pm
by Chip Z'Hoy
I always liked C&L (that's gangster talk for Cocked & Loaded, RIGHT!!) a little better.

Both classics.

Re: L.A. Guns - s/t or C&L?

Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2025 8:57 pm
by Ryan81
You're right. They are both classics! I'll go with Cocked & Loaded I remember the weekend I bought that album. Feb 24th 1990. I was in 7th grade and I'd just found out a girl I really liked might also like me too and the next day I bought Cocked & Loaded and loved it. Life was so good that weekend!

I recently rediscovered Magdalaine (sp?) looking through a guitar TAB book and had forgotten what great song that was.

Re: L.A. Guns - s/t or C&L?

Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2025 9:34 pm
by pieceofme
Self titled by a mile.

Cocked and loaded lasts too long and gets boring in parts. Big decline in quality compared to the 1st album. That first album rips and is relentless. A lot more anger and hunger in that first album.

Re: L.A. Guns - s/t or C&L?

Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2025 9:37 pm
by pieceofme
Ryan81 wrote: Fri Jan 17, 2025 8:57 pm You're right. They are both classics! I'll go with Cocked & Loaded I remember the weekend I bought that album. Feb 24th 1990. I was in 7th grade and I'd just found out a girl I really liked might also like me too and the next day I bought Cocked & Loaded and loved it. Life was so good that weekend!

I recently rediscovered Magdalaine (sp?) looking through a guitar TAB book and had forgotten what great song that was.
So you only prefer it because of a girl. What happened with the girl? Did she become your wife? Something at least happened with you both?

Re: L.A. Guns - s/t or C&L?

Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2025 10:35 pm
by DangerZone
Self-Titled, easily
C&L is great, too. But it lost some edge

Re: L.A. Guns - s/t or C&L?

Posted: Sat Jan 18, 2025 4:32 am
by dmbrocker
Chip Z'Hoy wrote: Fri Jan 17, 2025 8:47 pmBoth classics.
Agreed, but I always liked the debut slightly more.

Re: L.A. Guns - s/t or C&L?

Posted: Sat Jan 18, 2025 6:03 am
by Tyketto Meniketti
Both. The triumvirate with Vampires is among the very best 3-album run of any hard rock act of the late 80s-early 90s period.

Throw in Vicious Circles, too. Though, I don't dig the drum machine in a few parts, that album is catchy. Rockin' band that's underrated.

Re: L.A. Guns - s/t or C&L?

Posted: Sat Jan 18, 2025 8:36 am
by DonJuanDeMarco
That's a tough one! Cocked & Loaded had great singles but the first album just had that energy and street vibe to it. It's almost like they just hit "record" and played the entire record straight through.

Sorry, it's a tie for me!

For what it's worth though, I actually like Hollywood Vampires the most as an "album". I like the raw production and there was more diversity in the songs. It's a good record to listen to all the way through.

Re: L.A. Guns - s/t or C&L?

Posted: Sat Jan 18, 2025 8:49 am
by Wild Obsession
One of my favorite bands, IMO 1st 3 albums are "sludge classics".

C&L > Hollywood Vampires > ST

Re: L.A. Guns - s/t or C&L?

Posted: Sat Jan 18, 2025 10:34 am
by DangerZone
DonJuanDeMarco wrote: Sat Jan 18, 2025 8:36 am That's a tough one! Cocked & Loaded had great singles but the first album just had that energy and street vibe to it. It's almost like they just hit "record" and played the entire record straight through.

Sorry, it's a tie for me!

For what it's worth though, I actually like Hollywood Vampires the most as an "album". I like the raw production and there was more diversity in the songs. It's a good record to listen to all the way through.
The first record had a different drummer.
According to Sleek the production gutted the drum sound on vampires

Re: L.A. Guns - s/t or C&L?

Posted: Sat Jan 18, 2025 10:40 am
by Rocker4Real
Cocked and Loaded has better production and the songs have more edge. Who doesn't ROCK OUT to Rip and Tear?

Re: L.A. Guns - s/t or C&L?

Posted: Sat Jan 18, 2025 10:50 am
by thebends
Both excellent albums but St for me. Luv the raw sounding of it. Loaded is great as well

Re: L.A. Guns - s/t or C&L?

Posted: Sat Jan 18, 2025 12:20 pm
by Kajsa
For a band I care little about this made me think for a while.

I went with Cocked and Loaded.

Re: L.A. Guns - s/t or C&L?

Posted: Sat Jan 18, 2025 3:10 pm
by skinni
both are amazing, i picked C&L

Re: L.A. Guns - s/t or C&L?

Posted: Sat Jan 18, 2025 8:59 pm
by Tommy2Tone84
Chip Z'Hoy wrote: Fri Jan 17, 2025 8:47 pm I always liked C&L (that's gangster talk for Cocked & Loaded, RIGHT!!) a little better.

Both classics.

Add Vampires and VC and you have a superfecta of hair metal magnificence that most can’t compete.

Re: L.A. Guns - s/t or C&L?

Posted: Sat Jan 18, 2025 9:55 pm
by Fat_Elvis
Whichever one has the shorter running time.

Re: L.A. Guns - s/t or C&L?

Posted: Sun Jan 19, 2025 4:40 pm
by VinnieStJohn
Close call, but the production on S/T blows. Don't get the love for Hollywood Vampires or the hate for Vicious Circle

Re: L.A. Guns - s/t or C&L?

Posted: Mon Jan 20, 2025 12:06 am
by Hellsinkey
S/T by far.

Re: L.A. Guns - s/t or C&L?

Posted: Mon Jan 20, 2025 6:14 am
by joey78
Vampires by a mile .

Couldn’t get into their other records . Might give them a spin

Re: L.A. Guns - s/t or C&L?

Posted: Tue Jan 21, 2025 11:53 am
by TREVERLAST
S/T for me. Raw, dirty, street... Everything that C&L wasn't. I still like C&L, but that first record was the real deal for me.

Re: L.A. Guns - s/t or C&L?

Posted: Tue Jan 21, 2025 12:28 pm
by Sleek
I prefer Cocked and Loaded.

First album sounded like a fucking demo tape. People have come over time to view it as RAW and REAL, but it was really just not well recorded.

Re: L.A. Guns - s/t or C&L?

Posted: Tue Jan 21, 2025 2:51 pm
by HueyRamone
Rocker4Real wrote: Sat Jan 18, 2025 10:40 am Cocked and Loaded has better production and the songs have more edge. Who doesn't ROCK OUT to Rip and Tear?
I don’t rock out to rip and tear


It’s a less good rip and destroy

Re: L.A. Guns - s/t or C&L?

Posted: Wed Jan 22, 2025 3:55 pm
by ChipsRoach
Both are great, but I don't like the sleekness of the 2nd. It's a great album for sure but the 1st one sounded like being recorded in the street which I like. Sorry Sleek. And the C/L could of had two less songs, pretty long album with a few throwaways at the end. Magdalaine was an original masterpiece that sounded like no one else.

Re: L.A. Guns - s/t or C&L?

Posted: Wed Jan 22, 2025 4:33 pm
by Sleek
The first one was recorded at a very nice studio called the Village Recorder that had been used by everybody from the Rolling Stones to Steely Dan.

It was very not street.

Re: L.A. Guns - s/t or C&L?

Posted: Thu Jan 23, 2025 11:00 am
by ElectrickMagick
The sound on the self-titled album is absolute shit. Even at fourteen I thought the album sounded like it had been recorded underwater.

I really only remember the singles from C&L but that's more than what I remember from the self-titled record.

Re: L.A. Guns - s/t or C&L?

Posted: Thu Jan 23, 2025 11:09 am
by Wild Obsession
Back in the day I had a BOSS "Heavy Metal" Pedal, shitty beginner guitar, and a 10 watt solid state practice amp.......guitar sound/tone was exactly the same as the LA Guns ST.

Re: L.A. Guns - s/t or C&L?

Posted: Thu Jan 23, 2025 2:04 pm
by MotleyKaos
I love the rawness on that first album of theirs, but there are at least one or two songs I prefer to skip. Nothing bad, just alright. "Bitch is Back", "One More Reason", "Electric Gypsy", and "Sex Action" are all great!

But Cocked & Loaded is all killer, no filler. If I skip a song, it's the instrumental. "Letting Go" into "Slap in the Face" is an awesome way to start the album. "Wheels on Fire" is my personal favorite from C&L.

As others have already stated, these guys had a solid 3-album run right out of the gate. Maybe one of these days I'll give Vicious Circle a listen.

Re: L.A. Guns - s/t or C&L?

Posted: Thu Jan 23, 2025 7:08 pm
by BulletProofPoet
S/t by a mile! Vampires would be ahead of C&L as well. Tried to listened to today and only songs I like are BOJ and Never Enough ( which is their overall best song). The rest of C&L is unlistenable.