How Much Easier Would Axl's Life Have Been if He Went Solo?

[magisme]

When all the musicians work for one guy in the band, that's a solo project.

[Rovim]

When all the musicians work for one guy in the band, that's a solo project.

Then it's no different then Slash and the conspirators. Maybe even more of a band compared to that, cause people brought in songs for Chinese. It was more of a collaborative effort in many ways compared to writing all the music and just sending it to Myles to write lyrics and melodies and have Brent and Todd work on ideas Slash came up with.

At least with Axl it was like do what you want, but I have the final say. In both of these "bands" you don't really get total freedom which is when there is total musical trust and a goal to have everyone in the band decide together what are the right songs that represent everyone's shared vision and not just the leader of the group.

I think Axl and Slash are kinda similar in that aspect musically: they know what they like, and they don't really want to give total control over a song or even sometimes any control so it's not even open for debate really from the start, or you are a part of the album, but you don't know what part of an idea will be on there eventually.

There are many types of bands and it's all decided by how the people in those bands interact and how they agree on shit and who has the final say. It's not a democracy in the conspirators or in new Guns. Difference is Axl kept the name, and he wanted to make a Guns record, but many, many musicians that are in a position of power to decide what's included or what's the musical direction just do it.

Like Dave Grohl said he just did all the drums for the first or second Foo Fighters album and the drummer was pissed off and Dave said it was fucked up of him and he was young. But it's hard to know what is the best way to create the best album your band is capable of producing. And since Axl was the lead singer of old Guns, and he wanted to make a Guns album and knew what at least some of the elements that should be present were, and what ideas work for that, it makes sense he oversaw that whole thing and used all of his abilities to make it happen. Tommy doesn't know what works for a Guns song as well as Axl does. How could he? he can still write ideas that will help, but Axl needs to make it Guns in the end and that means changes, copy/paste of even solos and parts of solos. Probably every detail Axl has to approve or change.

Izzy kind of made that easier imo. He just came up with an idea that everyone was digging, and then they worked on it. Made Appetite possible, and then Use Your Illusion sounded like they fought for musical space. Everyone was pushing to make it more about themselves and you can hear it.

So either you have perfect chemistry and a shared goal that is very clear from the get go, or you're more interested in introducing your personal vision and you don't have perfect chemistry with your players anymore so someone needs to decide where to go. To direct it so it doesn't fall apart before it becomes songs that you can use, that you like.

Edited October 27, 2014 by Rovim

[Nick83]

There's no doubt in my mind that Axl could have become and developed into a highly successful solo artist, but I think he would have been better off forming an entirely new band that had a catchy name. But that brings its own set of problems, because it would be compared to GNR at every instant. Even if his new band was better and the comparisons weren't negative, I can't see him having wanted to have so much of the focus on comparisons to hisbokd and highly controversial band etc.

As a solo artist, I don't think Axl would want to be defined by the music he would have created. Obviously he's very well listened and probably would have liked to record and release many different kinds of music.

But if he had chosen to become a solo artist, he'd probably have a stellar career. He probably should have taken the Trent Reznor approach and created a new band that was always exclusively know as his solo band. That's a good compromise. But, if he went out on name alone, I think he'd probably be like a Lenny Kravitz, a Sting, a Rod Stewart, Phil Collins, Don Henley, Eric Clapton etc. I mean, he'd no doubt have a highly successful solo career, sell albums, and fill venues.

But I think when he was making these decisions he was viewing a return to MTV superstardom, and he had no idea that this wouldn't exist by the time he was ready to make his return.

So, my opinion is that he would have had a lot of success, and I would go on to say he probably would be more successful than he has been with new GNR. By trying to build this new GNR, he wasted a lot of time and creativity, and ended up being completely indecisive and blocked mentally and from taking physical action by all that he had to consider in his effort to meet or exceed the standards and expectations that old GNR had created. That is simply too much of a burden.

But in the end, as wasted said, the decision to continue to keep and continue under the GNR name was strongly influenced by the ego challenge. There were business elements as well. He owed the label albums and he had their funding etc. By pursuing a new GNR path, he perhaps wanted to effectively eliminate a future forced return to the old lineup that would have been required to satisfy his contractual obligations.

But I also think of it like this: if Axl wanted the support and funding for a solo career from the label, he'd have received all that he wanted and needed. Anything that would have promoted Axl would have promoted GNR in the future etc. So, to say his decisions were influenced by being bound to contractual commitments, wouldn't be a very strong argument.

I also don't know if he was worried about not being relevant, not being able to sell albums, or fill venues without the GNR name. This is very possible, but I think he could have been easily convinced otherwise by many. So once again, there a million influences or decision factors for his decision to continue under the GNR name, but I do think that it came down to ego, revenge, competition etc. He was wrapped up too personally in the old band, and that probably had the biggest influence on his decisions.

But yeah, the dude could have been like the male Madonna. At the same time, maybe he wasn't as creatively abundant as we've always assumed, and couldn't have done that. But we will never know. But I do know that his epic battle with old GNR and himself absolutely robbed him of his own creative development and ability to create. Had he off left GNR and the pressures associated with it behind, and ventured out on his own, yeah, he'd probably be the male Madonna.

What other male music star have we seen that had that capability? I can't think of any.

[magisme]

Axl kept the GNR name because he wanted to stay under the radar. He would have been too big for the music world if he went solo. What a humanitarian.

This section gets loony as fuck when Axl is inactive. spam-tl:dr.

[Rovim]

Axl kept the GNR name because he wanted to stay under the radar. He would have been too big for the music world if he went solo. What a humanitarian.

This section gets loony as fuck when Axl is inactive. spam-tl:dr.

Axl kept the Gn'R name cause it's a brand that's worth a lot of money and he did a lot of the work getting it to that place with the rest of the classic line up. He was also interested in keeping the band alive. It was more then just one reason, not just the money, Guns meant a lot to Axl especially then. He wasn't going to just end it, no matter what you think about the results. (one album in 23 years etc)

Artistically, it seems Axl prefers to use Guns as his only musical channel plus the occasional guest performance.

Edited October 26, 2014 by Rovim

[DieselDaisy]

I would have admired Axl a lot more if he had actually done something with the fuckin name. If Axl had released three masterpieces now, which thump Slash's buttrock albums, you would be saying to yourself, ''oh well, I suppose Axl was GN'R after all''. Unfortunately, sitting twiddling on overdubs for ten years before finally becoming a Vegas band does not justify Axl's usurpation.

[wasted]

I think some of the solo potential is based on what kind of stuff you can or do best.

Elton and Bowie are very pop rock. I'm not sure the material which Axl writes has been that commercial.

On all the albums he's benefitted from other writers and the context of a big band.

You kind of have to sell yourself like Ozzy or Slash, Elton, Bowie, Lenny do the interview circuit. Axl doesn't seem comfortable being that mainstream guy.

And can he write 12 catchy pop rock tunes and tone it down. Step away from the high vocals and solos. Just piano singer songwriter shit?

So it's more just The Axl Rose Band. Where it's still going to be a hard rock record. I hardly see the difference except make it more difficult.

If Slash and Izzy were sitting at home and Axl wouldn't let them join...but Izzy couldn't be fucked and Slash really wants to be his own boss.

Maybe Axl should have gone solo just so we wouldn't have to think about it.

Is there any band that ever did this, maybe Sex Pistol? Nirvana maybe just few records then nah fuck it.

Axl relationship with the media was poor too in the late to mid 90s.

Basically we have Axl's Snakepit.

Edited October 27, 2014 by wasted

[Rovim]

I think some of the solo potential is based on what kind of stuff you can or do best.

Elton and Bowie are very pop rock. I'm not sure the material which Axl writes has been that commercial.

On all the albums he's benefitted from other writers and the context of a big band.

You kind of have to sell yourself like Ozzy or Slash, Elton, Bowie, Lenny do the interview circuit. Axl doesn't seem comfortable being that mainstream guy.

And can he write 12 catchy pop rock tunes and tone it down. Step away from the high vocals and solos. Just piano singer songwriter shit?

So it's more just The Axl Rose Band. Where it's still going to be a hard rock record. I hardly see the difference except make it more difficult.

If Slash and Izzy were sitting at home and Axl wouldn't let them join...but Izzy couldn't be fucked and Slash really wants to be his own boss.

Maybe Axl should have gone solo just so we wouldn't have to think about it.

Is there any band that ever did this, maybe Sex Pistol? Nirvana maybe just few records then nah fuck it.

Even in old Guns Slash supported the idea of an Axl Rose solo album. He thought get it out of his system and let's keep doing the same thing in Guns. And even then, Axl wasn't really into it, or for whatever reason, the idea didn't appeal to him enough to do it.

So a solo thing really doesn't work for Axl it seems. It's kinda in the middle: it's not a band in the traditional sense for some, but it's not really a full on solo project. I think if you have problem with control, the music often suffers from it. Unless you're Prince or something. Both Axl and Slash have a lot of control in their bands. When they had less, it was different, but if you don't think the people you work with are as talented as you, or you don't really trust them, the cake will not taste the same. Even with input of others, it will still be more your musical vision, but it is possible to take whatever you need from your band members and then just put it together yourself. It worked better for Axl artistically with Chinese imo, but it also took a very long time to make so I'm not sure.

You can't always stick to what worked before. Axl was trying to do the best he could do with what he had. A lot of money, a lot of time. Much less efficient but it did work.

Edited October 27, 2014 by Rovim

[wasted]

I think some of the solo potential is based on what kind of stuff you can or do best.

Elton and Bowie are very pop rock. I'm not sure the material which Axl writes has been that commercial.

On all the albums he's benefitted from other writers and the context of a big band.

You kind of have to sell yourself like Ozzy or Slash, Elton, Bowie, Lenny do the interview circuit. Axl doesn't seem comfortable being that mainstream guy.

And can he write 12 catchy pop rock tunes and tone it down. Step away from the high vocals and solos. Just piano singer songwriter shit?

So it's more just The Axl Rose Band. Where it's still going to be a hard rock record. I hardly see the difference except make it more difficult.

If Slash and Izzy were sitting at home and Axl wouldn't let them join...but Izzy couldn't be fucked and Slash really wants to be his own boss.

Maybe Axl should have gone solo just so we wouldn't have to think about it.

Is there any band that ever did this, maybe Sex Pistol? Nirvana maybe just few records then nah fuck it.

Even in old Guns Slash supported the idea of an Axl Rose solo album. He thought get it out of his system and let's keep doing the same thing in Guns. And even then, Axl wasn't really into it, or for whatever reason, the idea didn't appeal to him enough to do it.

So a solo thing really doesn't work for Axl it seems. It's kinda in the middle: it's not a band in the traditional sense for some, but it's not really a full on solo project. I think if you have problem with control, the music often suffers from it. Unless you're Prince or something. Both Axl and Slash have a lot of control in their bands. When they had less, it was different, but if you don't think the people you work with are as talented as you, or you don't really trust them, the cake will not taste the same. Even with input of others, it will still be more your musical vision, but it is possible to take whatever you need from your band members and then just put it together yourself. It worked better for Axl artistically with Chinese imo, but it also took a very long time to make so I'm not sure.

You can't always stick to what worked before. Axl was trying to do the best he could do with what he had. A lot of money, a lot of time. Much less efficient but it did work.

I see the band dynamic on CD as the same as on UYI/AFD. Someone brings a song in and they work on it. I think on UYI Slash brought in a few songs already done and Axl just sang on them, probably the way he likes it. But doesn't get the AFD/CD results.

To me a solo record is just one writer mainly (music & lyrics), with others playing those songs. Solo isn't songs by other people played by a band with you singing. I would call that a band.

Just because Slash calls songs written with Myles a solo album doesn't really mean it's not really just a band with his name top billing to sell records.

Axl has a bout 5 solo songs so far (Estranged, Breakdown, Dead Horse, Shotgun Blues, This I Love)?

[Rovim]

I think some of the solo potential is based on what kind of stuff you can or do best.

Elton and Bowie are very pop rock. I'm not sure the material which Axl writes has been that commercial.

On all the albums he's benefitted from other writers and the context of a big band.

You kind of have to sell yourself like Ozzy or Slash, Elton, Bowie, Lenny do the interview circuit. Axl doesn't seem comfortable being that mainstream guy.

And can he write 12 catchy pop rock tunes and tone it down. Step away from the high vocals and solos. Just piano singer songwriter shit?

So it's more just The Axl Rose Band. Where it's still going to be a hard rock record. I hardly see the difference except make it more difficult.

If Slash and Izzy were sitting at home and Axl wouldn't let them join...but Izzy couldn't be fucked and Slash really wants to be his own boss.

Maybe Axl should have gone solo just so we wouldn't have to think about it.

Is there any band that ever did this, maybe Sex Pistol? Nirvana maybe just few records then nah fuck it.

Even in old Guns Slash supported the idea of an Axl Rose solo album. He thought get it out of his system and let's keep doing the same thing in Guns. And even then, Axl wasn't really into it, or for whatever reason, the idea didn't appeal to him enough to do it.

So a solo thing really doesn't work for Axl it seems. It's kinda in the middle: it's not a band in the traditional sense for some, but it's not really a full on solo project. I think if you have problem with control, the music often suffers from it. Unless you're Prince or something. Both Axl and Slash have a lot of control in their bands. When they had less, it was different, but if you don't think the people you work with are as talented as you, or you don't really trust them, the cake will not taste the same. Even with input of others, it will still be more your musical vision, but it is possible to take whatever you need from your band members and then just put it together yourself. It worked better for Axl artistically with Chinese imo, but it also took a very long time to make so I'm not sure.

You can't always stick to what worked before. Axl was trying to do the best he could do with what he had. A lot of money, a lot of time. Much less efficient but it did work.

I see the band dynamic on CD as the same as on UYI/AFD. Someone brings a song in and they work on it. I think on UYI Slash brought in a few songs already done and Axl just sang on them, probably the way he likes it. But doesn't get the AFD/CD results.

To me a solo record is just one writer mainly (music & lyrics), with others playing those songs. Solo isn't songs by other people played by a band with you singing. I would call that a band.

Just because Slash calls songs written with Myles a solo album doesn't really mean it's not really just a band with his name top billing to sell records.

Axl has a bout 5 solo songs so far (Estranged, Breakdown, Dead Horse, Shotgun Blues, This I Love)?

November Rain too but yeah. Axl is more of a collaborator. He gives the orders, but he wants to include everyone's input that he thinks is cool and then decide.

[Dazey]

I've no problem with Axl keeping the name. It's the fact that he's done fuck all with it that I find annoying.

[Seb91]

I think PR wise it would have saved him so much hassle. I'd say the majority of people don't see it as "Guns N' Roses" without the key players from the classic lineup. By keeping the name he certainly made a rod for his own back. Having said that he had the name so was able to continue at the same level and still play big venues and headline festivals. Were he to have gone solo it would have been a slow burn. It's a trade off really, I mean any band that has replaced members over the years has some fans who are annoyed.

[wkuk04]

He may have only released CD. But at least somebody had the sack to carry GNR on. Sold 100 million albums +, the fans & casual fans made the guys millionaires and then one day a few of them decide oh fuck this.

[Dazey]

If we'd seen multiple new albums like maybe four or five releases of good new material since Spaghetti Incident then I seriously doubt Axl would be getting anything like the grief he currently gets for keeping the name.

[wasted]

Axl doesn't seem too worried about releasing albums. He just seems to love touring the world, rocking the hits and modelling GNR memorabilia.

[Apollo]

By keeping the name GNR and working within that entity he also got access to millions of dollars of Geffen funding that otherwise wouldn't have been available. Pretty cushy gig, going to a studio whenever you want to dick around with someone else footing the bill for 14 years.

Ant hit the nail on the head.

Keeping the name made it easy for Axl to get studio backing and to sell his tours/album.

Keeping the name was actually the easy route to go.

What I don't understand is why fight so hard to keep the name alive if he wasn't going to release new music under the GnR moniker?

At the end of the day all the matters is the quality of the music released.

If Axl released five killer albums after slash/duff had left, most of the people who complain about the "name" wouldn't be bringing that up all the time now.

But one album in 20 years and of course fans are going to complain about him keeping the name.

[maynard]

Axl chose the ropes, the hard way ... and that's so GN'R.

How is hiring a bunch of yes-men to play old hit songs on Vegas or have 10+ million from the label to make one record in 20 years the hard way?

[Nosaj Thing]

Axl chose the ropes, the hard way ... and that's so GN'R.

How is hiring a bunch of yes-men to play old hit songs on Vegas or have 10+ million from the label to make one record in 20 years the hard way?

GUNNER PT loves to make baseless, clueless statements like this but will never back them up. If I were you, I wouldn't expect a reply.

[SoulMonster]

I would have admired Axl a lot more if he had actually done something with the fuckin name. If Axl had released three masterpieces now, which thump Slash's buttrock albums, you would be saying to yourself, ''oh well, I suppose Axl was GN'R after all''. Unfortunately, sitting twiddling on overdubs for ten years before finally becoming a Vegas band does not justify Axl's usurpation.

For me it is all about the music. And the very fact that he has managed to release one album after the UYI lineup failed is ALL that is needed to justify his decision to continue. If he hadn't done anything at all, then I would question his decision to not let the band disappear, but that would also not be a problem to me since the net effect of continuing with the band but not releasing and discontinuing the band is exactly the same: no new music. It would simpy, not make a difference to me.

I don't get people who are all angry and frustrated with him continuing with the band. One album is infinitely better than zero albums, and if you don't like it, then just don't listen to it and there is no affect in your life. Of course, two albums would have been better, and three even more so, but I can't see how the magical number of albums for when his decision is justified could be anything but one.

I think it has all got to do with broken expectations. People are disappointed by the poor productivity and lets that influence their view on whether he should have let the band die or not. It is all a bit childish to me.

Axl chose the ropes, the hard way ... and that's so GN'R.

How is hiring a bunch of yes-men to play old hit songs on Vegas or have 10+ million from the label to make one record in 20 years the hard way?

Deciding to continue with the band despite all the shit he is constantly being given, even from what you would expect would be a understanding and supportive fan base, seems to me to have been a harder path to walk than just allowing the band to die when the UYI lineup disintegrated. Of course, we coudl imagine a different path where he continued and succeded at winning everyone's approval, but I think the odds were stacked against him -- already back in the 90s he was the bad guy and I think he early on realized that there would be no point in fighting that fight. I am absolutely noy saying he doesn't deserve criticism, but I do believe he is aware he would get a hard time yet STILL decided to do it.

Edited October 27, 2014 by SoulMonster

[Laparka]

I would have admired Axl a lot more if he had actually done something with the fuckin name. If Axl had released three masterpieces now, which thump Slash's buttrock albums, you would be saying to yourself, ''oh well, I suppose Axl was GN'R after all''. Unfortunately, sitting twiddling on overdubs for ten years before finally becoming a Vegas band does not justify Axl's usurpation.

This.

I've always liked Axl more than any other member, but the fact that he does NOTHING with the GnR name is making my blood boil.

Since the day I had internet, I started looking every info possible about what genious move he was about to do to make NuGnR relevant.

And he blew everything up. BH leaving, Finck leaving, CD 3 times postponed, tour cancelled, no CD promotion, no real CD tour after the release, no music video, still waiting for the follow-up...

Axl would get a lot less hatred from the general public if he had been releasing 3 or 4 albums between 99 & 2014.

I would have loved an Axl autobiography too. That would have been something released at least...

[Rovim]

I would have admired Axl a lot more if he had actually done something with the fuckin name. If Axl had released three masterpieces now, which thump Slash's buttrock albums, you would be saying to yourself, ''oh well, I suppose Axl was GN'R after all''. Unfortunately, sitting twiddling on overdubs for ten years before finally becoming a Vegas band does not justify Axl's usurpation.

This.

I've always liked Axl more than any other member, but the fact that he does NOTHING with the GnR name is making my blood boil.

Since the day I had internet, I started looking every info possible about what genious move he was about to do to make NuGnR relevant.

And he blew everything up. BH leaving, Finck leaving, CD 3 times postponed, tour cancelled, no CD promotion, no real CD tour after the release, no music video, still waiting for the follow-up...

Axl would get a lot less hatred from the general public if he had been releasing 3 or 4 albums between 99 & 2014.

I would have loved an Axl autobiography too. That would have been something released at least...

One album in 23 years is fucked up. I wouldn't say he did nothing with the name, but he did very little with it. Maybe not enough. Not enough for it to be accepted by a lot of old Guns fans. Maybe he tried and we don't know the whole story, but bottom line is he waited too long with the music, and he waited too long to perform again after the old line up was no more. Time and tide waits for no man.

Edited October 28, 2014 by Rovim

[Laparka]

I would have admired Axl a lot more if he had actually done something with the fuckin name. If Axl had released three masterpieces now, which thump Slash's buttrock albums, you would be saying to yourself, ''oh well, I suppose Axl was GN'R after all''. Unfortunately, sitting twiddling on overdubs for ten years before finally becoming a Vegas band does not justify Axl's usurpation.

This.

I've always liked Axl more than any other member, but the fact that he does NOTHING with the GnR name is making my blood boil.

Since the day I had internet, I started looking every info possible about what genious move he was about to do to make NuGnR relevant.

And he blew everything up. BH leaving, Finck leaving, CD 3 times postponed, tour cancelled, no CD promotion, no real CD tour after the release, no music video, still waiting for the follow-up...

Axl would get a lot less hatred from the general public if he had been releasing 3 or 4 albums between 99 & 2014.

I would have loved an Axl autobiography too. That would have been something released at least...

One album in 23 years is fucked up. I wouldn't say he did nothing with the name, but he did very little with it. Maybe not enough. Not enough for it to be accepted by a lot of old Guns fans. Maybe he tried and we don't know the whole story, but bottom line is he waited too long with the music, and he waited too long to perform again after the old line up was no more. Time and tide waits for no man.

That's why I want an autobiography or some REAL book about the post-breakup period

[EvH]

I've no problem with Axl keeping the name. It's the fact that he's done fuck all with it that I find annoying.

[tinyrobot]

Not much easier.... the problem is not the music, the talent, the voice... Back in 1993, he had it all and he still had the looks to go out and be the biggest rockstar of the 90's but the problems in his head, his personal life is what stopped him and probably he was scared of facing the rock industry with his solo name.

I never thought Axl would be so fragile, mentally fragile, as to hide for so many years... His insecurities killed his talent and we missed the best years of his life. Like someone said before, he ain't no Ozzy and gosh, he could have been Ozzy but it is those bullshits in his head that stopped him.

An Axl solo career, done in the right way, would have been amazing for his life and he may have returned fresh and cool to GN'R, if ever.... It is mental instability what prevented him from making more music, either solo or in GN'R. Years proved that with our without a band, Axl is not a prolific songwriter and musician.... I really wonder what he does all day long... Nowadays, people in their 50's sometimes are more active than in their 30's, but him...?

Edited October 28, 2014 by tinyrobot

[CheapJon]

Who would he blame?