You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: Slash on Piers Morgan
That's what I'm saying. Slash wanted it to be Guns N' Roses. A balls to the wall rock band that it was. Axl wanted it to be everyone else and call it Guns N' Roses. Axl wanted it all his way I think. Slash was obviously willing to do and put up with the ballads just not bend completely to Axl's desire of turning the band into some mashup of NIN and Queen. Fuck me as a guitar player in the band hearing My World and knowing Axl's desire to "experiement" I'd have said Fuck that as well. In my opinion it's Axl who lost the plot. He stretched it too much and wanted Gn'R to be too many things. I also feel he felt this need to force the band to be epic when in reality they were epic just the way they were. I feel Axl wanted to create this timeless masterpeice when in reality straight up rock is what's timeless. Not chasing trends, not dipping into every popular genre that's happening at the time. CD sounds incredibly dated compared to AFD. It sounds incredibly dated compared to VR albums also.
- Intercourse
- Rep: 212
Re: Slash on Piers Morgan
Thanks to Bono for working with me on this.
This is a good read: http://xozita.stormpages.com/articles/musicianjun92.htm
The reason why i say what I said is that I notice that Axl seems to promote the band to fans today like its the GNR where the old guys never left.
He played Dublin on the 20th anniversary of GNRs first gig in Ireland, he played a Ritz '88 anniversary gig. He is actively trading on old GNR glories.
Lots of the merc still has the old vibe and even the old skull faces from the AFD cover on them for sale today.
YET, Axl seems to take grave offence when people push him on a reunion and he cannot seem to get that he is very much a part of why the calls for such are so loud.
My belief now is that Axl saw himself becoming like his hero Trent where the brand (with him at its heart) became the most important piece of the jigsaw and not the players.
He was happy to keep Izzy & Slash on - if they became workers for the brand and not band members. Of course, that would also mean him having full powers to vito their musical contributions.
That as a proposal to people who helped bring you off the streets and onto a hill in Malibau is pretty poor form no matter what way you try to jazz it up.
Re: Slash on Piers Morgan
YET, Axl seems to take grave offence when people push him on a reunion and he cannot seem to get that he is very much a part of why the calls for such are so loud.
My belief now is that Axl saw himself becoming like his hero Trent where the brand (with him at its heart) became the most important piece of the jigsaw and not the players.
The thing is that he could have done it if he had done it that way from the beginning (and he had the talent to write AFD/UYI without the others). What he can't do is recreate everything in the new way, but call it the same thing it was before. Nobody can, though in some ways VH came close by replacing their frontman. It's not a knock on Axl. He's trying to do the impossible and he's failing. I'm amazed that in 2012 we still have people that think he's been successful or has the chance to be successful if he keeps doing what he's been doing. It's stunning.
Most of us knew this when we saw the VMAs. I know some of you don't agree and think an album in 2002 would have been great, but as soon as he took the stage for the VMAs, it was over. It was hard for the general population to take Axl seriously before that; it was impossible afterwards. He could have gotten away with occasional shows for die hards without an album release forever, but it would have ended up right where he is now if the album was out in 2002, just a few years earlier. Casual fans want GnR, not hip-hop Axl and the freak show of 2002 or Axl and the 50th version of the band of today. I know that greatly hurts some people here, but it's the truth. Somewhere deep down Axl knows it. Most of us know it, though some wouldn't admit it.
That doesn't mean the band sucks. That doesn't mean the 2002 band wasn't talented. Had they been a new band with Axl as the singer, I think they could have been fairly successful in 1998 - 2002 with a better quality new album. When the band resurfaced with Ron in 06 (or whatever it was) and Finck playing better, again I think they could have been fairly successful with a better quality new album. Instead we got a half-assed, poorly constructed, poorly marketed album in 2008 and Axl mailing it in as GnR. That was doomed from the beginning and would have been even if it was a great album. It hit big for 2 weeks from people being curious, then dropped off the face of the earth. BB gave copies away. Axl is STILL touring 4 years later supporting the same album. It hasn't caught on. The shows now are mostly die hards that know the CD tunes and like them a lot, and casual fans that couldn't care less about CD songs. Casual fans aren't leaving shows thinking CD is awesome and going out to buy it. The people that love it REALLY love it, but the majority is pretty meh about the whole thing and just likes hearing the songs they love from the past.
Mygnr is closing (or maybe has closed...no idea). This place has gone days at times with no GnR discussions, and most of the ones taking place have been taking place for 10 years. Jarmo's place is still Jarmo's place, but even they are lower volume than they used to be. No new album is going to change things. There's no sign a new album is coming either. I said it way back when I first joined the forums, I said it before CD came out, I said it after CD came out, and I'll say it until the cows come home: GnR is done. They can tour as a nostolgic act forever as they are now, but they will never be more than this unless there's a reunion, and we all know how likely that is at this point. That was the case in 1998, 2002, 2006, 2008, 2012, and will be in 2014 and beyond. Doesn't mean we can't enjoy what we have; doesn't mean we can't hope for more in the future.
Re: Slash on Piers Morgan
Ali wrote:If Axl's plan was to use the brand name for his own benefit, then why wait until the end of 1995 to form a new partnership, when he had secured ownership of the band name for all future endeavors by 1993 at the latest (depending on what timeline you believe)? Why even go to the effort of trying to bring Zakk Wylde in with Slash before forming a new partnership? Why agree to put the contract in escrow to see if things could be worked out if there is no intention to work things out?
I just don't buy that was his plan from the get go. Yes, obviously, at some point, he wanted and felt the need to take control (his way or the highway so to speak). It wasn't from the get go, though, as he had ownership of the name by 1993 and did not act on it until 1995.
Ali
Why wait, maybe a couple of reasons.
1. Waiting until the statute of limitations had passed for Duff and Slash to take legal action regarding the contract they signed. Axl has directly mentioned this saying they have engaged him in litigation long after the statute of limitations had expired.
2. In the event it does go to court anyhow, he can at least show that he tried to work with the current lineup even after he got the name. He didn't just take the name and then immediately piss off (even if that was his intention). He can say (as he does) that he took the name as protection in the event one of them dies etc etc. He can show that he fully intended to continue on with them as his actions post the UYI tour showed. But it got to the point where it was unworkable therefore he exercised his legal right and left with the name.
That scanario would have to be looked on more favourably by a court than simply he coerced them into signing the name then ran off immeditely the UYI tour finished. If I was Axl's legal counsel at the time, I would have suggested he go through the motions with the guys for a period of time to make it look like he tried everything before he left with the name.
The statute of limitations on written contracts in California is four years, which would place the timeline to take legal action against Axl's ownership of the name into 1997 or 1996 depending on which timeline you believe. As I said, Axl left the partnership in 1995. So, he did not in fact wait until the statute of limitations had passed. So, sorry, but that is a non-factor.
http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/ … 29941.html
Ali
Re: Slash on Piers Morgan
Intercourse wrote:YET, Axl seems to take grave offence when people push him on a reunion and he cannot seem to get that he is very much a part of why the calls for such are so loud.
My belief now is that Axl saw himself becoming like his hero Trent where the brand (with him at its heart) became the most important piece of the jigsaw and not the players.
The thing is that he could have done it if he had done it that way from the beginning (and he had the talent to write AFD/UYI without the others). What he can't do is recreate everything in the new way, but call it the same thing it was before. Nobody can, though in some ways VH came close by replacing their frontman. It's not a knock on Axl. He's trying to do the impossible and he's failing. I'm amazed that in 2012 we still have people that think he's been successful or has the chance to be successful if he keeps doing what he's been doing. It's stunning.
Most of us knew this when we saw the VMAs. I know some of you don't agree and think an album in 2002 would have been great, but as soon as he took the stage for the VMAs, it was over. It was hard for the general population to take Axl seriously before that; it was impossible afterwards. He could have gotten away with occasional shows for die hards without an album release forever, but it would have ended up right where he is now if the album was out in 2002, just a few years earlier. Casual fans want GnR, not hip-hop Axl and the freak show of 2002 or Axl and the 50th version of the band of today. I know that greatly hurts some people here, but it's the truth. Somewhere deep down Axl knows it. Most of us know it, though some wouldn't admit it.
That doesn't mean the band sucks. That doesn't mean the 2002 band wasn't talented. Had they been a new band with Axl as the singer, I think they could have been fairly successful in 1998 - 2002 with a better quality new album. When the band resurfaced with Ron in 06 (or whatever it was) and Finck playing better, again I think they could have been fairly successful with a better quality new album. Instead we got a half-assed, poorly constructed, poorly marketed album in 2008 and Axl mailing it in as GnR. That was doomed from the beginning and would have been even if it was a great album. It hit big for 2 weeks from people being curious, then dropped off the face of the earth. BB gave copies away. Axl is STILL touring 4 years later supporting the same album. It hasn't caught on. The shows now are mostly die hards that know the CD tunes and like them a lot, and casual fans that couldn't care less about CD songs. Casual fans aren't leaving shows thinking CD is awesome and going out to buy it. The people that love it REALLY love it, but the majority is pretty meh about the whole thing and just likes hearing the songs they love from the past.
Mygnr is closing (or maybe has closed...no idea). This place has gone days at times with no GnR discussions, and most of the ones taking place have been taking place for 10 years. Jarmo's place is still Jarmo's place, but even they are lower volume than they used to be. No new album is going to change things. There's no sign a new album is coming either. I said it way back when I first joined the forums, I said it before CD came out, I said it after CD came out, and I'll say it until the cows come home: GnR is done. They can tour as a nostolgic act forever as they are now, but they will never be more than this unless there's a reunion, and we all know how likely that is at this point. That was the case in 1998, 2002, 2006, 2008, 2012, and will be in 2014 and beyond. Doesn't mean we can't enjoy what we have; doesn't mean we can't hope for more in the future.
can't say I disagree....Axl simply dropped the ball too many times. I think he had chances to do better with the new band than he has done. However, in the end, once Slash left, he should have put Gnr to rest and moved on. 
Re: Slash on Piers Morgan
No one was going to recreate AFD not even the orginal line up. The best of UYI wouldn't have been recreated because those are the specific types of songs Slash hated.
I don't think Axl tried to recreate any of it. I'm pretty sure he knew this would be an uphill battle, he would possibly go down in flames, he would not be successful, but he would put out the album he wanted.
This was NEVER about being the biggest band in the world or recreating any level of success and I've never understood the obsession with that anyway, whether you believed Axl would rule the world again, or you were obsessed that he didn't. I wanted great music and that's what CD gave me. I know people don't like that or agree. And I don't know how CD sounds dated when there are albums released today that carry a lot of elements that CD does and the fact musically, bands today can't touch the majority of songs. Outside Jungle, ISE, SCOM and PC, AFD is a very dated record and it was dated 3 years after it was released. Because the reality is, all albums are a product of their time, and can be considered "dated." The thing about it is, AFD had songs that were so good they transcended the times, like any great song does.
I see him being much more successful than he should be with this line up and album, despite his attempts at self sabotage, by not caring. The part about that that really means anything to me is when people blast the album saying either no one liked it, it was all just based on curiosity, when that just isn't the case. It was very well received by critics and had great sales around the world. You can't ignore that.
Any lack of success has more to do with Axl, that had absolutely NOTHING to do with music, or any of his line ups. Again, I'd take a reunion of the 02 line up over the 87 line up. There just seems to be a refusal to accept that the 02 line up had a very real fanbase that disappeared when Bucket and Robin left.
The worst thing that could have happened was that they would have put out that GN'R album in 1996. They would have been destroyed in the media. The musical change was too great for them to survive on a "R&R album" in the mid 90s. They were getting backlash for being that type of cliche R&R band in 94. And not only would they have broke up anyway, but they wouldn't have gone out on top with UYI. There was enough potential still there after UYI, enough for people to dream about what a reunion would be like, instead of knowing the reality of what a reunion to be like.
The best thing to happen for the old line up was to fall apart how and when it did. It makes the prospect of things (unfinished business; that one last great GN'R album) seem a lot more sunny than it actually is.
And, for me, I love the music Axl is making now. Again, just personal taste, I have no desire for anything Slash is doing right now, so I'd rather him not be a part of GN'R at this moment. I think a lot of fans would force themselves to like an original line up album, or like some of the Axl and Slash fans, love anything that has their names attached to it, but a lot of people would walk away very disappointed, IMO.
Re: Slash on Piers Morgan
The statute of limitations on written contracts in California is four years, which would place the timeline to take legal action against Axl's ownership of the name into 1997 or 1996 depending on which timeline you believe. As I said, Axl left the partnership in 1995. So, he did not in fact wait until the statute of limitations had passed. So, sorry, but that is a non-factor.
http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/ … 29941.html
Ali
If it's four years then that certainly makes it a plausible scenario. Not sure why you are suggesting they could only have signed over the name in 1992 or 1993. Other than that fits for you to say that this wasn't an issue since Axl took off with the name in 1995.
Nobody knows for sure when they signed over the name. It's suggested it took place either on the UYI Tour or when the Geffen renegotiation Niven set up was finalised. Axl sacked Niven in March 1991 and Niven has stated in past interviews there was no formal partnership agreement between the members when he was there. He had the bands lawyer Peter Paterno draw one up but it sat in a draw unsigned because the redhead refused to sign it. So after he sacked Niven in March 1991 they eventually signed the Geffen renegotiation and quite possibly this partnership agreement about the name.
So it's a plausible scenario that it was signed in 1991 and then after 4 years expired - 1995 Axl left.
Not saying this was definitely a factor in Axl's thinking but for you to dismiss it like you did is inaccurate, it's quite possible.
Re: Slash on Piers Morgan
No one was going to recreate AFD not even the orginal line up. The best of UYI wouldn't have been recreated because those are the specific types of songs Slash hated.
I don't think Axl tried to recreate any of it. I'm pretty sure he knew this would be an uphill battle, he would possibly go down in flames, he would not be successful, but he would put out the album he wanted.
This was NEVER about being the biggest band in the world or recreating any level of success and I've never understood the obsession with that anyway, whether you believed Axl would rule the world again, or you were obsessed that he didn't. I wanted great music and that's what CD gave me. I know people don't like that or agree. And I don't know how CD sounds dated when there are albums released today that carry a lot of elements that CD does and the fact musically, bands today can't touch the majority of songs. Outside Jungle, ISE, SCOM and PC, AFD is a very dated record and it was dated 3 years after it was released. Because the reality is, all albums are a product of their time, and can be considered "dated." The thing about it is, AFD had songs that were so good they transcended the times, like any great song does.
I see him being much more successful than he should be with this line up and album, despite his attempts at self sabotage, by not caring. The part about that that really means anything to me is when people blast the album saying either no one liked it, it was all just based on curiosity, when that just isn't the case. It was very well received by critics and had great sales around the world. You can't ignore that.
Any lack of success has more to do with Axl, that had absolutely NOTHING to do with music, or any of his line ups. Again, I'd take a reunion of the 02 line up over the 87 line up. There just seems to be a refusal to accept that the 02 line up had a very real fanbase that disappeared when Bucket and Robin left.
The worst thing that could have happened was that they would have put out that GN'R album in 1996. They would have been destroyed in the media. The musical change was too great for them to survive on a "R&R album" in the mid 90s. They were getting backlash for being that type of cliche R&R band in 94. And not only would they have broke up anyway, but they wouldn't have gone out on top with UYI. There was enough potential still there after UYI, enough for people to dream about what a reunion would be like, instead of knowing the reality of what a reunion to be like.
The best thing to happen for the old line up was to fall apart how and when it did. It makes the prospect of things (unfinished business; that one last great GN'R album) seem a lot more sunny than it actually is.
And, for me, I love the music Axl is making now. Again, just personal taste, I have no desire for anything Slash is doing right now, so I'd rather him not be a part of GN'R at this moment. I think a lot of fans would force themselves to like an original line up album, or like some of the Axl and Slash fans, love anything that has their names attached to it, but a lot of people would walk away very disappointed, IMO.
You're entitled to your opinion. Anything that sells as much as CD did and drops off the face of the earth after 2 weeks definately reflects the music quality. It's cool that you like it, but it was absolutely a factor, and a pretty major one in my opinion. While you and a few others may prefer the 2002 lineup (as I indicated in my post), you are so far in the minority that it's not funny. Hip-Hop Axl and the Circus Freaks wasn't going anywhere if they put out something better than AFD.
Re: Slash on Piers Morgan
No one was going to recreate AFD not even the orginal line up. The best of UYI wouldn't have been recreated because those are the specific types of songs Slash hated.
Disagree 100% The best of the Illusions Slash hated? Yeah right. Coma, Locomotive, Civil War, YCBM etc etc etc. What he hated NR and Estranged? Yet he turned those songs into absolute gems with his guitar work AND even said in the Piers Morgan interview that his best moment ever on stage was during November Rain. You're really stretching to say the best material on the Illusions is material Slash hates.
This was NEVER about being the biggest band in the world or recreating any level of success and I've never understood the obsession with that anyway, whether you believed Axl would rule the world again, or you were obsessed that he didn't. I wanted great music and that's what CD gave me. I know people don't like that or agree. And I don't know how CD sounds dated when there are albums released today that carry a lot of elements that CD does and the fact musically, bands today can't touch the majority of songs. Outside Jungle, ISE, SCOM and PC, AFD is a very dated record and it was dated 3 years after it was released. Because the reality is, all albums are a product of their time, and can be considered "dated." The thing about it is, AFD had songs that were so good they transcended the times, like any great song does
That's the point. Songs that transcend time sound as good 20 years after they were recorded. AFD sounds as good today as it did in 1987 and if an album like that came out today rock radio would devour it and it would explode. CD not so much. It sounds forced, it sounds artifical, it sounds dated and try hard. In fact the Illusion albums sound more dated than AFD does.
I see him being much more successful than he should be with this line up and album, despite his attempts at self sabotage, by not caring. The part about that that really means anything to me is when people blast the album saying either no one liked it, it was all just based on curiosity, when that just isn't the case. It was very well received by critics and had great sales around the world. You can't ignore that.
You work way to hard to present his career since Slash left as a success. It amazes me that you deny the fact many, many, many people checked out CD based on curiosity and I'd put money on most using it as a coaster after hearing it as opposed to most who bought it and loved it. You just want so badly for this whole thing to be a success you refuse to look at it objectively.
Any lack of success has more to do with Axl, that had absolutely NOTHING to do with music, or any of his line ups. Again, I'd take a reunion of the 02 line up over the 87 line up. There just seems to be a refusal to accept that the 02 line up had a very real fanbase that disappeared when Bucket and Robin left.
To be honest you might be partially right on this. There was probably some backlash and resistance to it becaue of Axl. However had this exact album been released without Axl Rose the sales would've sucked ass because the curiosity factor(which you refuse to acknowledge) wouldn't exist and the music itself isn't nearly good enough to drum up sales. Truth. Nobody woudl've bought thsi if it wasn't for Axl's name attached to it. And by Nobody I mean very few. Let's not get annoyingly technical.
The worst thing that could have happened was that they would have put out that GN'R album in 1996. They would have been destroyed in the media. The musical change was too great for them to survive on a "R&R album" in the mid 90s. They were getting backlash for being that type of cliche R&R band in 94. And not only would they have broke up anyway, but they wouldn't have gone out on top with UYI. There was enough potential still there after UYI, enough for people to dream about what a reunion would be like, instead of knowing the reality of what a reunion to be like.
Such a load of shit. Who was giving them backlash? Kurt Cobain? Gimme a break. Gn'R was so fucking huge they'd have been accepetd regardless of what kind of album they put out at the time. This is simply you making stuff up. the only person getting backlash was Axl for beinga dick. the wold loved Guns N' Roses and Slash was guesting with a lot of artists. trust em the world woudl NOT have turned their back on a Rn'R record released by Guns N' Roses. Wishful thining on your part. You do so to justify your weird position that the only direction the band could possibly go was a Buckethead era direction. Yeah that was what the world was waiting for alright. the world would've turned their back on a Rn'R Gn'R record with Slash but was foaming at the mouth for a Navaro, Zack, Buckethead or whoever Gn'R album 
Rock n rocll was too cliche right? 
The best thing to happen for the old line up was to fall apart how and when it did. It makes the prospect of things (unfinished business; that one last great GN'R album) seem a lot more sunny than it actually is.
The fact you say the dream of a reunion is better than the reality is insane. We've had nothing but incredible music made by these guys and you act as though it's a forgone conclusion they could never create incredible music again. I'd have full confidence if you locked Axl and Slash in a room together for a month they'd come up with something that would crush CD. Yet you'd take the 2002 lineup over the original lineup cause of what exactly? CD? Unreal. You are so in the minority it's not even funny.
And, for me, I love the music Axl is making now. Again, just personal taste, I have no desire for anything Slash is doing right now, so I'd rather him not be a part of GN'R at this moment. I think a lot of fans would force themselves to like an original line up album, or like some of the Axl and Slash fans, love anything that has their names attached to it, but a lot of people would walk away very disappointed, IMO.
Ummm... Axl isn't making music now. Hate to break it to ya. The music you hear on CD is over ten years old. And as for fans "forcing themselves to like an orginal lineup album" I guess I could say it'd be like a lot of fans who force themselves to like CD and even more so force themslevs to present an image of greater fandom by saying CD is as good as anything Gn'R has ever done? Kinda like that? Cause let's be real here there's so much to love of the post Slash era in Gn'R 
Re: Slash on Piers Morgan
Okay, you're forcing your opinion as fact again. CD was a very good album. Was it as great as it could've been? Hell no. But it has some great songs.
Again, you guys use a very strange calculation to determine that CD was bad and no one cared. First, you ignore the critical praise. It's been stated that the 2 million albums sold doesn't count because the majority came from outside the US, and the logic has been thrown around that anything outside the US doesn't matter. Then the sales it did have in America are attacked that it was all basically curiosity purchases. When you take into account that it was in one store, cutting the spontaneous, casual purchase by about 75% (conservative estimate) Axl sitting on his ass, no real promo, the fact the entire album was leaked and then streamed on their myspace page, which was well advertised in any article mentioning CD's release, that would have seeped up the curious listener factor for anyone who was remotely interested in hearing CD solely based on curiosity. The fact that you want to delegitamize CD as much as you can, and some of you are so obsessed with it, really astounds me. I don't understand it.
I have not seen one inkling of evidence that Slash can produce anything, remotely close to the work he did on Estranged, NR, Locomotive, Coma, etc. A lot of his best material in GN'R were songs written by Izzy. Again, Axl pointed out again that there's a huge myth that Slash brough in Coma and Locomotive as completed songs when they were basically ideas that were fleshed out by the band. And also, didn't Axl have to pay Slash to do those solos on NR and Estranged? And getting him and pushing him to do it was where the band really ended? On both sides?
AFD sounds much more dated than UYI. I think it's the only album that could stand up today as a whole, mainly because it's so damn weird, with some very avant garde moments in it. WTTJ, SCOM, ISE and PC hold up well as songs. AFD as a whole, does not. It's VERY dated. Even if it had been released even in 1992. But the album still rocks. It's a masterpiece. Doesn't mean it doesn't have warts.
And I've done everything I could to point out the lack of success Axl has had post 1993 because of HIM. His actions and inactions. I'm not going to ignore the success he has had or his good moments. I'm just not. I have no agenda talking about his success, and I'm not going to try and rationalize why it shouldn't count, or try to undermine it like painting him as a pouser for experimenting with sounds and genre's, that when Bono does it, he's a genius.
You hold Axl to a different standard to where he fails no matter what he does... Unless he does what you want him to.
Bono, we've had the discussion before, no matter how they were viewed in the 90's in Canada, it's been pointed out to you by numerous people on this board, that during the 90's GN'R had a major backlash with the rise of alt music and were turning into a joke in 1993... I'm sorry. And, going by some of the logic used, any opinion or album sale outside the US doesn't count 
And again, I see no evidence that Slash and Duff or even Izzy could bring anything remotely close to what they did together. I'm being serious, they would have much more pressure on them than any kind of pressure Axl had on him by carrying on the name. Even VR albums weren't that fresh or great. I'd rather see Axl do something new with a new players than to try and live up to something they couldn't possibly live up to and really something he doesn't want to be a part of. That line up deserves to leave a legacy better than a rehash. To think they could just pick up where they left off is pretty unrealistic.
Again, it's your opinion that you don't like CD. I think some of GN'Rs best songs are on that album.
