Jump to content

Why Guns N' Roses Hated Opening for Iron Maiden!


Recommended Posts

Just now, DieselDaisy said:

Only if you don't like Iron Maiden. If you like them it is a different story. I personally dislike them but I cannot deny they treat their fans like golddust. I cannot imagine a Maiden fan has ever thought it necessary to use the phrase, ''Bruce Dickinson doesn't owe you anything''.

Well, he doesn't.

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I think that's just the reality of a relatively unknown band opening for an established act.  Occasionally the established band will kind of take the unknown band under their wing especially if they're on the same label or have the same agent/manager. But this is probably the exception and not the rule.  It certainly didn't happen on the Guns/Maiden tour.   But to some extent did on the Aerosmith tour, I remember Tyler asking Slash about his drinking and offering advice.  I saw an interview with Chris Robinson of the Black Crowes where he was discussing opening for ZZ Top and how excited they were as a young band.   He said the guys in ZZ Top wouldn't give them the time of day on the tour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, lame ass security said:

Well, I think that's just the reality of a relatively unknown band opening for an established act. 

Yeah, literally every band has an equivalent experience coming up.  Watch enough band documentaries and read enough books and every band has it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting when Axl says their band is a political statement. Now, GN'R isn't political band but they've definitely picked a side, and that side being Liberal. I can't support GN'R in that aspect but at least they don't normally bring it to the show or do they?.......

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, DieselDaisy said:

Only if you don't like Iron Maiden. If you like them it is a different story. I personally dislike them but I cannot deny they treat their fans like golddust. I cannot imagine a Maiden fan has ever thought it necessary to use the phrase, ''Bruce Dickinson doesn't owe you anything''.

No artist owes their fans anything. The idea that the fans make an artist is silly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, The Holographic Universe said:

No artist owes their fans anything. The idea that the fans make an artist is silly. 

If you're artistic, you are, that's true.  How much time and energy you get to devote to your art and develop it kind of depends on other factors.  If it's the fans supporting your work and your ability to continue with your art at the level you want, you're kind of stuck producing things for them.  If you're like Slash and you enjoy performing on a stage, you have to have people come see you.  It's the old who made who.  Axl can get away with Wichita Lineman knowing it only appeals to a few of us but he damn well better sing Sweet Child of Mine and a hand full of other hits if he wants people showing up to support the show.

In our case, the bands we are talking about want to be playing the big top, not local bars or at weddings, they are dependant on fans.  They know it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Holographic Universe said:

No artist owes their fans anything. The idea that the fans make an artist is silly. 

I am not refuting this however my argument, which seems to have been lost on you, is, what other band's fans feel the requirement to constantly reiterate: ''they don't owe us anything''? That in itself demonstrates how appallingly Rose/Guns N' Roses treats his/their fans, that and paucity of studio material which is somewhat related. I cannot imagine a situation has ever arisen when Maiden fans felt the need to remind themselves that Maiden are not in their debt; I, as a Neil Young fan, have never once thought to remind myself that Shakey doesn't owe me something, even when his output (recently) has been less than stellar.

It is a colossal straw mas as I have never come across anyone here who does believe that they are owed something, either contractually or morally. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, GoBucky said:

I still find it crazy that they never did a huge headline tour for Appetite considering how huge it was. 

 

Why would they? It took a year for the album to blow up in a huge way. By that point they had already been on the road a long time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, 31illusions said:

Interesting when Axl says their band is a political statement. Now, GN'R isn't political band but they've definitely picked a side, and that side being Liberal. I can't support GN'R in that aspect but at least they don't normally bring it to the show or do they?.......

 

 

You're absolutely right, I've been saying this for awhile, I wish they would just do their thing and leave politics out of it. Just a few years ago on kimmel, Axl said how he wasn't into politics. I guess age does change you. I just hope to not see a political agenda being pushed at any future GNR shows. Politics have already ruined late night TV, I sure hope it doesn't ruin GNR for me. And for the record, I'm not on either side I just don't like band or anyone else who exists for my entertainment to try and influence that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DieselDaisy said:

I am not refuting this however my argument, which seems to have been lost on you, is, what other band's fans feel the requirement to constantly reiterate: ''they don't owe us anything''? That in itself demonstrates how appallingly Rose/Guns N' Roses treats his/their fans, that and paucity of studio material which is somewhat related. I cannot imagine a situation has ever arisen when Maiden fans felt the need to remind themselves that Maiden are not in their debt; I, as a Neil Young fan, have never once thought to remind myself that Shakey doesn't owe me something, even when his output (recently) has been less than stellar.

It is a colossal straw mas as I have never come across anyone here who does believe that they are owed something, either contractually or morally. 

I have never felt the need to remind myself that any artist owes me anything. That applies to Axl or any other musician. I don’t understand the possessiveness of fans in any measure. And I’ve only heard that argument on this forum. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, The Holographic Universe said:

I have never felt the need to remind myself that any artist owes me anything. That applies to Axl or any other musician. I don’t understand the possessiveness of fans in any measure. And I’ve only heard that argument on this forum. 

True, weird thinking people think a band owes them(fans) music or something else. They released AFD, you bought it, they released UYI, you bought it, they released CD, you bought etc.

"Now they need to put up music since i followed the band for years, they owed me that!" No, they can do whatever they want, its up to you if you want to put money into their pocket in some way or another for what they do.

And yes, its only on this forum/GnR forums ive seen people argue about this.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Contrary to what many here claims, I have actually quite a few times seen people on this very forum claim they are owed by the band. It usually starts with a more vague argument about it being the hardcore fans who kept the band alive throughout the dark years, that if it weren't for them the band members wouldn't be able to live their luxurious lives, and stuff like that, and when pressed some of these guys will double down and explicitly state that yes, they are owed by the band. I am NOT saying anyone in this thread has said anything like this, nor am I saying any such members are still present on this forum, nor am I willing to trawl the history of this place to find examples :lol:. Fortunately, that time is over and the expression "they don't owe us" is just kept alive by those who are still for some reason bitter about it or by us who joke about it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

Contrary to what many here claims, I have actually quite a few times seen people on this very forum claim they are owed by the band. It usually starts with a more vague argument about it being the hardcore fans who kept the band alive throughout the dark years, that if it weren't for them the band members wouldn't be able to live their luxurious lives, and stuff like that, and when pressed some of these guys will double down and explicitly state that yes, they are owed by the band. I am NOT saying anyone in this thread has said anything like this, nor am I saying any such members are still present on this forum, nor am I willing to trawl the history of this place to find examples :lol:. Fortunately, that time is over and the expression "they don't owe us" is just kept alive by those who are still for some reason bitter about it or by us who joke about it.

Well...there is a relationship there, isn't there?  The two things are kinda co-dependent, artist and audience.  'owe' is a strong word but as Tupac said 'all I owe y'all out there is 12 tracks of that real shit' in an interview where he was explaining why he isn't and shouldn't be considered a role model. 

Quite frankly its on the fans, if their level of output or behaviour or whatever bothers you then don't go to the shows, don't buy the albums.  But if you continue to keep your nose pressed up against their arse despite not getting any of that which you claim you want then clearly you are getting something out of it, otherwise you wouldn't do it, right?  Artists exist based on patronage, if you got a problem with the artist then you're welcome to back out of the relationship at any point. 

But quite frankly it won't matter a toss to Axl Rose, in fact casual fans are probably worth more to the GnR brand because they are less fickle, if you're hot then they'll turn up.  Bands like The Ramones and such relied on hardcore fans but big big bands like U2, GnR, Led Zeppelin, The Stones, they'll get on just fine even without their 'hardcore' fans.  Shit, you think the people that can afford Stones tickets are all hardcore fans?  Are they fuck.

Edited by Len Cnut
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Len Cnut said:

Well...there is a relationship there, isn't there?  The two things are kinda co-dependent, artist and audience.  'owe' is a strong word but as Tupac said 'all I owe y'all out there is 12 tracks of that real shit' in an interview where he was explaining why he isn't and shouldn't be considered a role model. 

Quite frankly its on the fans, if their level of output or behaviour or whatever bothers you then don't go to the shows, don't buy the albums.  But if you continue to keep your nose pressed up against their arse despite not getting any of that which you claim then clearly you are getting something out of it, otherwise you wouldn't do it, right?  Artists exist based on patronage, if you got a problem with the artist then you're welcome to back out of the relationship at any point. 

But quite frankly it won't matter a toss to Axl Rose, in fact casual fans are probably worth more to the GnR brand because they are less fickle, if you're hot then they'll turn up.  Bands like The Ramones and such relied on hardcore fans but big big bands like U2, GnR, Led Zeppelin, The Stones, they'll get on just fine even without their 'hardcore' fans.  Shit, you think the people that can afford Stones tickets are all hardcore fans?  Are they fuck.

Of course there is a relationship but not one where any of the parties is owed anything (unless the fan has paid for something, like an album or a concert, which he hasn't received). Anything else the fans feels he is owed only comes down to that fan's own personal decision to devote time and emotion on the band. Like the losers who complain about "defending Axl Rose" and now feel they is entitled to something in return, or the loser who spends his time taking down YT videos probably hoping for a pat on his shoulders by Axl at some point. These are the same guys who go whining about being "owed" when it turns out they are not getting the return on the investment they, and only they, expected. The rest of us realize that we choose to be fans of the band (or music) from our own free will and that it doesn't come with any entitlement at all. 

  • Like 2
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...