Jump to content

Fortus on Slash & Duff: 'I Think We All Agree It Clicked Instantly' [Update Page 7 - ''I Don't Think This Band Has Ever Sounded Better Than It Does Right Now'']


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Nikki_Sixx said:

You wanna talk 'technicalities' ?

Please apply your logic to the LA Guns situation, where there were in fact TWO bands out there proclaiming to be LA Guns ???

That was a preposterous situation, as preposterous as what Axl has been doing to the GNR name since about '96...

Funny, didn't seem to mention LA Guns. That's not exactly the discussion here. It's fine if you want to pretend a fact doesn't exist or you have your own set of standards, but CD is most definitely a Guns album. It's 100% a fact. Band members get replaced. There are bands out there with no original members. 

 

9 minutes ago, Nosaj Thing said:

Not a Guns N' Roses album.

See above. 

14 minutes ago, Silent Jay said:

It was meant as a joke and maybe we really are derailing my thread, but I agree.

Even if the band hadn't broken up and had to try to get along with Paul Tobias, songs were doomed to be made, at least the backbone of it. This I Love was always a contender no matter what, probably Catcher In The Rye, Street Of Dreams, There Was A Time, I.R.S. or Prostitute too. Axl/Paul/Dizzy songs.

Sarcasm isn't my strong point I guess :P 

 

18 minutes ago, Billsfan said:

Again, I do like them both. The problem is, Izzy actually is in fact, available. He always was. He just wants his cut of the loot, which he has a case for. And believe me, I'm more than fine with Fortus being in this lineup ad having a role but, he shouldn't take precedence over Izzy just because he was loyal to the Buckethead/Bumblefoot eras. Nothing came from that, except for Chinese Democracy, and we never even got one freaking music video from that incredibly over hyped album. This isn't about that band... it's being labeled a "reunion" of the lineup people cared about, which is the 1985-1993 era of GNR.

Fortus deserves more respect over Izzy, for being an Axl yes man? Not sure I can agree with that...

Axl however stays loyal to the people who stick by him, he is incredibly thankful of those types of people and values them. He may feel strong towards Fortus for this and wants to keep him in the line up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Nikki_Sixx said:

Which ex-band of Tracii's are you talking about ?

You may have heard about them. They had dolphins in their music videos and wrote a song about democracy in China.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Free Bird said:

Are you referring to Duff not being an original band member?

Duff, Slash, Matt and Gilby to be more exact. And Dizzy. 

Edited by Sosso
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, AxlRoseCDII said:

Funny, didn't seem to mention LA Guns. That's not exactly the discussion here. It's fine if you want to pretend a fact doesn't exist or you have your own set of standards, but CD is most definitely a Guns album. It's 100% a fact. Band members get replaced. There are bands out there with no original members. 

 

See above. 

Sarcasm isn't my strong point I guess :P 

 

Axl however stays loyal to the people who stick by him, he is incredibly thankful of those types of people and values them. He may feel strong towards Fortus for this and wants to keep him in the line up.

Just curious, do you know the bands history? Then you would know that Axl quit GNR in the mid 90's and since he owned the name, he just formed a new band. His solo band and called them GNR. He also offered Slash and Duff a job as his employers, which Slash refused. So technically and legally the band that released CD is an entire different band than Guns N Roses till '95.

Axl stays loyal to the yes-men around him. Otherwise he wouldn't have done such a dick move like he did back then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Free Bird said:

Just curious, do you know the bands history? Then you would know that Axl quit GNR in the mid 90's and since he owned the name, he just formed a new band. His solo band and called them GNR. He also offered Slash and Duff a job as his employers, which Slash refused. So technically and legally the band that released CD is an entire different band than Guns N Roses till '95.

Axl stays loyal to the yes-men around him. Otherwise he wouldn't have done such a dick move like he did back then.

Well, they finally joined Axl's version of GN'R in 2016, right? But I doubt that they are just employees.

Edited by Sosso
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Sosso said:

Duff, Slash, Matt and Gilby to be more exact. And Dizzy. 

GNR was a revolving door back then in an identification stage. Nothing more. Members and band names changed permanently until the AFD guys found each other. Rob and Tracii did maybe one gig with them after sticking to the name GNR. Before that Duff, Slash and Steven were part of that revolving door.

Original band members are the guys who wrote AFD and signed the deal with Geffen.

3 minutes ago, Sosso said:

Well, they finally joined Axl's version of GN'R in 2016, right? But I doubt that they are just employees.

They rebuild the old partnership. That's all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Free Bird said:

GNR was a revolving door back then in an identification stage. Nothing more. Members and band names changed permanently until the AFD guys found each other. Rob and Tracii did maybe one gig with them after sticking to the name GNR. Before that Duff, Slash and Steven were part of that revolving door.

Original band members are the guys who wrote AFD and signed the deal with Geffen.

No. Founding members are the original members. In any band. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, AxlRoseCDII said:

It's fine if you want to pretend a fact doesn't exist or you have your own set of standards, but CD is most definitely a Guns album. It's 100% a fact. Band members get replaced. There are bands out there with no original members. 

 

there ARE bands out there with no original members and it's suckers like YOU who enable them and believe them and pay for the albums and fake tours and the fancy lawyers who enable the delusion. 

 

Just now, AxlRoseCDII said:

 

Axl however stays loyal to the people who stick by him, he is incredibly thankful of those types of people and values them. He may feel strong towards Fortus for this and wants to keep him in the line up.

 

axl HIRES people and then PAYS them to stick by him, that's not a band, that's not loyalty.  

 

Just now, Sosso said:

No. Founding members are the original members. In any band. 

agreed.  but the afd5 are the original lineup.  there were no "lineups" before… axl was not curating something… axl struck gold the day izzy, steven, slash and duff agreed to play with him and deal with his endless bullshit.  and then minus steven, one by one, they got sick of it and they walked away, then axl being the little boy he is tried to prove to his bandmates and to the world HE was guns n' roses… and then he took an eternity to release an album because he learned the hard way he was merely 1/5 of something extraordinary and that you can't buy a great record, you can't hire talented people and expect chemistry.  

talent does not equal chemistry… CD proves this.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, AxlRoseCDII said:

 

 

Axl however stays loyal to the people who stick by him, he is incredibly thankful of those types of people and values them. He may feel strong towards Fortus for this and wants to keep him in the line up.

Oh please. Axl cut his high school buddy out of the reunion over cash and replaced him with cheap labor instead. Is that loyal? BBF toured with the band for years, and supposedly even did so while in great physical pain. Was Axl loyal enough to him for his services that he was willing to write material with him? Hell no. Pittman spent almost 2 decades in the band, and in a drunken stupor made some idiotic social media post dissing the reunion. Was Pittman's 2 decades worth of loyalty enough to save his worthless spot in the band? Umm.. don't think so.

Let's face it, in all reality, Axl would probably sell out the majority if the box of donuts was big enough.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, todreamofwolves said:

Oh please. Axl cut his high school buddy out of the reunion over cash and replaced him with cheap labor instead. Is that loyal? BBF toured with the band for years, and supposedly even did so while in great physical pain. Was Axl loyal enough to him for his services that he was willing to write material with him? Hell no. Pittman spent almost 2 decades in the band, and in a drunken stupor made some idiotic social media post dissing the reunion. Was Pittman's 2 decades worth of loyalty enough to save his worthless spot in the band? Umm.. don't think so.

Let's face it, in all reality, Axl would probably sell out the majority if the box of donuts was big enough.

 

Let's face it, you're wrong. There were only 2 open spots, for lead guitar and bass. Fortus was there for 15 years so yes, it was loyal like you wouldn't believe.

Pitman went against the band, on principal you fire his ass. No integrity issues here as well. Nothing Axl has done has led me to believe he'll abandon his friends like Slash. Oops. I meant the thing with Adler. You know. And Duff. Twice.

Edited by Rovim
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, todreamofwolves said:

Oh please. Axl cut his high school buddy out of the reunion over cash and replaced him with cheap labor instead. Is that loyal? BBF toured with the band for years, and supposedly even did so while in great physical pain. Was Axl loyal enough to him for his services that he was willing to write material with him? Hell no. Pittman spent almost 2 decades in the band, and in a drunken stupor made some idiotic social media post dissing the reunion. Was Pittman's 2 decades worth of loyalty enough to save his worthless spot in the band? Umm.. don't think so.

Let's face it, in all reality, Axl would probably sell out the majority if the box of donuts was big enough.

 

You're misunderstanding the term "loyal". You can be loyal to someone by not firing them blindly, versus giving them complete control of releasing new music. If Axl really wanted to sell out the majority, he would have fired the entire 2014 lineup minus Dizzy. He hasn't fired anybody since Matt Sorum- Freese, Huge, Bucket, Brain, Finck, Dj, Bumble, and Tommy all quit on their own.  Axl technically didn't force them out, but it's understandable for most why they left.

Axl Rose is as loyal as he can be to his employees. However, he still has his agenda. He won't kick you out, but he won't make you stay. It's a fine line you have to understand...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Billsfan said:

 

Axl Rose is as loyal as he can be to his employees. However, he still has his agenda. He won't kick you out, but he won't make you stay. It's a fine line you have to understand...

Which is why you must have the right personality to be a part of the operation. It's very simple and I'm sure it's in the contract. Axl is not an obscure musician, the rest should have known better or at the very least came in ignorant.

People rag on Fortus cause he's session. It was probably the key to overstand Axl for all these years. He's a chemical brother.

Edited by Rovim
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rovim said:

Let's face it, you're wrong. There were only 2 open spots, for lead guitar and bass. Fortus was there for 15 years so yes, it was loyal like you wouldn't believe.

Pitman went against the band, on principal you fire his ass. No integrity issues here as well. Nothing Axl has done has led me to believe he'll abandon his friends like Slash. Oops. I meant the thing with Adler. You know. And Duff. Twice.

No, I'm not wrong. Axl abandoned Izzy over money. Since Axl's the CEO of the GNR brand, he could have ensured that Izzy got the cut that he deserved. He didn't do that, though. So much for loyalty. Case closed.

Also, there have been conflicting stories over how Slash and Duff ended up back in the band. I know that you Axl apologists like to believe that he just so happened to have open slots, BUT reality should tell you that the lack of interest in New GNR, them being relegated to a lame Vegas act, and a failed decade-in-the-making of an album was likely the catalyst that finally forced Axl to call Slash. (Again, Axl called Slash).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, todreamofwolves said:

No, I'm not wrong. Axl abandoned Izzy over money. Since Axl's the CEO of the GNR brand, he could have ensured that Izzy got the cut that he deserved. He didn't do that, though. So much for loyalty. Case closed.

Also, there have been conflicting stories over how Slash and Duff ended up back in the band. I know that you Axl apologists like to believe that he just so happened to have open slots, BUT reality should tell you that the lack of interest in New GNR, them being relegated to a lame Vegas act, and a failed decade-in-the-making of an album was likely the catalyst that finally forced Axl to call Slash. (Again, Axl called Slash).

Lies Noobs Tell. Please allow me to tell you the truth imo: it's not Axl's fault that Izzy didn't get a cut for a full position in the band, not when you take 7 seconds to think about why would Axl will do that if:

1. Axl is happy as fuck with Fortus on rhythm and there was no full posish to begin with

2. Cheap as hell

3. Under control and already in the bag

4. He's relatively young and very spry, can still do many deeds

5. Izzy is not suitable for a full position, Fortus has proved his weight in gold and is a trust worthy employee

6. Ain't no sundown when M's gone

7. It ain't over 'till the mourning night

Edited by Rovim
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, if I felt strongly enough about Rose's musical reputation, I'd be doing my best to convince people that Chinese was not a Guns N' Roses album, that it is an aberration of sorts. People who say ''Nugnr/Chinese is not Guns'' are doing Rose a favour as the whole era was a sack of shit.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, rocknroll41 said:

Yeah it's easier in my mind to consider the 1999-2014 line-ups a completely separate band altogether.

on topic: since when did Fortus become the official GNR spokesperson?

It's a thread for an interview he gave. He's in the band, I think it's allowed. One interview does not make him a spokesperson but maybe 2 will make him ginger. Find a better way of getting your potentially silly point across.

Edited by Rovim
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, JustanUrchin said:

On the eve of what would appear to be exciting news for Gn’R fans (Izzy and Adler, and perhaps one or more new tunes?)—news that may bring me (and many others) back into the fold—it seems time to dust off legal facts.

 

The o-r-i-g-i-n-a-l Guns n’ Roses is the five individuals who signed a recording contract with Geffen, registered their biz entity as a general p’ship with the California DOS, trademarked the brand (band), and wrote, recorded and copyrighted the first Gn’R album.

 

There is thus no other o-r-i-g-i-n-a-l Gn’R than Slash, Duff, Izzy, Adler and Axl.  This is legal fact.  Any other assertion is a legal impossibility, and thus, false.

 

Anyone who attempts to claim otherwise (while seeking pecuniary benefit) would first receive a cease-and-desist letter, and if said party/ies continued to infringe upon copyrighted or trademarked images or sounds or claims of being “original” to the band, said party/ies would be sued.  Ask yourself, then, who—what entity—can enforce and protect the rights of Gn’R copyrighted and trademarked material?  Further, ask yourself why Axl could n-e-v-e-r license this biz entity’s product—its images, marks and sounds (in other words, said images, marks and sounds owned by the S/D/A p’ship that had been created by the S/D/I/A/A p’ship)?

 

Subsequent to Adler being fired, S/D/A purchased Izzy’s equity share/capital account (with their individual cash) when Izzy withdrew from the p’ship in ‘91, and thereafter formed a new p’ship—the S/D/A p’ship.  During this period, however, Axl, legally secured the exclusive right to the brand name—Guns n’ Roses.  Soapy Smith would’ve been proud of such maneuvering—albeit Mr. Smith swindled presumably sober individuals.

 

With brand name in tow, Axl ventured to continue his raging dictatorial delusions, and “employ” both Slash and Duff in Axl’s solo band.  Said solo band, and Axl in his individual capacity, had sole legal right to the use (historical misuse) of the brand name moving forward.  Slash said, in legal effect, “fuck off” in ’96 and Duff said, in legal effect, “fuck off” in ’97.

 

-----------------------------

 

The legal and end results?  The legal result was that Axl retained a brand name for two decades by which he apparently supported himself, his live-ins, and work-for-hire musicians during those two decades by touring under said brand name while performing S/D/A p’ship tunes.  To some degree, anyhow.  One of his former employees, a keyboardist, sued him for failing to pay him for work performed.  Axl attempted to use or license p’ship material during that time, and was met with S/D litigation, which resulted, in part, in Axl “re-recording” AFD.  As ridiculous (and desperate) as that may seem to “re-record” an iconic album, he could not legally/financially benefit/control that material unless he did so (while paying the p’ship/copyrighted artists).  Axl also released 15 songs in 25 years with his solo band, 14 of which landed on Wikipedia’s worst-ever albums.  Over those two decades, Slash and Duff controlled whether and when and for what price (2/3 vote majority vote) any S/D/A asset would be licensed or otherwise used (the original/lucrative Gn’R assets—licensing, merchandising, etc.).  Slash and Duff (and Izzy and even Adler), meanwhile, pumped out new tune after new tune during those two decades.  Slash and Duff (and Sorum) also won Grammies.

 

The question then becomes, beyond the arguably unparalleled embarrassment and train wreck that Axl was for a quarter-century in which he hired and fired musicians, managers and promoters like one would expect of Mao, and blew through outrageous recording advances like Monopoly money as the standby butt of late-night talk show and peer musician mockery—when has Axl controlled ANYTHING other than the brand name and his employees in his two-decade solo band, its music (or lack thereof), and touring of said solo band?

 

Stated differently, Axl doesn’t control shit.  He never did.  It’s myth propagated by Axl apologists.  Myth and near-delusional horseshit that is crushed by legal fact.  Axl legally owned, at least until January 1, 2016, the brand name.  Any and all legally relevant fact since that time support an amended, modified or new S/D/A p’ship agreement.  While I have neither the time nor inclination to recite it, you may, if so inclined, search my prior posts as they are few and all relevant to the topic are supported and sourced by legally relevant, current fact. 

 

Axl has always been legally controlled, after Izzy’s w/drawl from the p’ship, by Slash and Duff.  Axl is further controlled, and marginalized, since January 1, 2016.  By what?  A quarter-of-a-billion-dollar grossing biz entity (and growing) being administered and controlled by Live Nation, a conglomerate with many subsidiaries (including the publishing house Roc Nation—promoting new Gn’R music?), Slash’s separate management (and counsel), Duff’s separate management (and counsel), and Axl’s separate live-in management and familial accounting.  Again, refer to my sparse prior posts for supporting and sourced fact.  Axl is, moreover, controlled by specific division of loss terms, assuredly forced upon him by S/D’s counsel AND Live Nation.  This controls not only his behavior on-stage (zero diva hissy-fits and zero criminal behavior like inciting riots) but his timeliness and legally FORCED respect for paying consumers of the S/D/A product—ticketing for live performances and a beastly killing on merchandising, and licensing, e.g., NASCAR).

 

While maynard, Sunset Gardner, Free Bird, todreamofwolves, and the dude/dudette with the string of numbers name are mowing down the Axl apologist propaganda, an additional hand never hurts.  Apologies in advance if I’m missing any others stating legally relevant facts as I‘ve scrolled through just the last few pages.  And yes, feel free to cut and paste anything from this post above the ------------ as it is legal fact, and because I rarely post on Gn’R boards but am routinely asked in PM’s if copying from my posts is cool.  Hell, yeah!  Rock the fuck on.  Axl apologist propaganda bullshit has no place on these boards post-January 1, 2016, if it ever did.

 

Regarding Izzy’s whatever-the-number replacement, who apparently was the subject of this thread, this guy is in his 50’s and has zero known riffs.  I repeat.  The guy is in his 50’s, is a guitarist, and no one knows him from a can of paint.  The guy feeds his family by playing Izzy’s chords and attempting to look like Izzy.  Hell, even Adler mistook him for Izzy from a distance.  He has, though, recorded and/or toured with Rihanna and NSYNC.  Izzy would be rolling in his grave, if he were in one, like the rest of us Gn’R fans who saw the o-r-g-i-n-a-l band.

 

Then again, Izzy is ready, willing and able.  But S/D/A are bathing in ticketing and merchandising to the tune of a quarter of a billion before we get into NASCAR licensing and so forth, and (perhaps until tomorrow), refuse to split the loot with Izzy as they tour on the backs of songs that he co-wrote.

Geez. Can't you use a different colour? This is barely readable. I've changed that for you and anyone wanting to have an easier time reading this.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, PatrickS77 said:

Geez. Can't you use a different colour? This is barely readable. I've changed that for you and anyone wanting to have an easier time reading this.

There is no way more than 10 people are gonna read all of that anyway. lol

Edited by DexAxl
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Rovim said:

Let's face it, you're wrong. There were only 2 open spots, for lead guitar and bass. Fortus was there for 15 years so yes, it was loyal like you wouldn't believe.

Pitman went against the band, on principal you fire his ass. No integrity issues here as well. Nothing Axl has done has led me to believe he'll abandon his friends like Slash. Oops. I meant the thing with Adler. You know. And Duff. Twice.

No... he just quit your band and makes it his own... that's a very nice move :lol::lol::lol:

 

:facepalm:

By the way, Adler was fired by the band, not by Slash.

And Slash never abandoned Duff. Not once. Axl broke up Guns and VR couldn't find the right frontman after Scott. 

Edited by Free Bird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Rovim said:

Which is why you must have the right personality to be a part of the operation. It's very simple and I'm sure it's in the contract. Axl is not an obscure musician, the rest should have known better or at the very least came in ignorant.

People rag on Fortus cause he's session. It was probably the key to overstand Axl for all these years. He's a chemical brother.

Or a saint t put up with Axl's BS

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...