Jump to content

Alan Niven, "I cannot digest is that he states that he is Guns N' Roses because on his own – he is not.”


SunnyDRE

Recommended Posts

Some people still live in 1990?!

I'm afraid so. :shrugs:

Whoose living in 1990? What is wrong with having an opinion that a particular lineup epotimised for him Guns N' Roses.

I still like and listen to Queen - does that mean I am living in the past? I happen to think that the Bon Scott era ACDC material is the best stuff, does that mean I'm living in the 70's. No it just means that I have an opinion that is different from some other people. Not right, not wrong, just different. Doesn't mean I'm living in the past nor is Niven.

Besides Niven was asked the questions so he's just answering them. It's like when people bag Slash for always talking about GNR. He doesn't bring up the questions, the person interviewing him does.

In addition if he is living in the past why were the first few questions and answers all about the artists he is currently working with and his new record label. Sounds to me like he is moving forward. But people seem to conviently gloss over most of this stuff (assuming they even read the whole article) and pick out one statement they disagree with and try and dismiss the whole thing as having no credability as a consequence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 176
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Alan Niven: I think we’re looking at coercion and unpleasantness and meanness of spirit that elicits a negative response when they see a ‘Guns N Roses’ banner over a crowd at Leeds which is exacerbated by a Slash look-a-like who is doing the same moves and wearing a top-hat. Where there is a guy who looks rather similar in haircut and body language to Izzy and plays a hollow body guitar and you look at the bass player and think ‘well, that’s the closest they could find to Duff. I think that’s a tremendous deceit on Axl’s part. I think it’s an incredible insult to the people who made Guns N' Roses what it was… to Izzy, to Steven, to Slash, to Duff and I think it’s very callous and arrogant. I think it’s foolish for Axl to do it and I think it’s foolish for an audience to accept it.

Just my point! It's just crazy to keep that look when you replace a rock icon like Slash. A very bad move.

This band is NOT Guns N' Roses. I know all you Axlites smart asses always say things like "Uh, how come it says Guns N' Roses on my concert ticket?" etc, and it's fucking bullshit! Guns N' Roses died in 1990 as Alan said. I like the CD album as a Axl solo album, but to call it Guns N' Roses is very disrespectful to the GNR lagacy, because it simply doesn't reach up to the GNR standard. And please save me for that "It's better than AFD and UYI because This I Love makes me cry every time I hear it". Pussies.

If you dont like it fuck off, its plain simple.

Fact is : The current gnr are more exciting, have better songs, have more fans, put on better concerts, are in more demand then any of the old ex members currently (velvet revolver anyone? LOL fucking EL OH EL).

If you dont like the current gnr, then theres something wrong with you and you should learn to grow the fuck up and accept that things aren't always 'clear cut' and that in music, there is no rules, and politics aside, this band has proven themselves that they are more than capable of creating and performing music that not only pays homage to the gnr legacy, but surpasses it on many levels.

so if you dont like gnr in 2010, go enject yourself with some cool drugs and drink some jack like your old 80s guitarist and reminisce on the old band whilst the rest of us can accept and love this band for what it is and enjoy the music and the concerts while we still have them.

I like it, but i think it's bullshit that they are called Guns N' Roses (like the majority does), plain and simple.

You think the current "GNR" surpasses the real band??? How old are you, kiddo? As I said, I like Fake GNR, but they are NOTHING compared to Guns N' Roses! Not a damn thing. Guns N' Roses doesn't exist anymore, and you know it. Punk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But people seem to conviently gloss over most of this stuff (assuming they even read the whole article) and pick out one statement they disagree with and try and dismiss the whole thing as having no credability as a consequence.

The questions are no more than a prompt. It's the answers that the questioned person is responsible for. And if that person claims Guns n' Roses ceased to exist for him when Adler left the band - sorry, for me this constitutes obvious denial of the fact that there have been 20 years of Guns n' Roses since. And if this doesn't mean living in the past to you - well, to me it does.

And it is not as if people usually just state they "prefer" the AFD line-up. No, they usually claim that the AFD line-up was "the real" Guns n' Roses and everything afterwards is fake or a "bunch of hired hands" etc. pp.

EDIT: Regarding the above post - q.e.d. <_<

Edited by Granny
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm so lucky I consider this lineup to be GnR and that I like CD cause I still have this band to watch today. I don't have to go to 20 year old videos on YouTube to watch what I consider to be GnR.

25 years guys. GnR is a band that evolves. Always has been, always will until the end. That's GnR. You can prefer an album over the others, but to prefer just one lineup is \to focus on one small range of time in the long history that is this band.

Edited by Orsys
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm so lucky I consider this lineup to be GnR and that I like CD cause I still have this band to watch today. I don't have to go to 20 year old videos on YouTube to watch what I consider to be GnR.

25 years guys. GnR is a band that evolves. Always has been, always will until the end. That's GnR. You can prefer an album over the others, but to prefer just one lineup is \to focus on one small range of time in the long history that is this band.

Why are you lucky to do so? Because you're fooling yourself?

I can still watch Fake GNR. Hell, I even saw them to times this summer and they rocked. But when I watch concert clips on youtube, I will of course watch the real band, simply because they are much better and they have a real rock attitude and an INSANE energy. I was lucky enough to see the real band, and once you have seen the real band you know in your heart that there can only be ONE Guns N' Roses, and that's the original.

If you wasn't there, you should just shut the funk up. It's like I should start a discussion with a war vetaran, I can have all the info and watched all the documentaries in the world, but it would just be silly because i wasn't there.

R.I.P. Guns N' Roses

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for posting, interesting read.

I havent read the 6 pages of "it IS guns n roses" followed by "it's not GNR without slash" :sleeper:

Shame everything on here seems to descend into THAT argument.

From 1985 to 1990 GNR was: Axl, Slash, Duff, Steven and Izzy

Since then it's been ever-changing to: Axl, Dizzy, Pitman, DJ Ashba, Ron Thal, Tommy Stinson, Frank Ferrer, Richard Fortus

Both bands have the same name, but they are VERY different bands. That's what's happened, and Axl has the right to do what he wants with GNR.

Everyone knows Axl is on his own and Slash and co aren't there anymore, so I don't really think it matters. Problem is that a lot of casual fans just associate GNR with Axl and don't care who is with him and the people that know better are annoyed he's somewhat getting away with it. That's the real issue.

The fact is that GNR haven't written a better song without Izzy's involvement than with it, whoever has been in the band.

In fact GNR have released one original album since Izzy left, so if you're looking for the important person in terms of songwriting and direction, he's your man.

But we have what we have and I'd rather Axl was playing gigs with these new dudes than not at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was lucky enough to see the real band, and once you have seen the real band you know in your heart that there can only be ONE Guns N' Roses, and that's the original.

If you wasn't there, you should just shut the funk up. It's like I should start a discussion with a war vetaran, I can have all the info and watched all the documentaries in the world, but it would just be silly because i wasn't there.

R.I.P. Guns N' Roses

Let me concise your attitude for you: "I am in possession of the one and only truth. If you disagree with me you simply have no idea. I am the measure."

No more questions.

Edited by Granny
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was lucky enough to see the real band, and once you have seen the real band you know in your heart that there can only be ONE Guns N' Roses, and that's the original.

If you wasn't there, you should just shut the funk up. It's like I should start a discussion with a war vetaran, I can have all the info and watched all the documentaries in the world, but it would just be silly because i wasn't there.

R.I.P. Guns N' Roses

Let me concise your attitude for you: "I am in possession of the one and only truth. If you disagree with me you simply have no idea. I am the measure."

No more questions.

You're both right and wrong at the same time and neither of you can win this argument.

One of you doesn't care the new band is called Guns N Roses and the other one does.

There can be more than one guns n roses, in fact there has been LOTS of "Guns N Roses" long before Slash left.

ALSO the old band will always be a LOT more successful than the new band, and will always have the best selling and more appreciated (better) albums.

The new band are essentially a touring band. And a very good one at that. They may do some parts on an (ok) album but their main function is touring.

BUT they ARE called Guns N Roses.

You can't argue about much of the above points, apart from some clown will say CD is their best album :rolleyes: and maybe "we don't know what the next album will sell :rolleyes:

So I think everyone should just leave it. No the new band is not GNR that was around in the early years, but whatever you think they're called Guns N Roses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At least he's got it right saying Slash couldn't pen a great song to save his life.

See Slash fans, Slash didnt do shit.

To be fair, no one else could have come up with those amazing solos of his.

Except for Buckethead or Bumblefoot or Guthrie Govan or any other guitarist that's more talented than he.

Negative. NO ONE would have come up with something better than the SCOM solo, or the NR solos, or the Estranged pieces, or Locomotive, or Coma.

BH is amazing, but we must give credit to Slash for writing to IZZY's songs.

Maybe to no one who actually knows music theory and knows how it works. Slash isnt a good musician nor guitarist. I hate to say it, he's fun, and he knows the basics, but GnR is better off without him.

lol, now i know you're full of BS........ keep posting, it makes for a laugh!!! :thumbsup:

Truth is the truth hurts.....don't you agree?

not debating wheter Slash is a "good musician or guitarrist"... but using "music theory" to rate him proves you know squad, about music theory

CdLove: you shouldn't talk about things that your brain evidently cannot fathom. Keep the musical insider stuff to your offline friends, cos on here you're just making a fool out of yourself.

If music was a five-step stairway, you would be on step one along with the tonedeafs.

When was music EVER about technique? It's strange, isn't it, that 10-year-olds across the world can play Mozart and Beethoven on the piano? But then again, Mozart and Beethoven were lesser musicians than Bucket and Bumble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ALSO the old band will always be a LOT more successful than the new band, and will always have the best selling and more appreciated (better) albums.

Oh, a fortune-teller. ;)

Look, I don't have a problem with people preferring and praising the AFD aera. Hardly anybody has, I guess. The problem lies where some of them get aggressive against people who care as much about the current line-up or say the one with Buckethead in it. It is intolerance for other opinions (and I mean opinions, not attacks) that creates tension and trouble.

To me Guns n' Roses are like a man I have known and loved for the good half of my life. Of course, today he is not the same he used to be when we first met. Do I love him less though? Do I adore the memory of him 20 years ago but bitch at him every day for having changed over the years and being different now? Do I scream in his face he is not himself anymore and he should change his name therefore?

No. And I deem this the reasonable way to deal with human beings, Guns n' Roses included.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But then again, Mozart and Beethoven were lesser musicians than Bucket and Bumble.

:rofl-lol: :rofl-lol: :rofl-lol:

O my god!!! You're killing me!

:rofl-lol: :rofl-lol: :rofl-lol:

Let's meet again in say a mere hundred years and find out who's music by then will be better known around the globe - the compositions of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart and Ludwig van Beethoven or the guitar work of Buckethead and Bumblefoot. It's like comparing beautifully designed contemporary family homes to the Taj Mahal, I'm afraid. You better don't do that, it's unfair to all of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At least he's got it right saying Slash couldn't pen a great song to save his life.

See Slash fans, Slash didnt do shit.

To be fair, no one else could have come up with those amazing solos of his.

Except for Buckethead or Bumblefoot or Guthrie Govan or any other guitarist that's more talented than he.

Shut it mate Guthrie Govan dont make me laugh.No-one in the public had ever heard of BF or BH b4 axl got them in his cover band :rofl-lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why are you lucky to do so? Because you're fooling yourself?

I can still watch Fake GNR. Hell, I even saw them to times this summer and they rocked. But when I watch concert clips on youtube, I will of course watch the real band, simply because they are much better and they have a real rock attitude and an INSANE energy. I was lucky enough to see the real band, and once you have seen the real band you know in your heart that there can only be ONE Guns N' Roses, and that's the original.

If you wasn't there, you should just shut the funk up. It's like I should start a discussion with a war vetaran, I can have all the info and watched all the documentaries in the world, but it would just be silly because i wasn't there.

R.I.P. Guns N' Roses

No, not fooling myself. I don't struggle with change either though. GnR changed. In the end, it's just a label. People might take notice because of the label. But if they hate the content of the package they will still move on.

I've changed a lot in the last 10 years, substantially so. Doesn't make me fake Orsys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Well, it's obviously not Guns N' Roses. I think

all the fans know that. It's not even right that he

uses the name, because he's the only guy left."

- Izzy Stradlin

At least somebody agrees with me...

Or did. That was way before he very willingly joined the wrongdoing on stage with Guns N' Roses in 2006...

He still does. Just because he played some gigs with Fake GNR, doesn't mean he believes that band is Guns N' Roses. Of course he doesn't, use your brain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Well, it's obviously not Guns N' Roses. I think

all the fans know that. It's not even right that he

uses the name, because he's the only guy left."

- Izzy Stradlin

At least somebody agrees with me...

Or did. That was way before he very willingly joined the wrongdoing on stage with Guns N' Roses in 2006...

He still does. Just because he played some gigs with Fake GNR, doesn't mean he believes that band is Guns N' Roses. Of course he doesn't, use your brain.

Exclusive Interview with Izzy Stradlin [OCTOBER 2008]

Popular1

You returned to tour with GN'R in 2006. How did you get back in contact with Axl?

Izzy: “I don’t know. It’s been two years since we did that tour of Europe … it’s hard to think … I believe that they gave the number me of his management … No, now I remember: I went to his house, then he called me because they were going to do shows in New York and I said to him: “Hey, why don't I play with you? It could be great." And we did it. And then we toured Europe."

How did you feel at your first show with the new Guns N' Roses?

Izzy: “I arrived at Heathrow airport, I rode in a van and they took me to the Donnington Festival. I had fatal jet lag, but I went to the scene and I felt better instantly. It’s magic."

Much has been said about the present formation of Guns N' Roses. What’s your opinion of the present band compared to the original Guns N’ Roses?

Izzy: “They are more together than we were. (Laughter) Those guys are great musicians. We let ourselves go more."

But if it were to occur, you would consider the possibility of a reunion?

Izzy: “Yes, of course. I wrote great deal of that material."

Well, in 2008 he didn't have any problems with "are they Guns or not", he enjoyed playing with Axl again...actually, Izzy asked Axl if he can play with him :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm glad that we are having that argument...

...again.

:thumbsup:

Difficult to let them get away without setting things straight with at least one reply - and then with another one ... and ... You know? :xmasssanta:

For sure! Some people are just too blind/naive to see that this isn't the real Guns N' Roses, but just a legal name :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jeez Niven, bitter much?

GNR WAS IZZY

Yes, Axl is the greatest front man of all time, but those songs...........were from IZZY. Without the songs....

IZZY was the pixie dust.....we can all write music......IZZY wrote classics.

Well, he didn't come up with many memorable songs after he left Axl. So not sure if he was an island of talent.

Maybe Axl was Izzy's muse?

And Lennon and McArtney never produced anything as brilliant separate as they did together. But they are still great writers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey look, SunnyDRE postes a negative article about todays Guns N' Roses, what else is new. <_<

Just call it Guns N' Roses and move on with you life. No reason to wish and cry over a reunion that'll probably never happen.

your the only moron who mentioned reunion so far in this thread from what I've read

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...