Jump to content
Towelie

Question for the 87-93 purists... Would you consider a new album by the current lineup as a legitimate follow up to UYI?

Recommended Posts

UYI had the perfect GNR sound. it was actually overproduced, but somehow it was just perfect like that. And with Melissa, Frank and 4tus it wont sound perfect. 

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guns n roses is more than sum of its parts.

A record with Slash and Duff will sound a whole lot closer to what most people remember as GNR. That doesn't mean CD is any less a GNR record though. 

This argument will rage on long after GNR hang up their leather chaps and large brimmed hats, we ain't ever going to come to an understanding. I accept any version of GNR that has All on vocals. 

All things considered😉, he wrote some of my favourite songs and he's the voice. Guitar players, like it or not are far more replaceable! And I'm speaking as a guitar player so I should be saying the opposite. I don't take anything away from Slash or any member (Ashba obviously excluded), but the voice is the key ingredient. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Tom2112 said:

Guns n roses is more than sum of its parts.

A record with Slash and Duff will sound a whole lot closer to what most people remember as GNR. That doesn't mean CD is any less a GNR record though. 

This argument will rage on long after GNR hang up their leather chaps and large brimmed hats, we ain't ever going to come to an understanding. I accept any version of GNR that has All on vocals. 

All things considered😉, he wrote some of my favourite songs and he's the voice. Guitar players, like it or not are far more replaceable! And I'm speaking as a guitar player so I should be saying the opposite. I don't take anything away from Slash or any member (Ashba obviously excluded), but the voice is the key ingredient. 

If guitar players are so easily replaceable, why did Guns go from playing bowling alleys and half filled arenas to stadiums upon Slash’s return?

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
28 minutes ago, Towelie said:

If guitar players are so easily replaceable, why did Guns go from playing bowling alleys and half filled arenas to stadiums upon Slash’s return?

 

Voice is in no way the key ingridient in music, its music, not poetry recitals, music is everything and the vocals are a part of that sure but when I first got into listening to GnR it was the guitar that did it, not the vocals and I wager thats the same for a great many, possibly even the majority of fans of rock music, its not coincidence that some of the greatest figures in rock n roll history had a guitar attached to em. 

It wasn't until this forum that it even occured to me that Axl had some sort of primary position in the band over and above any other member, just about everyone I ever knew pre-this forum made more of Slash than any other member.  People tend to gravitate more to guitars and guitar players cuz its something you can have a go at, where as a voice is like you either got one or you don't.

Edited by Len Cnut
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
28 minutes ago, Towelie said:

If guitar players are so easily replaceable, why did Guns go from playing bowling alleys and half filled arenas to stadiums upon Slash’s return?

 

You could say that's an apples and oranges argument because Slash was playing those sort of venues before he rejoined Guns. I've never understood this argument from Guns fans. The cancelled 02/03 tour from Guns wasn't the best selling but they managed to sell out a few shows including Madison Square Garden. The 2006/2007 CD tour shows were pretty good selling shows I'd say the 2011 tour was one of the least selling tours. It doesn't matter nowadays though they could do a couple of U.S legs of a tour and it pretty much would sell out although personally I'm not sure just rocking up to play the greatest hits & a few CD songs can cut it anymore though needs new music like a least a few songs of a new album or its just a straight cash grab type tour but some people will say fair fucks if they can get the fans in plus the casuals.  

Edited by Edward Nygma
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, janrichmond said:

I really really hope you're wrong about the CD voice being used giphy.gif

lol... I didn't like how he sounded on a lot of those CD tunes either but I can't imagine him sounding any better now. That would also mean that they are just re-recording crap that Axl and his rotating band of freaks wrote making it even less authentic.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Tom-Ass said:

My take on that is that Slash wasn't running around under the Gn'R name. The Guns N' Roses name alone will sell tickets. I also don't think there are any pure guitarists that don't sing who play Arena's or anything like that. Has there been any ever? Not even Jimmy Page's bands... Slash, Duff and Matt were playing arena's with Velvet Revolver though. 

Jimmy Page did arenas on his own in the 80s during his sole solo tour, so do Clapton and Gilmour sometimes. They're the exception though and in those cases it's partially because they are harder to see acts. I saw Santana play an arena once a long time ago. Page and Gilmour barely tour.

Either way, I agree. If Slash had the GNR name, attendance would have been similar to NuGNR and Axl would have been playing theaters as a solo act. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Towelie said:

If guitar players are so easily replaceable, why did Guns go from playing bowling alleys and half filled arenas to stadiums upon Slash’s return?

 

That's an interesting retelling of history. 

They played bowling alleys because they wanted to play a bunch of intimate shows, they weren't forced into it because of poor ticket sales. And I know the arenas in America weren't full but we're still talking mostly 3/4 full arenas, with the occasional sell out or less than 3/4 sold. 

Gnr were still playing double nights in London, and selling out throughout Europe, selling thousands of tickets in SA, and doing great in the Asian territories, they were no way near stadiums but they were still a huge band, doing good, but not spectacular business.

Finally, I never suggested Slash wasn't a huge fan favourite and that he brings a lot of fans back! I just meant that there are a lot of great players out there, and there are not that many great frontmen! So while I love Slash he is far more replaceable... Had gnr replaced Axl they'd be where Skid row are today. Axl could still go out with another version of GNR and do well, the rest of the guys could not do that, even if they were allowed the use of the gnr name.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Tom2112 said:

they wanted to play a bunch of intimate shows, they weren't forced into it because of poor ticket sales.

That is their spin you've been listening to haha. Of course they had plummeting sales during that godawful Ashba era.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ZoSoRose said:

Jimmy Page did arenas on his own in the 80s during his sole solo tour, so do Clapton and Gilmour sometimes. They're the exception though and in those cases it's partially because they are harder to see acts. I saw Santana play an arena once a long time ago. Page and Gilmour barely tour.

Either way, I agree. If Slash had the GNR name, attendance would have been similar to NuGNR and Axl would have been playing theaters as a solo act. 

I actually stated guitarist that are pure guitarists and aren't the vocalists as well. Clapton and Gilmore do guitar and vocals. It is kind of a different animal.  As for Page, I really don't think he ever played Arena's on his own.. He did with Zeppelin and Page/Plant.. Maybe Coverdale/Page but his solo bands like The Firm were Theaters at best I believe.. He may have done a couple arenas in some market's but then again so did SMKC.

You may be right on Santana but he isn't a lead guitarist that left some big band. He has always just been Santana from the beginning. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I've said it on here before and it's fairly unpopular but if Axl isn't involved it's not GN'R to me. You could have the AFD lineup with Myles or anyone else fronting it and it wouldn't be GN'R in my eyes. What Axl brings to the table in terms of vocals, songwriting ability, stage presence, and talent is invaluable. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • GNFNR 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Tom2112 said:

That's an interesting retelling of history. 

They played bowling alleys because they wanted to play a bunch of intimate shows, they weren't forced into it because of poor ticket sales. And I know the arenas in America weren't full but we're still talking mostly 3/4 full arenas, with the occasional sell out or less than 3/4 sold. 

Gnr were still playing double nights in London, and selling out throughout Europe, selling thousands of tickets in SA, and doing great in the Asian territories, they were no way near stadiums but they were still a huge band, doing good, but not spectacular business.

Finally, I never suggested Slash wasn't a huge fan favourite and that he brings a lot of fans back! I just meant that there are a lot of great players out there, and there are not that many great frontmen! So while I love Slash he is far more replaceable... Had gnr replaced Axl they'd be where Skid row are today. Axl could still go out with another version of GNR and do well, the rest of the guys could not do that, even if they were allowed the use of the gnr name.

Funny how these bands/artists only ever get the desire to play stripped back, intimate shows in smaller venues when they can no longer sell out the bigger venues though, isn't it?

I agree that replacing a singer is usually career suicide for a band, although Guns were always on a higher tier than Skid Row. An Axl-less GNR probably wouldn't have been as successful as NuGNR, but there's no way Slash/Izzy/Duff would've ever been reduced to playing divebars like Skid Row.

I don't agree that Slash is "far more replaceable" at all. Outside of the Axl fans on this board, Slash's name carries far more weight and credibility and legitimizes Guns N Roses for the majority of concert goers. I know a lot of casual fans who had no interest in seeing GNR from 2000-2014 and were practically giddy at the prospect of seeing NITL in 2016. Slash defines the GNR sound far more than Axl imho. The evidence is in how Chinese Democracy sounds nothing like AFD/Lies/UYI and Slash's post-Guns catalogue drips with that classic GNR feel.

Edited by Towelie
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Gibson_Guy87 said:

I think I've said it on here before and it's fairly unpopular but if Axl isn't involved it's not GN'R to me. You could have the AFD lineup with Myles or anyone else fronting it and it wouldn't be GN'R in my eyes. What Axl brings to the table in terms of vocals, songwriting ability, stage presence, and talent is invaluable. 

I agree with that.. It definitely isn't Gn'R without Axl.  While it wouldn't be Gn'R, I still think Slash, Izzy, Duff and Steven with almost any singer would be better than the NITL lineup. Even if Gilby or Matt were substituted in there somewhere. That HOF lineup had more of a Gn'R vibe than the NITL lineup. 

  • Like 1
  • GNFNR 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GNR didn't even sell out the 2000 seat theater show I saw in 2012. They also started touring B and C markets and casinos and shit in 2013 and 2014. 

Reunion is why it is like it is now. To say otherwise is false

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Tom-Ass said:

I agree with that.. It definitely isn't Gn'R without Axl.  While it wouldn't be Gn'R, I still think Slash, Izzy, Duff and Steven with almost any singer would be better than the NITL lineup. Even if Gilby or Matt were substituted in there somewhere. That HOF lineup had more of a Gn'R vibe than the NITL lineup. 

I actually agree with that, the HOF performance was better than most of the NITL tour versions of the same songs... Obviously swap out Myles (who did great on the night to be clear).

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DieselDaisy said:

That is their spin you've been listening to haha. Of course they had plummeting sales during that godawful Ashba era.

Hey you might be right, but they aren't the first band to do something similar. I might have bought a bare faced lie though, I'm open to it. But they didn't need to do those shows, the other markets I mentioned would have welcomed them with open arms (and legs).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Towelie said:

Funny how these bands/artists only ever get the desire to play stripped back, intimate shows in smaller venues when they can no longer sell out the bigger venues though, isn't it?

Like Troubadour 2016?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was at the HOF. It was awesome. 

I also thought the NITL shows I sae were awesome.

For me it all depends on Axl. When hes bad, the whole thing is bad

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ZoSoRose said:

GNR didn't even sell out the 2000 seat theater show I saw in 2012. They also started touring B and C markets and casinos and shit in 2013 and 2014. 

Reunion is why it is like it is now. To say otherwise is false

 

I wonder how much money Axl was making doing these shows?  It couldn't have been much really.   Maybe he felt a responsibility for the other guys in the band monetarily speaking.  But he had to be thinking "jeez, why am I doing these shows?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, lame ass security said:

I wonder how much money Axl was making doing these shows?  It couldn't have been much really.   Maybe he felt a responsibility for the other guys in the band monetarily speaking.  But he had to be thinking "jeez, why am I doing these shows?"

I'd guess it's more to do with contracts than feeling responsible monetarily, I doubt he was that concerned about the band, after all he had them waiting years and years to release anything with their name on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, janrichmond said:

I'd guess it's more to do with contracts than feeling responsible monetarily, I doubt he was that concerned about the band, after all he had them waiting years and years to release anything with their name on.

Yeah, probably so, and maybe Axl had fun playing with them, who knows. Were those guys on salary regardless if they played or not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, lame ass security said:

Yeah, probably so, and maybe Axl had fun playing with them, who knows. Were those guys on salary regardless if they played or not?

I'd imagine they were, but I dunno how it all works so i could be wrong. @Blackstar any ideas on this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×