Chinese Democracy

[sanity_lost]

1 hour ago, StrangerInThisTown said:

You misunderstood. Real guns as in real GNR. Not "real" fans.

Ah so as someone who likes and accepts CD as a Guns album I can be a real fan of Guns n' Roses but I can't be a fan of "real Guns".

Which I find to be weird since I am a fan of all the lineups. 

[BlueJean Baby]

1 minute ago, sanity_lost said:

Ah so as someone who likes and accepts CD as a Guns album I can be a real fan of Guns n' Roses but I can't be a fan of "real Guns".

Which I find to be weird since I am a fan of all the lineups. 

Same with me..

[BorderlineCrazy]

30 minutes ago, Magnus Cavalerra said:

AFD and UYI has different musical direction.

47 minutes ago, Zurimor said:

Well, let me put it this way, when everyone leaves a band and the last member still in it wants to continue it, it's up to him whether he wants to change the name or not. Axl decided not to, which is legit.

Maybe not a smart move, but you can't blame him for that, it was his good right to do so.

Your second point, bands often change their style without changing band members, just compare early Pink Floyd to later Pink Floyd, completely different sound and style, but still the same name.

Well, and Marillion changed almost their whole lineup, still call themselves Marillion.

Of course bands change and/or "evolve" with time but one thing is the change from Appetite to the Illusions (you can clearly hear it's the same band) and then there's Chinese Democracy. Shackler's Revenge is not GNR "evolving", it's a completely different band making completely different music. Take the vocals out and it could easily be a Buckethead solo song. 

I don't even know what Marillion is but when I think of bands like the current Thin Lizzy, I can't help but think how big a of a joke they are. And I'm sure AC/DC fans will be extremely pissed if Angus replaces Cliff and goes on with AC/DC being the only original member.

"You can't blame him for that". What?! Of course I can!! I would never blame Axl for the breakup because I believe it was everybody's fault but I totally blame him for giving the GNR name a terrible use for 15 years. That was his fault, nobody elses's.

41 minutes ago, Blackstar said:

To me the presence of original members weighs more for the "legitimacy" of a band than the sound (after all, half of the Illusions didn't sound like AFD). I 'd have welcomed an evolution of the band's sound and even a change of direction, if the outcome had been good and most of the original members had been involved.

But that legitimacy has to do with something, right? Every member of the band brings something to the table that can't be replaced (unless you have someone who's mediocre which clearly wasn't GNR's case) and that makes a piece of the band's identity. When everyone leaves, the identity is lost and if you don't have an identity you're nothing, just a successful name. 

No matter how much evolution there was, there is no chance the original band would/could have come up with an album like Chinese Democracy. Some of the piano driven songs could have existed and be somewhat similar but overall the album would have been different (not necessarily better, just different).

[Zurimor]

12 minutes ago, BorderlineCrazy said:

"You can't blame him for that". What?! Of course I can!! I would never blame Axl for the breakup because I believe it was everybody's fault but I totally blame him for giving the GNR name a terrible use for 15 years. That was his fault, nobody elses's.

No matter how much evolution there was, there is no chance the original band would/could have come up with an album like Chinese Democracy. Some of the piano driven songs could have existed and be somewhat similar but overall the album would have been different (not necessarily better, just different).

 

No, you can't blame him. He just made use of his right. You can dislike it, but you can not blame him for making use of his right.

 

And I have to disagree with you on the second part, too. Everyone knows that Axl's idea of i.e. electronic sounds wasn't liked by all of the band and that it was part of the breakup that several band members headed into different directions, but if those electronic sounds would've been at least partly approved they might very well sound like that by now. In my opinion, Chinese Democracy is Axl's idea of what Gn'R should sound like, he just couldn't agree with the rest of the band on it.

Edited December 22, 2016 by Zurimor

[Magnus Cavalerra]

4 minutes ago, BorderlineCrazy said:

Of course bands change and/or "evolve" with time but one thing is the change from Appetite to the Illusions (you can clearly hear it's the same band) and then there's Chinese Democracy. Shackler's Revenge is not GNR "evolving", it's a completely different band making completely different music. Take the vocals out and it could easily be a Buckethead solo song. 

Well you cherry picking it. TWAT, CITR, Sorry, IRS, Madagascar, SOD, Prostitute, TIL, and CD itself could easily fit on UYI, combine it with Estranged, Nov Rain, DC, Yesterday, Breakdown,  then and you can even read the pattern of Axl ideal song there.

What you need really is just Slash signature sound and Duff midrange bass. And it's UYI all over again.

[BorderlineCrazy]

41 minutes ago, Zurimor said:

No, you can't blame him. He just made use of his right. You can dislike it, but you can not blame him for making use of his right.

 

And I have to disagree with you on the second part, too. Everyone knows that Axl's idea of i.e. electronic sounds wasn't liked by all of the band and that it was part of the breakup that several band members headed into different directions, but if those electronic sounds would've been at least partly approved they might very well sound like that by now. In my opinion, Chinese Democracy is Axl's idea of what Gn'R should sound like, he just couldn't agree with the rest of the band on it.

I don't know what you mean. I can't send him to jail for the use he gave to the name (not that I would anyway ) but it wasn't Slash's decision to release CD as GNR, it was Axl's so I totally blame him.

And to the other thing, that's not what Axl said. He said he wanted to go back to an Appetite kind of album but he couldn't do it without Slash so he had to do something else. But even if CD was his vision of what GNR should be, I don't give a shit. I don't care about their individual visions, GNR was a band not a solo project.

Still, it's all good if we disagree, it's not like I own the truth or anything, we're all entitled to our own opinion.

44 minutes ago, Magnus Cavalerra said:

Well you cherry picking it. TWAT, CITR, Sorry, IRS, Madagascar, SOD, Prostitute, TIL, and CD itself could easily fit on UYI, combine it with Estranged, Nov Rain, DC, Yesterday, Breakdown,  then and you can even read the pattern of Axl ideal song there.

What you need really is just Slash signature sound and Duff midrange bass. And it's UYI all over again.

Yes, I took one of the most extreme cases, then I mentioned that some of the piano driven songs could have been part of the Illusions (they wouldn't be exactly the way they are, though, IMO). I can't imagine songs like TWAT or Madagascar being part of an original GNR record at all.

Also, even though most of those songs are brilliant, that list would make a terrible album. It would be a crime to waste Slash in an album with little to none rock songs.

[Natalia92]

7 hours ago, Jane M. said:

This must be a joke.

No way. By the time they split they were too fucked up with heroin and alcohol abuse to care. Duff admitted it himself. This is the bitter truth. It was a matter of time before they would fell apart irrespectively of Axl . One must be blind not to understand this and blame it solely on one person.

[Jane M.]

3 minutes ago, Natalia92 said:

No way. By the time they split they were too fucked up with heroin and alcohol abuse to care. Duff admitted it himself. This is the bitter truth. It was a matter of time before they would fell apart irrespectively of Axl . One must be blind not to understand this and blame it solely on one person.

One must be blind not to understand Axl is to blame for the fall of GNR just like the other 4 original members.

[Natalia92]

8 hours ago, StrangerInThisTown said:

Ridiculous. You can continue to view the world through "rose" colored glasses and ignore all the legitimate reasons I've listed above. I'm not here to change your mind, just stating what happened. If you doubt any of the reasons I've posted above, feel free to point them out. Saying Axl was not one of the reasons the band fell apart is..worse than what some people like Night Drive Loneliness are spewing around here. Or maybe I'm just delusional and CD is really better than AFD?

Oh boy..

As I already answered to sb else you must be totally blind to blame it on one person since the band was falling apart already in the early 90s for a number of other reasons. Slash and Duff half dead half alive due to their drug addiction and alcohol abuse was one of them (and please dont question this cause Duff admitted it himself) ... you thinkk the band would go on for a lot longer anyway? NO. And stating that he made them sign over their will is equally RIDICULOUS to comparing AFD and Chinese. Totally different musical directions.

Ah and you are blaming me for viewing the world "through rose colored glasses" when most of your "legitimate" arguements are based on slash's book. oh well...

[Good, Fuck'n, Night.]

10 hours ago, Zurimor said:

I just noticed that people are now, that Guns n' Roses are touring with almost the original lineup again, finally giving credit to the Chinese Democracy album. You now can read many appreciative comments on youtube while all the time before there was mostly hate. Makes me a bit sad.

I always liked that album.

All the years nothing than how bad that album is and now...almost completely changed. It's good that album gets the credit it deserves, however, Axl clearly had a vision years ago when his band members probably weren't ready for it.

What I wonder is, why is that?

Is that because people regardeded Axl as the one who didn't want to continue old Gn'R stuff and now that they're together again it's easier to appreciate his work? Any ideas?

If it makes you feel any better... I still hate it.  

[BlueJean Baby]

I guess this argument will always continue with the fans. But all in all, we are all GNR fans (or we would not be on this forum).  

I remember being on my old forum during the years following the breakup and seeing these same arguments on both sides from the fans. I spent years defending Axl's side of things and always will. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions. 

We can't change history, we should all be glad that they have been able to work through that and reunite for this tour and hopefully beyond it.  

Merry Christmas to you all. Merry Christmas GNR. Hoping for great things in the coming year...

 

 

[Blackstar]

8 hours ago, BorderlineCrazy said:

But that legitimacy has to do with something, right? Every member of the band brings something to the table that can't be replaced (unless you have someone who's mediocre which clearly wasn't GNR's case) and that makes a piece of the band's identity. When everyone leaves, the identity is lost and if you don't have an identity you're nothing, just a successful name. 

No matter how much evolution there was, there is no chance the original band would/could have come up with an album like Chinese Democracy. Some of the piano driven songs could have existed and be somewhat similar but overall the album would have been different (not necessarily better, just different).

My point with an example:

Between two hypothetical albums under the GnR name, which would be a more "legit" (not necessarily better) GnR record? 1) an album from the 1993 lineup (or with another rhythm guitarist instead of Gilby) with industrial and electronica elements (Slash said in his book that he'd have been open for that if everything else between him and Axl had been good) or 2) a traditional hard rock album from NuGnR (let's say that Axl had hired known musicians of this genre)? To me it would be 1.

Edited December 22, 2016 by Blackstar

[BorderlineCrazy]

3 hours ago, Natalia92 said:

No way. By the time they split they were too fucked up with heroin and alcohol abuse to care. Duff admitted it himself. This is the bitter truth. It was a matter of time before they would fell apart irrespectively of Axl . One must be blind not to understand this and blame it solely on one person.

I don't know where you read/hear that but that is completely false. Duff was already clean and sober when he quit the band. And Slash wasn't too fucked up either (as Steven was when he got fired), you can watch the interviews he did during Snakepit and you'll see he was thinking clearly and he and Axl weren't looking eye to eye. Drugs and booze may have made the Illusions tour more complicated but the band's breakup wasn't because of that.

It's true you can't blame only Axl for the breakup, though, they all did their part.

1 hour ago, Blackstar said:

My point with an example:

Between two hypothetical albums under the GnR name, which would be a more "legit" (not necessarily better) GnR record? 1) an album from the 1993 lineup (or with another rhythm guitarist instead of Gilby) with industrial and electronica elements (Slash said in his book that he'd have been open for that if everything else between him and Axl had been good) or 2) a traditional hard rock album from NuGnR (let's say that Axl had hired known musicians of this genre)? To me it would be 1.

I get what you mean and I'd definitely pick option 1 but honestly I can't imagine "another hard rock band" doing a GNR album. Not only NuGNR didn't sound like GNR, Hollywood Rose didn't either and Tracii Guns was part of the band. To me, an album with Slash would always sound "more GNR" no matter what the aim was as far as style. And that's more or less what Axl told Kurt Loader, he wanted to do a "traditional record" but he couldn't because Slash was gone and he couldn't find anyone who could replace him to do that kind of album.

[Tom-Ass]

6 hours ago, Good, Fuck'n, Night. said:

If it makes you feel any better... I still hate it.  

Me too.  I've tried.. It is 90% garbage. A skid mark in the shorts of the Gn'R legacy.

[James Bond]

I like Chinese Democracy. I like Slash. It's certainly possible to like and appreciate all the "solo efforts" regardless of which member was running the ship. Good music is good music.

[Nostalgia^]

I'm not really a fan of the lineup Axl had when it was just him from the original lineup left. People like Bumblefoot, DJ Ashba, they never really spoke to me and they're not people I was following or have been following since they left Guns. The original lineup and the Illusion lineup will always be my favorite. That said...I FREAKIN' love the Chinese Democracy album!

[StrangerInThisTown]

9 hours ago, Natalia92 said:

As I already answered to sb else you must be totally blind to blame it on one person since the band was falling apart already in the early 90s for a number of other reasons. Slash and Duff half dead half alive due to their drug addiction and alcohol abuse was one of them (and please dont question this cause Duff admitted it himself) ... you thinkk the band would go on for a lot longer anyway? NO. And stating that he made them sign over their will is equally RIDICULOUS to comparing AFD and Chinese. Totally different musical directions.

Ah and you are blaming me for viewing the world "through rose colored glasses" when most of your "legitimate" arguements are based on slash's book. oh well...

Hold on. Let me actually get this straight. You post "The band was falling apart for a number of reasons and Axl was not one of them."

..and expect people to actually argue with you after that? This quote is so hilarious it should be quoted everytime you want to point out someones wrong.

You know what, I'm down. Let's play the axlrose4ever game! Yes Slash and Duff were totally down to give Axl the name Guns N Roses just like that! How ridiculous of a claim to make that the people who helped build the name want to keep it! I mean they have no use for it anyway right?! Why not just give it to him?

Edited December 22, 2016 by StrangerInThisTown

[Zurimor]

14 hours ago, BorderlineCrazy said:

I don't know what you mean. I can't send him to jail for the use he gave to the name (not that I would anyway ) but it wasn't Slash's decision to release CD as GNR, it was Axl's so I totally blame him.

And to the other thing, that's not what Axl said. He said he wanted to go back to an Appetite kind of album but he couldn't do it without Slash so he had to do something else. But even if CD was his vision of what GNR should be, I don't give a shit. I don't care about their individual visions, GNR was a band not a solo project.

 

I think you can only blame someone if there is actually blame, that is if someone violated legal or social rules. In this case, there is no blame, it's more like something you don't like, but no objective blame. You can turn it down and refuse it, but "blame" is the wrong term I think...

Well, I didn't follow everything about Gn'R, but now that you mention it, I think you're right about that Appetit stuff, it still stands that the band members had different opinions about where to move on from here.

Regarding band vs. solo, band concepts can be very different. It can be that just one person does most or almost all things, writing songs, composing songs, etc. like let's say Genesis, old Genesis are clearly mostly Peter Gabriel while later Genesis is mostly Phil Collins. Not saying that the other members don't contribute anything to it, but I'd dare to say that those 2 are the dominating persons in the respective lineup. Or it can be that everyone in the band contributes the same, the German band Die Ärzte would be an example for that concept. Both concepts can work if everyone is happy with it.

I guess we can agree that there were just too many big egos at one place at the same time.

Edited December 22, 2016 by Zurimor

[riot]

19 hours ago, Mendez said:

All they care about is that Slash is playing it. Its like people that don't give One Hot Minute or The Getaway by the Red Hot Chili Peppers fairgame just because it doesn't have John Frusciante on it (their "signature" guitar player).

 

"UGHGH BUT TALL MAN WEARS A KFC BUCKET ON HIS HEAD, IT LOOKS STUPID"

Umm Slash wears a tophat. Who's he trying to be? Abraham Lincoln?

 

"ROBIN FUCK LOOKS EMO GOTH"

thats his thing, just like Slash's thing is finding anything with leather on it on putting it on

 

"PAUL HUGE IS A FUCK HEAD"

Yeah lol.*

 

"IT DOESNT SOUND LIKE GUNS"

they didn't bring in these guys to emulate Slash/Axl/Duff, they brought them in to make music in their respective styles. Take it for what it is: Alternative Rock/Hard Rock

 

"THERES TOO MANY BALLADS"

blame Axl

 

"THE MUSIC SUCKS"

fair enough

 

*he helped with songs that I like (like TWAT and Prostitute) so I give him credit for that.

 

I hate fans, man. Its never "I didn't really like it, so I just won't listen to it.", its always "UGH MAN THIS IS THE WORST FUCKING PIECE OF SHIT EVER, ATTILA IS BETTER THAN THIS SHIT. MY SHIT IS BETTER THAN THIS SHITTY SHIT" posts every day, actively seeking out something you don't like just to show people you mean business.

GNR fans, Metallica fans, any fans... they're all the same.

 

"GUNS IS BETTER THAN METALLICA!!!"

You can't have em both can you? You always have to think in binaries

 

Eat a dick.

Fu-ckin loved your post.

[chokes]

1 minute ago, StrangerInThisTown said:

Hold on. Let me actually get this straight. You post "The band was falling apart for a number of reasons and Axl was not one of them."

..and expect people to actually argue with you after that? This quote is so hilarious it should be quoted everytime you want to point out someones wrong.

You know what, I'm down. Let's play the axlrose4ever game! Yes Slash and Duff were totally down to give Axl the name Guns N Roses just like that! How ridiculous of a claim to make that the people who helped build the name want to keep it! I mean they have no use for it anyway right?! Why not just give it to him?

You'd need to ask Slash & Duff why they accepted Axl had the rights to the name, it might be cause he was a founding member and they weren't, no one really knows.

One thing is clear though, if Axl and Duff weren't totally down with giving Axl the name they wouldn't have done so. If they were in any way coerced into giving up the name it would be fairly straightforward to get the rights to the name back in court. As none of this has happened the only logical conclusion is that Slash and Duff were indeed 'totally down giving Axl the name'. 

If you have any evidence that contradicts what i just said then it's debatable, but it's been 20 years and Axl still owns the name so i'm going with logic on this one.

P.S. The big three were responsible for the breakup, especially Axl and Slash and their huge egos not letting them budge from their positions.

[StrangerInThisTown]

27 minutes ago, chokes said:

You'd need to ask Slash & Duff why they accepted Axl had the rights to the name, it might be cause he was a founding member and they weren't, no one really knows.

One thing is clear though, if Axl and Duff weren't totally down with giving Axl the name they wouldn't have done so. If they were in any way coerced into giving up the name it would be fairly straightforward to get the rights to the name back in court. As none of this has happened the only logical conclusion is that Slash and Duff were indeed 'totally down giving Axl the name'. 

If you have any evidence that contradicts what i just said then it's debatable, but it's been 20 years and Axl still owns the name so i'm going with logic on this one.

P.S. The big three were responsible for the breakup, especially Axl and Slash and their huge egos not letting them budge from their positions.

Finally someone with some logic in his arguments. Indeed Slash and Duff did not take action to take back the name from Axl, nor did they prevent him from acquiring it (since Axl has got it).

The question is: WHAT reason would they have to sign it over to him? What would it benefit them? There is no benefit to sign over the name. Putting yourself in their position at the time, a theory would be the "benefit" was to keep Axl happy and keep the tour going. Just went "fuck it the band wont break up anyway". That is not exactly being down to just sign over something as important as that. There was definitely something brewing that made them do it and it came from Axls camp, because they certainly didn't just go "ok have it!"

Edited December 22, 2016 by Gracii Guns
Edited for courtesy.

[Rovim]

I think Slash and Duff just wanted to keep it going and didn't actually believe Axl will continue Guns without them. So they probably signed the name over thinking not much will change. It was a huge mistake obviously. They were also fucked up on drugs and booze in those days.

The benefit of signing over the name was not to piss off Axl is my guess. I guess it was cowardly and stupid of them. Axl said he was worried about them dying (which they came very close to) and then their wives or whatever taking over the band if they did.

Edited December 22, 2016 by Rovim

[alfierose]

Myself and @Gracii Guns have had to clean this thread up a bit. As per forum rules please keep discussion courteous and don't insult other posters to get points across.

[moreblack]

20 hours ago, Jane M. said:

It's all about Slash, remove him from the equation and everything will go back as before.

Pretty much. The only reason I've listened to the songs, is when Slash and Duff are playing them. 

[Zurimor]

When reading all the posts, I got one insight, which is, there is no use discussing things in a manner like "but they left the band because of Axl". While this may be true, it's of no importance other then ethical discussions. Now the problem with ethics is, it changes depending on your cultural environment, religion, education and so on. Only some very few, very basic ethics are shared by most people like "you shouldn't kill anyone" (which isn't even true for some cultures, but for our culture area, so I think we can all agree on that one).

The point I want to make is, ethics is nothing objective, but very subjective, and holding a discussion on that footing usually leads nowhere. It's your opinion, which you're of course entitled to have, but nothing which is true or not true. For a discussion, however, such opinions can barely be a real argument, since everyone might see things slightly different.

So, be nice to each other.