Jump to content

DUFF MCKAGAN Says AXL ROSE Has Come Up With 'Some Magnificent Stuff' For New GUNS N' ROSES Album


Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, GNRfan2008 said:

 

It's pretty amazing to me how forgiving he seems to be through the years. They screwed him back in the day on royalties and he agreed to do the 1993 shows to get $1 million of royalty money that already belonged to him. Good for the fans they got to see him and the other 3 guys together one last time, but Izzy was entitled to that money even if he refused to do the shows. He played nice in that situation. Think I would have gone the mean guy route and sued them for the money. 

In this case, if they try to bring him back for songwriting and touring...I would demand the same "equal share moving forward" that he demanded in 2016, PLUS a good share of the profits they made from the 2016-2018 tour. That tour wouldn't even have existed without the great music Izzy helped write and create 30+ years ago. 

As much as I like and want Izzy back, he did sell his share of the partnership. You can't fault the rest of the guys for Izzy selling his part. It's unfortunate that he felt he had to as a result of stress, drugs, etc. However, you can't sell your part of the partnership and then want back in. This is similar to what happened at my employer, Bloomberg. Mike Bloomberg wrote in his biography that a partner in the early days sold his share of the partnership.  The guy wanted back in after seeing how successful the company would become. He was denied since the other partners all took the risk. The guy would have been a billionaire if he had not sold his share. Similar situation. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Draguns said:

As much as I like and want Izzy back, he did sell his share of the partnership. You can't fault the rest of the guys for Izzy selling his part. It's unfortunate that he felt he had to as a result of stress, drugs, etc. However, you can't sell your part of the partnership and then want back in. This is similar to what happened at my employer, Bloomberg. Mike Bloomberg wrote in his biography that a partner in the early days sold his share of the partnership.  The guy wanted back in after seeing how successful the company would become. He was denied since the other partners all took the risk. The guy would have been a billionaire if he had not sold his share. Similar situation. 

Agree with this right here and he sold his share. 

Wouldnt he have to come up with money to buy back in? And im sure the value of the partnership is way more now then 26 years ago.

He sold it got paid out and was his choice at the time to take the money and run.

If i sold my entire quarter share of the company Google for 2 mill to the other partners back in 1998 and now its worth a billion bucks do you think if i rock up and ask for it back they will give it to me no questions asked? Hell no.

Edited by vloors
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, default_ said:

This would be ideal but unfortunately I live on the real world. 

Im not 100% found of this lineup either but we cant say much if we dont have anything to judge, they never released a song after all. If they ever release anything and it sucks, Ill probably just quit GNR and be okay with the classics, cause I dont really expect the miracle of Izzy getting back and even if he gets back, theres no guarantee the material will br any better than what we would get from this lineup. 

we have a lot of information to judge this band that presents itself to the world as "guns n roses"

 

the members of that band all have solo releases

- slash and duff have been releasing substandard music on the last decade like there was no tomorrow

- axl has released that album

- the aliens also release music

i think there is very little great stuff in any of these guys individual releases.

GNR used to put out great music

 

we can judge them by how they sound live

i think this lineup sounds horrendous live

GNR used to sound great live

 

we has "jams" that were recorded during soundchecks

those were abysmal

GNR jams used to be fantastic

 

we have new covers that they played live

some were just plain awful. none was great.

GNR used to play covers better than the bands who wrote them

 

how can someone have any hope that these guys will release good music?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Draguns said:

As much as I like and want Izzy back, he did sell his share of the partnership. You can't fault the rest of the guys for Izzy selling his part. It's unfortunate that he felt he had to as a result of stress, drugs, etc. However, you can't sell your part of the partnership and then want back in. This is similar to what happened at my employer, Bloomberg. Mike Bloomberg wrote in his biography that a partner in the early days sold his share of the partnership.  The guy wanted back in after seeing how successful the company would become. He was denied since the other partners all took the risk. The guy would have been a billionaire if he had not sold his share. Similar situation. 

Exactly. He wanted out, they paid him out. He cashed out. Axl/Duff/Slash then spent 20 years making GNR decisions and managing GNR and suing each other over GNR. Izzy didn't get "equal loot" because he wasn't entitled to it in writing or in principal. If fans are upset at anyone for not compromising it should be Izzy for demanding something he wasn't entitled to, not the other's for not giving in and giving it to him. He can't profit from selling it and then profit as if he didn't sell it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, ChristmasFnatic said:

Izzy reminds me of John Frusciante. Cannot handle/do not want the fame and rather be away, but amazing guitar players.

yeah you can say that i suppose, it is a bit similar i reckon

john seems to be have had way more troubles than izzy in his personal life

apparently he had a real hard time with drugs etc

thing is everyone in RHCP were smart enough to realize john's importance and did their best to welcome john back and ultimately were very successful at that

after john's return, RHCP wrote, recorded and performed live some of their best music ever

and it lasted a lot

like 8 or 10 years?

what about axl, slash and duff?

the man with a vision and his "brand partners" are clearly smarter than the "romantic", "music first" guys in RHCP

the man with a vision and his "brand partners" split the loot in three ways and got all these "hard working and extremely talented" musicians on salary

who cares about writing, recording and releasing good music?

 

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

4 hours ago, chevelle said:

I'm willing to put a little more trust in this since Duff actually said it instead of Fortus. I'm tired of the nostalgia touring, bring on new music please.

you know a few years ago alice in chains released a new album and duff said it was the best thing he had listened to in years

to this day i am still unable to find one great song in that album

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Draguns said:

As much as I like and want Izzy back, he did sell his share of the partnership. You can't fault the rest of the guys for Izzy selling his part. It's unfortunate that he felt he had to as a result of stress, drugs, etc. However, you can't sell your part of the partnership and then want back in. This is similar to what happened at my employer, Bloomberg. Mike Bloomberg wrote in his biography that a partner in the early days sold his share of the partnership.  The guy wanted back in after seeing how successful the company would become. He was denied since the other partners all took the risk. The guy would have been a billionaire if he had not sold his share. Similar situation. 


 

I was almost sure that Izzy is still getting money from GNR music = that still got rights to music? Are we sure that when he was leaving the band he sold his "rights" to music to other guys? Does it mean that since he left Izzy hasn't receieved any money from GNR music?


 

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Tom-Ass said:

I don't really agree with that.  I think he is adequate most of the time but there are still a handful of songs that his style detracts from. With Axl's voice these days there is just no room for that.  He also doesn't sing backup vocals.. Having Duff back helps but Izzy's backups were part of the bands sound.  With him and Duff singing backups you wouldn't need to anime doll. 

OK fair but maybe I should clarify. More to a live setting in terms of versatility - i.e. can play all of the GN'R catalogue. As great as Izzy is, can you imagine him playing Buckethead's Chinese Democracy solo?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This interview from Dayton Daily News also implies that Slash was very much involved in the decision to demote Izzy:

Slash: "So then Axl and I decided that he wasn’t an equal partner, per se, unless he decided to change his ways about a few things — at least do like a couple videos a year, and work harder on the road. And Izzy said, ΌΚ, I resign' "[Dayton Daily News, January 10, 1992].

Come to think of it, it makes more sense that Slash would be behind it rather than Axl considering Axl's friendship with Izzy, whereas it is likely that Slash's professional nature would conflict with Izzy slowly giving less and less of a fuck about GN'R and his "obligations" as a band member. Slash had also gone through the experience of having to work with Izzy in the studio, and having to cover for him, and was likely a bit fed up at the time.

As for why Izzy wanted to leave. I think we all agree there were more than one reason (frustration with Axl, his sobriety, the band becoming too big, frustration with the waste of money etc), but we really shouldn't downplay how the threat of being demoted was the final straw and possibly a big factor in his decision. As such, the blame cannot be put on any one reason or any one person, but basically how they grew apart as the they and the band changed. 

  • Like 3
  • GNFNR 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RONIN said:

From the old interviews, it appears that they amended the contract after Steven was forced out -  a partner who was leaving would have to be bought out by the other partners iirc. Prior to leaving, Izzy was facing a demotion in the band and Axl was threatening to cut his share of royalties (as per Izzy) - Slash and Duff went along with this. With his hand forced, Izzy decided to quit - but in order to do so, he had to sell his shares to the others. By the time Duff and Slash walked out on Axl, the contract obviously had been reconfigured so that an exiting partner could still retain their shares in the band regardless of their resignation. Therefore, the situation with Izzy was quite different given what preceded his ouster from the band.

As far as this talk about Izzy leaving and then wanting back in when he found out how successful the band was - let's get real here, Izzy walked out in the Fall of 1991 - basically the peak of GnR's fame and success, on the eve of the Illusion records being released. He didn't leave like Tracii Gunns in the early days. Meaning, Izzy knowingly walked away from the fame and riches he was due simply to be done with Axl. Given his sobriety, he couldn't deal like Slash could by drinking himself to death to forget the insanity of being in that band. But if people want to boil the whole thing down as basically - yeah he sold his shares and so he isn't entitled to anything - that's their prerogative but the situation is a little more nuanced than that. 

I know that you are a big Izzy fan. Like you, I know the history of the band. With that being said, it's still a business decision that Izzy made. It sucks what happened, but that's still the reality of it. Izzy made his money and is doing very well for himself. 

  • GNFNR 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that the Izzy situation, although it stemmed from disagreements about the band (creative and business differences - the way the band operated in general), was also - and probably still is - deeply personal and emotional. Many times we tend to overlook this aspect, but there were relationships, friendships, hurt feelings... Things got emotional and even childish sometimes.

Izzy was seemingly concerned about the money the band was loosing because of Axl. Plus, being sober made him much less tolerant to Axl's and the band's volatility. So, as he said, he called a band meeting and tried to set terms in regards to Axl's liability (and, according to Slash, he was asking the accountants for reports on the money spent). Axl somehow thought that the band - and I guess more so Izzy, because he was a longtime friend - should stick up for him because he was doing therapy etc. So Axl was hurt.

Then Axl and Slash threatened Izzy to demote him. And I guess Izzy was hurt mostly by Axl, because they'd known each other for so long, since Axl was a kid with a bowl haircut in Lafayette who "couldn't get pussy in high school", so how could he do that to him? So Izzy resigned with a letter. Right after that he and Axl talked on the phone, Axl told him that they could get together again to write for the next record, and they agreed to meet in person and talk. And then there was a ridiculous misunderstanding: Izzy talked to Duff and bitched about Axl apparently; Axl heard about that and was angry, because he thought things were cool between them after the phone call, and when Izzy went to his house, he just kicked him out, and Izzy was in turn angry and hurt because Axl treated him like that there. 

Edited by Blackstar
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, megaguns1982 said:

Slash probably has a whole bunch of Izzy recordings from the sessions leading into his first solo album. Izzy was the only guitarist other than himself to play on that album and I seriously doubt that “ghost” was the only song they recorded.

if any more slash/Izzy recordings exist from those sessions and slash still has them, he should dust them off and present them to axl and duff.

hopefully you are right but if I had to bet i would bet that izzy recorded his guitar for ghost and left pretty fast in the slash solo album sessions

maybe they jammed a bit but there is not many indication of that, is there?

maybe slash wasn't even there on the day izzy recorded his parts for ghost

is there any photo of them in studio together?

i don't remember

good news though is that slash and izzy have done countless other sessions over the years

and according to slash they (izzy, slash, duff, matt) have recorded "the best instrumental GNR album" in one of these sessions

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Creed said:

'Jackie Chan' is a leftover from 1996/1997. And i would say that Slither, Fall to Pieces and Set me free are also from these sessions, cause they fit in this darker tone Axl wanted to go. The same with Cure me or kill me.

And of course lot of Snakepit.

This i love was most probably a totally different song and Slash thought it was a heavy ballad.

There is/was definately good stuff for an upcoming album. Not as good as AFD and UYI, but as good or even better as GnR Lies.

With the speculation about the 1996 sessions tapes...wasn't there a guy from a warehouse that said that someone from GnR pick them up a few months ago? So...maybe...theiy are really reworking some of them.

set me free is a riff that matt sorum came up with and presented to the guys in velvet revolver

cure or kill me is from 1994

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Draguns said:

As much as I like and want Izzy back, he did sell his share of the partnership. You can't fault the rest of the guys for Izzy selling his part. It's unfortunate that he felt he had to as a result of stress, drugs, etc. However, you can't sell your part of the partnership and then want back in. This is similar to what happened at my employer, Bloomberg. Mike Bloomberg wrote in his biography that a partner in the early days sold his share of the partnership.  The guy wanted back in after seeing how successful the company would become. He was denied since the other partners all took the risk. The guy would have been a billionaire if he had not sold his share. Similar situation. 

if izzy had "sold his share" after, let's say, the gig at music machine in 1986, or even the marquee in 1987, then maybe you would have a point

izzy left in 1991 when GNR was at the top of the world, and after years of hard work with the four other guys that resulted in taking GNR from the gutter to the very top of rock n roll.

his last gig was at wembley fucking stadium

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, CAFC Nick said:

OK fair but maybe I should clarify. More to a live setting in terms of versatility - i.e. can play all of the GN'R catalogue. As great as Izzy is, can you imagine him playing Buckethead's Chinese Democracy solo?

Lol nobody wants Izzy playing that. Not because he cant, but because he doesnt fuckin need it. 

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Blackstar said:

Some "new" (uncirculated online before) Slash interviews from 1991-1992 in combination to what Axl and Izzy have said (each from their side) shed some more light on what happened in the autumn of 1991. It looks like the threat to demote Izzy (=cut his royalties and make him a "lesser partner") was an Axl and Slash thing, and Duff wasn't involved so much, e.g.:

 

great read thanks for posting

:headbang:

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, ludurigan said:

if izzy had "sold his share" after, let's say, the gig at music machine in 1986, or even the marquee in 1987, then maybe you would have a point

izzy left in 1991 when GNR was at the top of the world, and after years of hard work with the four other guys that resulted in taking GNR from the gutter to the very top of rock n roll.

his last gig was at wembley fucking stadium

 

The point being that it was still a business decision that was made. I'm taking the emotion of this one. I'm also comparing this to a similar situation that Mike Bloomberg wrote in his book.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...