Jump to content

Why do some praise RiR3?


Vincent Vega

Recommended Posts

I've never gotten the love of it...

The band (IMO) compared to the '90s and 2006-present sounded very sloppy..and not in a good way. The sound mix at RiR3 was way too muddled and sludgy, way too bass heavy, Axl didn't sound or look his best. I guess for sentimental reasons (it being the return of Axl and the first show of 'new' Guns) I can understand the good feelings toward it...But from a purely objective, technical standpoint...It was a very low point in Guns' history.

That isn't a knock at Axl or the band in general. They rock now, they're tight, the mix is great, the guitars and bass all sound tight and the way they should now, and they've gotten better and better since 2006. But as far as Rock in Rio 3--It was their first show, and Axl's first full show in seven years. It's understandable that there would be some foibles. But to hail it as some great concert, even with the nostalgia of it being 10 years ago now, is kind of silly IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even 10 years later,that version of "The Blues",the first performance of "Madagascar" (as well as that speech he made),as well as one of the most heartfelt "Knockin On Heavens Doors" EVER, (which Axl said would be closer to the original),still remain my favorites.

Vocally,I loved Axl's opening few lines to "The Blues",even when he screwed up at that "Okay,nevermind!" part.Ha.I must have listened to that damn song 1000 times,so it was like a part of it to me.The intro to KOHD still gives me chills.and while I love "Madaagascar" in both old AND current/recorded form,I am kind of partial to the cleaner vocals displayed at RIR3.

So yeah,I wouldn't call RIR3 a complete disaster.Even if for those 3 songs alone,it was well worth it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was a damn good concert.

Some praise the concert becuase it was a good show, good performance, and great crowd.

Even though Axl did'nt have the rasp, he did sound good for what he was trying to do, which was sing more clean for a different style.

IMO, it's one of New GNR's best concert's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest siliconmessiah

Well, the fans were stoked. At last. THE BAND of BANDS finally took the stage for the first time in ages. I remember getting my friend to order a VHS-bootleg from overseas. Totally fantastic. I remember being 17 years and Guns N Roses comeback made my day back in 2001. When I saw them live in 2006 another dream came true.

To answer the OP-question: There is still something legendary about RIR-3. The VHS-quality does NOT make it justice. I guess you had to be there to see the magic. Still, I´ll take 2006 shows over 2001-2002, any day!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personly enjoyed the RIRIII show!!! The first real look at the new band!! I remember watching online I think it was a live stream on AOL.

Did you really expect a miracle and the band sound tight and Axl being spot on. Hell it was there first big show!!!! I could only amgine what there nerves where like. The band didn't know what to expect from the crowd.

If you want to trash it for not being a technicaly sounds performance, look at the ritz show, Axl didn't sound as good there as he did in RIRIII and the band fucked up all the way through the show. But oh.... wait that is a classic raw and unploished. I bet they had more than one warm up show before the 88 ritz show. And really any show the old band done back in the day they fucked up all the time and Axl's vocals where spoty at best.

I think the 2010 band is by far the best technical incarnation of GNR ever put together. Axl's vocals now are more predictable than at anyother time in his singing carear. The way he screams and shit I think it is amazing given his age on how he sounded from day one to the end of the 2009-2010 tour.

It's like comparing apples to oranges to try and compair the different GNR band configurations and even Axl he is what 17 years older than he was in 93 and you would be hard pressed to find another lead vocalist still performing at the level Axl is now at his age. Yeah there are a few but IMHO Axl has a harder road to hoe due to the different sounds he makes which have to be murder on his cords!!!

Do I think the new band is better than the old??? Yes and No

Do I think the old band is better than the new??? Yes and No

It is what it is and we should just roll with it or get the fuck out of the GNR forums if we don't like at and get a life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Get that guy outta here! That guy right there. Are you listening to me mr security man!? That guy, gone!

Yeah, throw him.

Hand me that shirt! Hand me that shirt! Thank you! ;)"

^^ This part is just funny, but Axl's final rant about Beta was really magical and touching.

Edited by MarcoM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it was a great show, the atmosphere is insane and for the most part Axl sounds great. He sings much gentler than before but I think it works well on most songs, and theres a few songs where he really sounds fantastic. He was a bit chubbier than the 90's but so fuckin what, I'm not a teenage girl obsessed with pointing out physical flaws, this is is rock n roll and the uglier the better rock3

Even the guitar solos were great in this show! The only car crash moment was paradise city with those dancers, it was all a bit messy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably the best version of Madagascar ever

It could have been awesome if a) he'd stood still when singing 'Iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii' and B) not bottled singing the high notes before the solo. I'm gutted he didn't because his voice has never ever sounded that way before or since: so rich, deep and clean. None of the 2002 soundboards come close to it. Madagscar from Cleveland is awesome but just not that rich and deep.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The band was awesome in 2002. Axl's voice is what let people down. I'd trade the current lineup for the Buckethead one in a second.

Exactly, that band was awesome in 2002 (and I agree by the way, they were mindblowing). But was it Guns N' Roses? Absolutely not.

I might say... I prefer Buckethead over Dj, or even Robin over Ron (which I don't), but the reality is that Bucket/Finck were not visually or playing wise GN'R guitarists.

Bucket is techinically unbelievable. But are a KFC bucket and nunchunks Guns N' Roses? Nah. Is a six minute solo filled with technical prowess and freestyle dancing GN'R? Nah.

The objective should be to sell Guns as a legitimate project (which is a plausbile continuation of the old guys). A guy “raised by chickens” and a goth guy who fucks up “Sweet Child” and nearly every other old track with slop is not the way to go about the latter.

Dj may not be the most technically gifted, but he plays the material the way it is supposed to be played and his look is acceptable. Ron is a guitar maestro, and both his style and image are more than compatible with the GN'R concept.

So whilst I may prefer the 2002 line-up as a band, as Guns N' Roses, the 2010 incarnation is by far the most legitimate.

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...