[QuitHiding]

No offense , Turn it Up, but I'm aware of what 'Burly' means. I'm just curious how he looked, and there has been some discussion as late of his weight fluctuating...

NO worries though.

[Kill_YourIdols]

simple as this ron owns richard i like richard's playing but he's nowhere close to ron and yes i've seen em both live

[Turn_It_Up]

QuitHiding, on Jun 11 2007, 01:34 PM, said:

No offense , Turn it Up, but I'm aware of what 'Burly' means. I'm just curious how he looked, and there has been some discussion as late of his weight fluctuating...

NO worries though.

QH, there were a couple of folks on the 1st page taking offense to Axl being called burly which is why I explained as I did. Axl(and probably all us) have been called A LOT worse than burly...

[wasted]

it sounds like they had sound trouble so the new band couldnt shine. At least Axl didnt go home.

[Turn_It_Up]

Sounds like the venue had awful acoustics. But what's with the terrible mixing everyone keeps complaining about from reviewers to general fans? As much of a perfectionist as Axl typically is with that type of stuff, weird it's still a big ongoing issue...

This post has been edited by Turn_It_Up: 11 June 2007 - 08:30 PM

[Midnight Rambler]

After seeing axl on monday, i really think he should just get the original band back together or call the new band something else. Basically when people go to a 'guns n roses' concert all they wana hear is jungle, paradise city, etc. And thats never gonna change, no matter how good CD is. So to have another band playin these songs is just wrong i think, i mean i feel sorry for the new band coz therye never gonna have theri own identity, i mean theyre never gonna get a chance to play a concert consisiting of just thier own material. At one time, like 8 years ago, people woulda been interested in hearing new songs at conerts, but now i think its just too late, GNR are nostalga, like the stones or soemthin. If u go see the stones, u wana hear mabye one oe two new songs and then just the classics, its the same with gnr. I think he should just end it or get the band back together. And i know this has been said a thousand times, but iv never felt this strongly about it before. This was the second time iv seen axl, the first was london 02. Then i didnt care i was just amazed to see what axl even looked like, but know i dunno, i think he should just end it and get GNR back together, it aint fair on the fans, the new guys or the old guys.

Sorry had to say it.

[Axl-rocks]

Midnight Rambler, on Jun 12 2007, 03:33 AM, said:

After seeing axl on monday, i really think he should just get the original band back together or call the new band something else. Basically when people go to a 'guns n roses' concert all they wana hear is jungle, paradise city, etc. And thats never gonna change, no matter how good CD is. So to have another band playin these songs is just wrong i think, i mean i feel sorry for the new band coz therye never gonna have theri own identity, i mean theyre never gonna get a chance to play a concert consisiting of just thier own material. At one time, like 8 years ago, people woulda been interested in hearing new songs at conerts, but now i think its just too late, GNR are nostalga, like the stones or soemthin. If u go see the stones, u wana hear mabye one oe two new songs and then just the classics, its the same with gnr. I think he should just end it or get the band back together. And i know this has been said a thousand times, but iv never felt this strongly about it before. This was the second time iv seen axl, the first was london 02. Then i didnt care i was just amazed to see what axl even looked like, but know i dunno, i think he should just end it and get GNR back together, it aint fair on the fans, the new guys or the old guys.

Sorry had to say it.

[Vogstar90_G'N'R]

Axl-rocks, on Jun 11 2007, 05:06 PM, said:

and what does it mean by Axl looking burly?

blury like fattish.

Good read.

[Possum]

I must admit, live, Rich really blew the ass off BBF and Finck.

He's a real rock guitarist, he was very magnetic on stage, and however good the other two are with their shredding skeelz, I'd rather watch Rich any day.

[Longpig]

Vogstar90_G, on Jun 12 2007, 10:27 AM, said:

Axl-rocks, on Jun 11 2007, 05:06 PM, said:

and what does it mean by Axl looking burly?

blury like fattish.

No it doesn't, it means 'well built' or strong i.e. the opposite of slight or thin.

The reviewer might have meant it as a nod towards him being bigger than he was, but burly does not mean "fat".

LP

[Axl-rocks]

Longpig, on Jun 12 2007, 04:55 AM, said:

Vogstar90_G, on Jun 12 2007, 10:27 AM, said:

Axl-rocks, on Jun 11 2007, 05:06 PM, said:

and what does it mean by Axl looking burly?

blury like fattish.

No it doesn't, it means 'well built' or strong i.e. the opposite of slight or thin.

The reviewer might have meant it as a nod towards him being bigger than he was, but burly does not mean "fat".

LP

ok, that's alright then, and yes Axl is very well built

[Karri]

Nice, but the writer is only 7 years too late.
Thanks, but we all know it's a different band by now.
No need to point that out in every freakin review.

[gnfnr2006]

Karri, on Jun 12 2007, 09:49 AM, said:

Nice, but the writer is only 7 years too late.
Thanks, but we all know it's a different band by now.
No need to point that out in every freakin review.

Actually, there is a need to point it out in every review.
1. The advertisments on the radio and tv for the shows, shows the old band playing the old songs. They might show a new(er) pic of Axl.
2. There has been no new GNr music released- which a "new" band would normally do.
3. Geffen has no pics of the "band"
4. GNR has no pics of the "band" on the "band website", only pat-on-the-back reviews stating the obvious.

Unfortunately, if the reviewers didnt mention it, the casual fans probably wouldnt even know.

Hell, we cant even get a straight answer as to WHO IS GUNS N ROSES DRUMMER ????

[dobadog]

gnfnr2006, on Jun 12 2007, 03:40 PM, said:

Karri, on Jun 12 2007, 09:49 AM, said:

Nice, but the writer is only 7 years too late.
Thanks, but we all know it's a different band by now.
No need to point that out in every freakin review.

Actually, there is a need to point it out in every review.
1. The advertisments on the radio and tv for the shows, shows the old band playing the old songs. They might show a new(er) pic of Axl.
2. There has been no new GNr music released- which a "new" band would normally do.
3. Geffen has no pics of the "band"
4. GNR has no pics of the "band" on the "band website", only pat-on-the-back reviews stating the obvious.

Unfortunately, if the reviewers didnt mention it, the casual fans probably wouldnt even know.

Hell, we cant even get a straight answer as to WHO IS GUNS N ROSES DRUMMER ????

..but we do get photo's of BBF feeding roo's

This post has been edited by dobadog: 12 June 2007 - 03:53 PM

[Gryfon]

This review must be fake! there were none of the usual lame Chinese democracy album jokes.

Axl is only "burly" by catwalk standards and his 2007 voice is better than i think ever i've heard it..... on bootlegs anyway. Like Blake Sabbath said before it was an outsiders review and i think it was okay at that-Mostly positive but slightly biased, like they wikipedia'd guns n roses 30 mins before getting into a taxi with their complimentary ticket and notebook