You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: Revisiting the Billboard Interview
Why can't Slash keep a lead singer, D?
People have called out Axl and Slash. And people who've worked with them haved raved about them both, too. So, you look at it how you want. I'm not saying anyone is 100% right or wrong. Which went to my Duff comment. It's just not true when you make it out that everyone loves Slash and that somehow he's to be believed more than Axl. That is just not accurate. People who know Slash have attacked his credibility and honesty in the past. Not just Axl. I give Axl a lot of shit, but your argument(s) is pretty biased, D.
Can't keep a lead singer?
Scott said he had no problems with Slash at all and enjoyed working with him........... So.......... find some other examples please.
I also didn't say Slash should be believed more than Axl, I said when you have the majority telling the same exact stories as Slash....... is the enitre planet lying and only Axl telling the truth?
I don't absolve Slash of all the blame, I have always stated on the record that his drug abuse etc caused a major rift etc.
I think they both are culpable in the split but I do believe most of what Slash said about Axl just as I believe most of what Axl says about Slash.
They both were wrong but most of the time, Slash fans don't admit that and Axl fans definitely don't admit that.
Re: Revisiting the Billboard Interview
I don't think too much about the Slash said/Axl said debate. I think we all just need to think for ourselves & be realistic about what went down with what we know.
For the most part, the band was huge, egos conflicted, and the band fell apart. I think some of it is once Steven & Izzy were gone it was only Slash & Duff remaining, and the unity wasn't the same. That, and Axl can probably be a bit of a spaz, and wanted a newer GnR sound whereas Slash was probably into playing more blues rock still. Ashame they couldn't pull out some Soundgarden style riffs, they band could have been solid. Who knows though, myb Slash was bad at showing up for rehearsal & songwriting back then. That or practice could have become a big argue-fest. Axl being to specific & dmenading in what guitar sounds, chords, riffs & solos to play, Slash telling Axl to go fuck himself & play his own songs. Axl eventually getting other guitarists (Huge) more than willing to join GnR.
Re: Revisiting the Billboard Interview
in slash's book he claims that they sat around all day and got high and drunk waiting for Axl to show to the studio, when he finally got there they were too wasted to do anything...he also says that he refused to do anything til Axl showed up
I dunno, poor communication i think was the biggest thing, Slash also claimed that you couldnt talk directly to Axl, that ou had to go through goldstien first adn that Doug would always taint the message....again its Slash's POV so it is what it is
Re: Revisiting the Billboard Interview
Just sayin, Axl just seems to contradict himself.
Like with the Duff Collaboration
he talks how he'd get left doing this and that and all the blame which sounds like he is questioning Duff's work ethic
Duff has released a solo album or two, Put together loaded and released a damn good album "SICK" and was in VR and released 2 albums.... So what Axl says just doesn't add up a lot of times.
If Slash and CO were the problem, who the hell is to blame for this decade debacle goin on still?
get my point? If Axl put together a new band and was happy and releasing music and touring and active, I could more easily support his side of the story,but when he pretty much perpetuates the supposed "lies" over and over throughout the years, it gets pretty tough to defend him.
Re: Revisiting the Billboard Interview
I don't believe that Axl thinks he's wrong. I'm not sure Slash believes he was wrong either, but he did accept some fault for the stuff that happened. Axl and Slash have very different music tastes and influences. It's not that surprising that they didn't get along all the time. What I don't understand is why they could never get past it. I've had the same best friend since 4th grade, but we went through a time where we argued about GnR vs Nirvana or Pearl Jam. It's natural. That didn't keep us from hanging out or playing sports together...we just knew that was a touchy subject and we avoided it for the most part. I guess if it's your way of living it's probably different.
I think if Axl ever accepted some responsibility for what happened...really ANYTHING that's happened, his life would become a lot simpler. Everything is always somebody else's fault. People get sick of that after awhile.
Re: Revisiting the Billboard Interview
These assumptions and theories are always nice. But in reality, if Uni was telling Axl to either get back with the old band or they'd drop him, he would be dropped right now.
No he wouldn't. Uni still wants ties to that back catalog. They also don't want the risk of an Axl changing his mind, leaving Uni, and then calling reunion and new album. Plus he's under contract as far as albums go to my knowledge. Right now, it's just new Guns is going nowhere, and never has. But Uni still wants that brand name - GN'R - in their back pocket.
I doubt, from everything I've seen and heard from Axl in the last ten years, that anything will make him do what he doesn't want to do.
I totally agree with this. Axl said "one of us will die before a reunion". That's strong words in my book, and pretty much makes a reunion a LONG SHOT, or at least an Axl/Slash reunion a long shot.
But it doesn't mean the world or the label are going to suddenly turn around on new Guns because Axl wants it.
And the main thing: Axl can take the finished recordings that he has to any label who wants it, and there are labels that would kill for a guy who has the ability to sell 3 million albums around the world... That's just in 6 months.
I don't know the contractual nuts n' bolts, but something tells me, despite delivering CD, Axl still probably has 1-2 more albums in play at Uni, and if the material for those potential new GN'R albums, were produced on Uni's dime, they'd certaintly have more a claim to it than Axl. Axl's stuck. Uni aren't going to let him or those recordings go, but they also aren't going to probably support new Guns either.
And as for Axl not being able to blackmail uni anymore... I think it was quite clear to everyone that he was holding no one hostage with CD. They were willing to eat it. Axl and Azoff just cleared the debt, which was the major sticking point.
Yes he did. Because even though Uni moved on, and didn't need CD, they still were intrigued by the thought of at least making some of that money back. Remember all of the rumors, including Eddie Trunk talking to some people "in the know" that Uni was thinking about just shelving the album, because they didn't feel it'd turn a profit, and they were thinking about actively shopping the album around in order to make SOME money off of it?
Then suddenly Azoff comes in, and works a brilliant deal with BB to clear the debt, and suddenly Uni is back on board for at least releasing it, but not much more.
That right there was the beginning of Uni's "we don't give a crap about your new band" thought process.
And as for 3 million worldwide, it's crap. Some people just don't get how the music business works, and try to "bright side" that. Well if it was Adam Lambert and the Traveling Walligoggies doing 3 mil worldwide, yes, it would be okay.
But for a brand name like GN'R, the amount of hype and legend the album had.... it's a complete and utter flop. And if you don't believe me - see Uni. If Uni thought it was a good, they'd be falling over themselves to promote the shit out of it and support Axl and the new Guns. They didn't. There's a clue.
And how can Slash be wrong... I hate getting into this, because I wasn't there, I don't know the full story, and niether does anyone else so this makes these arguments completely useless.... But didn't Duff even disagree with how Slash remembers things? And I've never heard Duff or Izzy go into any real detail about how things went down. And really, I haven't seen the people who were actually involved, and who do talk it, actually agree on what happened: Axl-Slash-Doug. So I don't know who "all these people" who agree with Slash are, outside you guys.
I think what D is referring to is that when Slash's book came out, pretty much everyone associated with old Guns, other than Axl & Dizzy, claimed it to be "that's how I remember it". Which means they agree with Slash's side of the story.
And I'm not taking sides here, but just to even things out, Axl's explanation is just as realistic as the others I've heard.
I agree with this. Just because a crowd of people say it's one way, doesn't mean it's true.
In Axl's case his actions, or inactions have led me to gradually believe more and more of Slash's side of the story, when at a time, that was the furthest thing from the truth.
Here's a thought:
Maybe Axl talked about Slash in his interviews so much because, I don't know, HE READS THESE BOARDS and this is all you guys can ever friggin talk about along with all of these assumptions and theories you pull out of your asses.
Those interviews were a direct result of (and aimed at) these boards. And you punks!
Says alot about him doesn't it? The man has a chance to promote his own work, work that i'm proud of, and instead spends it crushing the hopes of a few 'naysayers'.
See that's why Axl and ass kissers around him both in reality and electronically, always do not get why they are hypocrites and their arguments fall flat.
If the reunionites or the Slashites are a few 'naysayers' that 'pull things out of their ass'... then why do you use a professional media source to call them out or at least crush their beliefs, if they are in fact just a bunch of no name, no voice, haters?
It doesn't hold water. Those naysayers that talk all that shit, is exactly what he's hearing in the other ear from promoters and his label.
Re: Revisiting the Billboard Interview
"Universal has Guns under contract but I own the name."-Axl (assuming Dexter was Axl) 2008
Outside of that Axlin08, you know NOTHING about what UNI thinks of Axl, what promoters think of Axl and new Gnr, what Uni thinks about the back catalog, the current contract specifications, etc. Your post was one long rambling OPINION from your point of view. In other words, you don't know what the hell you are talking about and neither do I or Buzz or Mister ID or anyone else on these boards when it comes to discussing behind the scenes business and personal relationships between drug addled, extremely rich rock stars. How you guys can continually spout off about the same things over and over and over is well beyond me. Carry on.:peace:
