Mr Estranged

these lists can only be completely subjective

dont let it rattle ur cage

chill its just a programme....

Guns N' Roses is a name.

Guns N' Roses were 5 guys who singlehandedly tore through the music scene in LA and took the world by storm. The only thing that stopped them was the only thing that could.... themselves.

So many people here seem to forget that these days. How a fan can say that Guns N' Roses is just a "name" is beyond comprehension for me.

if only there was a clapping smile

here about this rock1 to show my appreciation

he wasn't even out of diapers when guns n roses was a band.

He was 15 when they started... so he would've been out of diapers.

Unless, you're basing that on past experiences?

ho ho this ones a clever one, we've got to watch this one!!

You know it sickens me that people are making a case that the original GNR was comprised of those retards traci and co.

To anyone who makes that claim, all i can say you are no more a Guns and Roses fan then you are an intelligent soul, by the way i dont agree with OP, the Slash section was nonsense (dont worry its all in my opinion, "oh no he has an opinion what shall we do") but the fact that I'd ever have to defend Slash's PLAYING on a GNR fan site is also sickening.....In my opinion it was a crap email.

I feel like the Grinch! >:>

....former employee Matt Sorum

Former indeed unlike present employees, Fortus/Finck/Brain/Thal/Stinson/Reed and the other one that everyone picks on....em...you know...head the ball

The first page of this thread has just about every post backing him up.

He makes a valid point. Contribute, or shut the fuck up. The Kaneda bashing is the only annoying things about his thread.

An excellent point, well made.

An excellent point, welll made.

oh right we're taking him seriously, sorry ill just go

Sorry but this is a little too much ring licking than i can handle

i love madagascar/ the blues and better

irs doubtful (its alright not great)

Twat and citr are little less but still alright

the rest garbage

Just so I can get my bit of history. Spotted this on HTGTH:

http://www.greensborocoliseum.com/calendar...ails.cfm?id=625

The band’s long awaited new album, Chinese Democracy, is scheduled to be released later this month.

Also info. on the Halloween date.

Oh my lord, you JINXed it you fat fuck.

It was the phrasing and the unexpected nature that got me...

Im thankful for more people like you blkgnr..

I hate how some people can worship this new band, and then slag off on the old..

by simply saying "Dont live in the Past."...

The past it was we've been playing in our cd players/tape players/record players for all these years...

when some can remember opening up that new record back in 1987 and turning it on, and Hearing the opening licks to Welcome To The Jungle...

What have even new kids that might have just gotten into the band this year joined this board for??..

The Greatest Hits, or Appetite for Destruction...

Im sure that a lot of them arent even sure who is in the band now..

Some people need to fuck off...

The past is what we have..

This GnR we have now..some arent so easy into falling into a blind love as others..

Most of there set-list is 80% AFD...

wish leads me to say..

More people need proven too..

Releasing CD may let people understand that this band could have a chance...

but, as of now they have nothing to bite on too...

Not everyone is an Axlite such as..names I wont name..

Not everyone can say fuck slash, izzy, duff, and steven..

and, I dont know how you could even think this..and, then be willing to blow Finck at the drop of the hat..

Then say dont live in the past, even though what GnR accomplished in the past is amazing..

were just to forget about it all, even in which some threads that are made to talk about it..where just not aloud..

I just dont get it..

Last I read, this was called "MYGNR."

in which, you can talk about "GNR."

in which you can talk about all "GNR" has been, is, and will be...

Accpet it...

solid post

not more to be said than that.

oh A_D ain't going to like this ...

Well for me...

CITR - is a badly structured song, i still like though (wierdly enough) its not that bad, but it isnt really going anywhere and the guitar is real sterotype brian may, i mean i know this boy can be original yet it seems hes trying to be derivative...

Madagascar is a very simple descending progression, but i like it, it works, the guitar compliments up until the solo (which i think is muck) is quite satisfactory

Better, while simplistic (rhythm), is effective, particularly fond of bucketheads work and i wont begrudge Finck that is a fine outro solo, plus the metal riffage in the bridge is refreshing

The guitar work in TWAT is too sterotypical for me, its like their imagining what slash would do...its not good enough

Chinese democracy = boring guitar

The blues guitar work, while kind of typical, isn't bad and i think it works quite well, some nice chord play there, another kudos to Finck

IRS, while containing an impressive solo by buckethead, is reasonably boring guitar wise, no innovation, no interest

IM not going to talk about rhiad and silkworms quite frankly they sicken me

this is no indicaiton to how i feel about the songs in general, i am in fact fond of IRS, but its no "Rocker", its just a good song

thats from my point of view

a guitarist, albeit not a great one....

and A_d relax the fuck would ya

Now all of a sudden you are all experts in the music bussiness, band promotions, management...WOW!!

to be honest do you have enough knowledge about the music business to say that he is doing great?

I´ve NEVER said whether he´s good or bad in his job simply because I don´t know shit about the man´s job and I don´t judge people I don´t know. That´s all.

To be honest, I think anyone with half a working brain can have an opinion, based on how the band deals with promoting itself, how accessable it makes its information known etc. These are all tasks that the manger should be in control of, and to be honest, nobody here as the ability to fire Merck so its not the end of the world if people don't like him.

This nonsense of "you don't work in the music industry so your not qualified to talk" is out and out shite, if we listened to that kind of crap then why would we have site to discuss a band in the first place, I'm sure very few members here are in a band that can sell out a European tour, so by your logic, I suppose we're not qualified to talk about the band either.

If you want to defend Merck because of some irrational loyality to the band then I think you should come up with more substantial arguments, this whole topic is based on opinion not fact, no a lot of people here can't talk with direct mangerial experience but they can say how easy it was for them to find out about the tour, how it easy it was for them to get info on the band through official channels and the recorded output of the band, these are things Merck as manger should take some responsibilty for and we all have experience of...making us somewhat qualified to talk...

I agree with some of what your saying, this whole topic is based on opinion, everyone has their own views and some of the arugements in support of Merck are quite weak to say the least! However, Guns n' Roses are not like any other band, they are somewhat of an anomoly in the corporate music buisness that exists today, as is Axl.... and that is where i believe the problem lies. Merck has managed an impressive number of bands in his carrer, do you really think he would have let things get to the state they are today if there wasnt someone else pulling the strings, stopping him from doing the usual promotional stuff etc. Axl is the one calling the shots, not Merck, i dont think its very fair to blame him. After everything that happened with Goldstein - booking tours without approval, generally being pushy, trying to force the record out, Axl probably came away from that era with the view that never again would he let a manager have so much power. Mercks contract with Axl probably states that he cant do shit without the approval of the man himself , and we all know that Axl does his own thing, on his own timescale.

Compared to other bands the public image of Guns n Roses is apporling, as someone said earlier the only people who know about what is happening at the moment are those who trawl the internet looking for info. I cant believe someone in Mercks position, with that much experience would have let things get this way unless there was something holding him back. Axl is protective of everything Guns n' Roses, his actions in the past have shown that to be true....... look at every bloody lawsuit from the past 14 years!

I personally think Merck does the best he can with the given situation. He is good to those who email him, he always replys and yeah yeah his answers are always vague but what do you expect, he probably cant say anything without jepodising his relationship with Axl, and possibly jepodising his job...... i dont know of any other manager who takes time out of their busy schedule to talk to fans via the net.

If Merck treated GnR like any other band he would probably be in the same position as Goldstein- an ex GnR manager!

Jonx

Perhaps all of that is true, however my arguement is if his power is so limited, that Axl calls the shots on everything and dictates everything, then whether he's a good manger or not becomes irrelevant, as Axl has effectively made his position reduntant...The manager has no room to manage.

Also the post you quoted above was more aimed at this nonsense of "your not there so you don't know" crap as espoused by "november rain" and "mysteron", i just don't approve of that nonsense everybody can have have opinion and some are more informed than others but everybody can still have an opinion....

Now all of a sudden you are all experts in the music bussiness, band promotions, management...WOW!!

to be honest do you have enough knowledge about the music business to say that he is doing great?

I´ve NEVER said whether he´s good or bad in his job simply because I don´t know shit about the man´s job and I don´t judge people I don´t know. That´s all.

To be honest, I think anyone with half a working brain can have an opinion, based on how the band deals with promoting itself, how accessable it makes its information known etc. These are all tasks that the manger should be in control of, and to be honest, nobody here as the ability to fire Merck so its not the end of the world if people don't like him.

This nonsense of "you don't work in the music industry so your not qualified to talk" is out and out shite, if we listened to that kind of crap then why would we have site to discuss a band in the first place, I'm sure very few members here are in a band that can sell out a European tour, so by your logic, I suppose we're not qualified to talk about the band either.

If you want to defend Merck because of some irrational loyality to the band then I think you should come up with more substantial arguments, this whole topic is based on opinion not fact, no a lot of people here can't talk with direct mangerial experience but they can say how easy it was for them to find out about the tour, how it easy it was for them to get info on the band through official channels and the recorded output of the band, these are things Merck as manger should take some responsibilty for and we all have experience of...making us somewhat qualified to talk...

There's no way that Merck could be doing this bad of a job without doing on purpose, though. The absence of promotion and publicity that we've seen can't be just because he sucks at what he does. They have to planning some kind of sudden big comeback with an immense shock factor. And maybe they're proving to the label that they can sell out shows even without promotion (other than word of mouth). I dunno. I'm sure he isn't getting paid for nothing, though.

There can be no qualified responses here which makes me wonder why this thread is still active

"Qualified"??

How about everyone is entitled to their own opinion and its a internet forum?

I agree however there are some bloody stupid responses.(abw1987 point in case)

UK SUBS.

yeah i thought that was abit of poncey thing to say as well...

On topic: I am going to have to agree to the Merck nay sayers, purely for the poor promotion and exchange of information, he may have a difficult client or he may work very hard but the fact is theres no website to follow up quieries (unforgivable in this day and age), communication with the outside world is minimal and important information concert dates or whatever is awkard to find.

He may have tough but that does not excuse him...in my opinion.

To be fair, I don't see why "kicking the habbit" as too sacrifice his whole point of view to be listened too, for instance A_D you have always made it very clear that you would prefer this line up to any other and thats fine, but in this instance thats not the question.

The question is, is Mr Rose the sole embodiment of Guns and Roses, if he is, then it never mattered who was with him the band was always Guns N Roses, if he isn't, than this new line up cannot be considered Guns N Roses, because other vital conponents are missing.

I agree with Kicking the habbit/Sweetness on this, the way I see it, is Guns N Roses stemed from the combination of Duff's Punk rhythms, Izzy magnificent songwriting ability, Slash's riffage and Axl's over the top imagination, I am of the opinion, that a band is a callabrative enterprise, or its not a band, its a person and his/her backing.

So while Mr Rose adds one of the more distinctive elements to the music, his voice, he cannot equal the sum total of the other 3. Therefore in my opinion and you saw this coming I'm sure, this is not Guns N Roses.

But this those not mean any of the multitude of response your planning, including but no limited to,

"you just love slash" - Not true the reality is Axl is my favourite member i'm merely remembering that he is a member of a group and it was his input in conjuction with others that made the band I love.

"you hate the new band" - Also not true, Im quite fond of a number of their tracks and do look forward to the album, while I don't accept this ids Guns and Roses, I do accept that if they got the finger out they were quite band, Madagascar barely goes without a listen on my computer.

"if you dont think this is GNR, than what you doing here?" - Very simple, I refuse to be brow beaten by aload of people who call themselves Guns and Roses fans, but in reality are Axl Rose fans (this is not meant to mean anybody neccessarly just in general). I wanted know whats happening with this band, I have interest in it, i enjoy their music, why shouldnt I be here? Is it because Axl got a legal document to say the sky is green and I choose not to accept it?

The main point here is this, if you want to consider the new band Guns and roses, than fine, go right ahead, but not attack other guns n roses fans who dont agree with you, this is a very contentious issue, if kicking the habbit/myself or sweetness wish to continue enjoying the new band while maintaining their not the old band, then why shouldnt be allowed too?

Discussion forums feed on the diversity of opinions without such diversity they starve and die...

whether or not this lineup is Guns N Roses is not a matter of opinion, it is a fact. This doesn't mean Axl is the sole person responsible for GNR's success, I acknowledge it was a band effort. It always has been, and now is no exception.

Kicking has never not once made a supportive post towards the band. He suggested those of us who had hammerstein tickets rip them up once it was confirmed it was this lineup. his posts indicate he has no interest in this version of GNR, the only interest he has in it, is so that he can act resentful about something. Its really annoying. We are here to support the band, not bring them down.

In general, I feel if you aren't at least more than half way content with whats going on, you really aren't a fan of this. If all one can dwell on is the negatives and they constantly refuse to see any good in anything, what is their purpose in being here on a fan forum?

Im not accepting your first point, I refuse to let legalities inform my opinion, rather the content of the situation to speak fo itself.

On your second point, I don't see this board as some kind of pep squad for the band, they dont need it and we dont need to be it, I see this board has a discussion board and for that to work you need conflicting views, you can't have a perfect fan board and a discussion board in my opinion, if that were the case, then conversation of interest would die, as conversation drifted towards the "who do you love more" topics.

I can see your third point but still it ties back with what i said for no. 2, if this place was a pure fan site then it would horrifically boring, you may have noticed this band is hardly forthcoming with information, there sure as fuck would'nt be allot to discuss very quickly.

In any case, I was under the impression, this whole site was dedicated to all entites known as guns n roses?

To be fair, I don't see why "kicking the habbit" as too sacrifice his whole point of view to be listened too, for instance A_D you have always made it very clear that you would prefer this line up to any other and thats fine, but in this instance thats not the question.

The question is, is Mr Rose the sole embodiment of Guns and Roses, if he is, then it never mattered who was with him the band was always Guns N Roses, if he isn't, than this new line up cannot be considered Guns N Roses, because other vital conponents are missing.

I agree with Kicking the habbit/Sweetness on this, the way I see it, is Guns N Roses stemed from the combination of Duff's Punk rhythms, Izzy magnificent songwriting ability, Slash's riffage and Axl's over the top imagination, I am of the opinion, that a band is a callabrative enterprise, or its not a band, its a person and his/her backing.

So while Mr Rose adds one of the more distinctive elements to the music, his voice, he cannot equal the sum total of the other 3. Therefore in my opinion and you saw this coming I'm sure, this is not Guns N Roses.

But this those not mean any of the multitude of response your planning, including but no limited to,

"you just love slash" - Not true the reality is Axl is my favourite member i'm merely remembering that he is a member of a group and it was his input in conjuction with others that made the band I love.

"you hate the new band" - Also not true, Im quite fond of a number of their tracks and do look forward to the album, while I don't accept this as Guns and Roses, I do accept that if they got the finger out they would be quite an excellent band, Madagascar barely goes without a listen on my computer.

"if you dont think this is GNR, than what you doing here?" - Very simple, I refuse to be brow beaten by aload of people who call themselves Guns and Roses fans, but in reality are Axl Rose fans (this is not meant to mean anybody neccessarly just in general). I want toknow whats happening with this band, I have interest in it, i enjoy their music, why shouldnt I be here? Is it because Axl got a legal document to say the sky is green and I choose not to accept it?

The main point here is this, if you want to consider the new band Guns and roses, than fine, go right ahead, but not attack other guns n roses fans who dont agree with you, this is a very contentious issue, if kicking the habbit/myself or sweetness wish to continue enjoying the new band while maintaining their not the old band, then why shouldnt be allowed too?

Discussion forums feed on the diversity of opinions without such diversity they starve and die...

The truth is however that when Guns N' Roses broke up in 1996/97 unlike his former bandmates Slash, Duff and Matt....he did not have the balls to move on from the break up and accept what happened and to restart his career. The truth is that he is affraid to step out into the real rock world with a band in his own name, and not with that of what was the greatest band ever. Because he knows that his masterpiece album wouldn't be much without the backing of Guns N' Roses songs and without adding the history of the world's greatest band to his own solo band. I think it 's what prevents a lot of people from respecting the man. You can see he 's affraid to play the game fair. And it 's a pity, all this hard work he 's done and all this great music and shows his band do and they ruin every single bit of it by pretending they are Guns N' Roses. They know they aren't, he knows they aren't, Slash said damn well good when he said "I would perform with them on a one off but I will not join a bunch of guys pretending to be Guns N' Roses". However, as I said this is a very great band and they don't need to be verbally bashed just because they pretend to be something they are not, they 're great musicians and can sure as hell play the fuck out of anything. For you other people who agree with this my advice would be, if you don't like the bandname thing...just ignore it and don't call them Gn'R...but you can still love them for their music and how they play. Long live this great band...

Great post.

People comparing the situation in Megadeth to Guns and Roses are completely ignoring context and are essentially talking from their arse....

Axl was only a component and that is becoming very clear now....

Ok Mullethead...if you don't like what you hear...go listen to old GNR records, and VR crap-fest!

This band is not for you!

End of this stupid mulletheads topic....

How can you attack him for liking old GNR music, with the exception of a few songs thats all this band plays, whats wrong with you? I don't understand how you can have so much contempt for this kind of music?

Perhaps you should call auld cornrows "mullet head" and while your at it you can call yourself the same..unless of course your only here for the 9 or so new songs, in which case you've got some fucking cheek calling yourself a Guns and Roses fan!

How old you are anyway? 12? 13?

Sorry but i just don't get how people verge on hating the old band, I mean I like some of Axl's band's music too but fuck do people really believe these 9 songs are so far ahead of the old material, I mean T.W.A.T and The blues are almost old GNR b-sides (although i do like them), I.R.S too (once again I should point out its a good song), without mentioning the other too disasters (silk/rhiad) that leaves Madagascar/Better has the stand alone departures from anything Axl has done before in other bands...

So what makes Guns N Roses (original) so intolerable to these alledged Guns and Roses fans?

Funeral if you don't like the "mullet head" music, take this advice, don't go to one of Axl's gigs, tis all he plays.....

man im startin to think there on the axl payroll

either/or

theyre gay for him

every interview they do, he's some how mentioned, i wouldnt mind but their music isn't even close to GNR

Retards need to learn how to read.

I heard it with my own ears and IT'S NOT NEW.

For fuck's sake, try reading maybe 1 or 2 posts behind your own before you post some crap.

You probably masturbated to it. you sick fuck.

it was the delivery thats what i liked about it

indeed i am

theres quite a few on this site for some reason

I guess irish people have good taste in music after all we did give the world Thin Lizzy, Rory Gallagher and U2

I think he looks pretty sharp in this pic here

finally some with a sense of humour!