GeorgeGlass

Threads like this fairly sum up the current state of Axl and his traveling orchestra...

Hmm, an Indigo Child thread. For some reason without reading any of this I feel compelled to argue about how I feel Slash is a better musician than Axl.

Whatever dude.

It's not a crime to be a fan of the new band.

No there is nothing wrong at all with being a fan of the new band, I just always think its ridiculous when people say its better than the original.

It is quite ridiculous to say the new band is better than the old. Ten years, one slightly above average album, 20 different musicians, all no-names....in his 40's, Axl's like a lost soul music-wise, and hasn't been able to figure out what the hell to do (except to remain bitter about Slash). At the end of the day, Axl's done really nothing since 1994 and it's a shame. It's also clear Axl would rather struggle while hiding out in Europe and Asia than come full circle with the guys who helped make him who he is. Right now in the public eye he's a has-been, washed up rock star. His only salvation to restore some kind of credibility is to reunite. Maybe one day he'll get off this kick of 'woe is me' and 'fuck everyone else' and just come to his senses.

People in the US see through his bullshit, and rightly, have largely forgotten about him. Overseas they don't get it, they REALLY think it's Guns N Roses still...ha ha ha!! I love Asian people.

You're a fuckin' tool. the "public eye" does not only consist of the US. The world has over 6 billion people US has 350 million? Shall i post what music is popular at the moment on Billboard?

Just fuck off

I do think the US has some say in the rock and roll scene...I mean after all, it was invented here. I love how people here are just clinging to anything and everything that makes them believe Axl is still Axl. He's a cult hero now, not a rock star. We are a very small group of people that have even the slightest interest in what he is doing. The slash impersonator he has on guitar now is not really helping him out. Talk about implied meanings...of all the people he has to get someone like him?

His only salvation is a reunion.

Hmm, an Indigo Child thread. For some reason without reading any of this I feel compelled to argue about how I feel Slash is a better musician than Axl.

Whatever dude.

It's not a crime to be a fan of the new band.

No there is nothing wrong at all with being a fan of the new band, I just always think its ridiculous when people say its better than the original.

It is quite ridiculous to say the new band is better than the old. Ten years, one slightly above average album, 20 different musicians, all no-names....in his 40's, Axl's like a lost soul music-wise, and hasn't been able to figure out what the hell to do (except to remain bitter about Slash). At the end of the day, Axl's done really nothing since 1994 and it's a shame. It's also clear Axl would rather struggle while hiding out in Europe and Asia than come full circle with the guys who helped make him who he is. Right now in the public eye he's a has-been, washed up rock star. His only salvation to restore some kind of credibility is to reunite. Maybe one day he'll get off this kick of 'woe is me' and 'fuck everyone else' and just come to his senses.

People in the US see through his bullshit, and rightly, have largely forgotten about him. Overseas they don't get it, they REALLY think it's Guns N Roses still...ha ha ha!! I love Asian people.

Would be a bit of a PR disaster if he came right out and said that 'Sorry' was about Slash.

Well, I do think Sorry is about multiple people--Slash definitely included--But not just him.

Here's what I don't get: If Axl writes one song about Slash, in the media it'd be played as being an example of how mean spirited Axl is. Slash ADMITS to writing almost a whole album about Axl (all the lyrics of It's Five O'Clock Somewhere which Slash penned are about Axl) and yet it's no big deal.

Axl was such an asshole to the media, how did you expect them to treat him? People and the media dislike Axl for a reason. He burned nearly every bridge at the height of his fame because he could...now trying to 'come back' 15 years on, nobody gives a shit about him. It serves him right.

Also, 'Its 5 oclock' was released with even less fanfare than Chinese Democracy - nobody cared. Guns was done AND grunge had taken over - pretty significant 1-2 punch. Even a new full fledged Guns album in '96ish wouldn't have been that big of a deal. In some ways, the death of Guns in '93 was pretty appropriate timing...now that real rock is sort of back, its a shame that Axl's out and about with the wrong guys.

It's like the genius in school who has 'so much potential' but just fucks around being an idiot wasting his talent. I feel that's what Axl's doing now touring to 8k people a night.

Would be a bit of a PR disaster if he came right out and said that 'Sorry' was about Slash.

The fact that he publicly, on stage, said it wasn't 'about who you think its' about, just serves to corroborate the lies Axl's told everyone over the years (breakup wasn't my fault, for example). To me it is CLEAR that the song is about Slash/other former members/the media.

Hey DJ Slashba confirmed that they're hitting the states in February. So because that will DEFINITELY happen, I'm a happy camper. I mean there's nothing wrong with the fact that it's Jan 10 and we've not heard one lick about a states tour starting in one month, right??? I do want to stress that this isn't Axl's fault, it's simply everyone else's but his - lawyers, record companies, venues, management. Such high demand for him that logistically it's a nightmare.

The only nightmare is finding venues smaller than 10k but bigger than 2k since that's his sweet spot right now, at least in the US where we know this ISN'T gnr unlike in Asia where 6 dummies could be marched out and they'd scream AXL AXL GNR!!!

Should have been Metallica

fixed

Besides physically evolving, I was watching Axl's '90 interview with Kurt Loder...He seems so relaxed, so open minded, so idealistic there. Not overly idealistic but optimistic. Yet you watch say, an interview from '92 or the Making Fucking Videos thing from '93 and he seems so much more cynical, a little bitter, not nearly as optimistic. The UYU really aged him, IMO, physically and mentally

It was a double album which was toured for 2.5 years at the age of ~30...hardly the case for extensive physical and mental aging. Axl burned all his bridges during and after that tour and has never fully recovered.

Someone do average attendance to illustrate that despite more songs, attendance has gone way down.

I got a little scared seeing the '02 picture of him with the cigar. It is a good picture but come on he looks like he's 25 and we all know he's 40 in that pic. If people are really believing he had no work done, then he must be the only man in the world to look younger and have MORE hair at 45 than he did at 30. In all honesty, I am just curious as to WHAT exactly he had done as the reports vary to the specific procedures (botox, chemical peel, etc, etc.). For me, he's no less of a person for wanting to improve his appearance but it was so drastic in the early 00's that one can't help but wonder what he had done. And if you think that is ridiculous for me to say, it is more ridiculous for one to think he's had NOTHING done to his hair or face.

my god, he changed ALOT between 1998 and 2000....

Yes this is right around the time he got his hairplugs and facial treatment...seriously. There is a marked difference in those 96-97 pics and the ones after these procedures. His complexion is plasticky and his hair got magically thicker.

Probably 2002

I imagine Live Era may have been a contractural thing with the record company, I don't have time to research this right now, so claiming it was an Axl money grab is unfair. Slash stated he and Axl collaborated through intermediaries on the album and never communicated directly with each other and I believe Slash did a lot of the production work on it.

Criticizing Axl for rerecording his vocals is just stirring the shit as just about every commercial live album ever released has had studio work done on it to fix "mistakes". I think it is misleading to not tell the fans this unfront but that is not Axl's fault it is how the music busness works.

I read somewhere that Led Zeppelin's live album was re-recorded in many spots. I forget where I heard that...The vocals weren't touched but a lot of the spottier instrumentals were if I remember.

The Doors' live album, too, Absolutely Live, was I heard pieced together from various performances--I mean individual songs--Because most of the songs were from their 1970 tour, in which Jim was bombed most of the time:

"Absolutely Live is the first live album released by American rock band The Doors in July 1970. Many shows were recorded during the 1970 tour to create the "Absolutely Live" album. The Doors producer, and long time collaborator Paul Rothchild painstakingly edited the album from many different shows to create one cohesive concert. For example, the best part of a song from the Detroit show may have been spliced together with another part of the same song from the Boston show, again trying to create "the ultimate concert". It can become very difficult to identify what parts are from what shows. Rothchild has said "I couldn't get complete takes of a lot of songs, so sometimes I'd cut from Detroit to Philadelphia in midsong. There must be 2,000 edits on that album"

It still doesn't make it right. Its like a girl with natural cans - sure they aren't perfect but isn't it much better to have the uncut, natural thing - flaws and all?

Well that's not your argument is it. Your argument is specifically against Axl, claiming that he's some kind of fraud (for doing what everyone else is doing). It's how things are, If you don't like it your argument is with more than just one man, it's against many classic bands, albums and a whole industry... it's most notably also with Slash (considering he was responsible for a lot of the production on Live Era).

So I guess if all the other frontmen stepped in dog shit, Axl would too, and it'd be ok? Isn't he the 'anti-establishment, buck the trend, don't sell out kind of guy'? Well he clearly voided the last of those by using the GNR name and re-recording live era tracks. HE'S the guy that's supposed to NOT do it like everyone else.

He's supposed to not do it like the rolling stones? One of Guns biggest influences. Your get your ass kicked in every thread and just move the goal posts.

Does this statement: 'anti-establishment, buck the trend, don't sell out kind of guy'? not apply to Slash then? Since he was one of the main producers of Live Era.

Isn't carrying on with the GN'R name as the last man standing NOT doing it like everyone else? Your all over the place, you don't have any valid argument... all you want to do is shit on Axl. Why don't you just come out and say that you think he sucks, it'd be a lot more entertaining than this rouse.

Slash didn't re-record vocals or guitar tracks. Axl doesn't suck - he's just going about things incorrectly. Seeing him live is better than nothing yes, but NOT the same. Funny how people in here blame Slash not Axl for the breakup, yet everyone else in the world is the other way around (if they still even care).

Ohh warn status up to 30% - go me!!

If GN'R/"Nu-GN'R" had released new records by now, do you think there would be such a stigma still attached with them?

For example let's say CD came out in 1999/2000; CD in 2002/2003, CD III in 2006/2007 and CDIV next year, do you think the new band would be accepted as Guns by more people?

What about yourself? Do you see the lack of new releases by the new band a factor in you not being able to see it as Guns?

Axl has only ONE recourse to re-legitimize himself and the GNR name....

I imagine Live Era may have been a contractural thing with the record company, I don't have time to research this right now, so claiming it was an Axl money grab is unfair. Slash stated he and Axl collaborated through intermediaries on the album and never communicated directly with each other and I believe Slash did a lot of the production work on it.

Criticizing Axl for rerecording his vocals is just stirring the shit as just about every commercial live album ever released has had studio work done on it to fix "mistakes". I think it is misleading to not tell the fans this unfront but that is not Axl's fault it is how the music busness works.

I read somewhere that Led Zeppelin's live album was re-recorded in many spots. I forget where I heard that...The vocals weren't touched but a lot of the spottier instrumentals were if I remember.

The Doors' live album, too, Absolutely Live, was I heard pieced together from various performances--I mean individual songs--Because most of the songs were from their 1970 tour, in which Jim was bombed most of the time:

"Absolutely Live is the first live album released by American rock band The Doors in July 1970. Many shows were recorded during the 1970 tour to create the "Absolutely Live" album. The Doors producer, and long time collaborator Paul Rothchild painstakingly edited the album from many different shows to create one cohesive concert. For example, the best part of a song from the Detroit show may have been spliced together with another part of the same song from the Boston show, again trying to create "the ultimate concert". It can become very difficult to identify what parts are from what shows. Rothchild has said "I couldn't get complete takes of a lot of songs, so sometimes I'd cut from Detroit to Philadelphia in midsong. There must be 2,000 edits on that album"

It still doesn't make it right. Its like a girl with natural cans - sure they aren't perfect but isn't it much better to have the uncut, natural thing - flaws and all?

Well that's not your argument is it. Your argument is specifically against Axl, claiming that he's some kind of fraud (for doing what everyone else is doing). It's how things are, If you don't like it your argument is with more than just one man, it's against many classic bands, albums and a whole industry... it's most notably also with Slash (considering he was responsible for a lot of the production on Live Era).

So I guess if all the other frontmen stepped in dog shit, Axl would too, and it'd be ok? Isn't he the 'anti-establishment, buck the trend, don't sell out kind of guy'? Well he clearly voided the last of those by using the GNR name and re-recording live era tracks. HE'S the guy that's supposed to NOT do it like everyone else.

I imagine Live Era may have been a contractural thing with the record company, I don't have time to research this right now, so claiming it was an Axl money grab is unfair. Slash stated he and Axl collaborated through intermediaries on the album and never communicated directly with each other and I believe Slash did a lot of the production work on it.

Criticizing Axl for rerecording his vocals is just stirring the shit as just about every commercial live album ever released has had studio work done on it to fix "mistakes". I think it is misleading to not tell the fans this unfront but that is not Axl's fault it is how the music busness works.

I read somewhere that Led Zeppelin's live album was re-recorded in many spots. I forget where I heard that...The vocals weren't touched but a lot of the spottier instrumentals were if I remember.

The Doors' live album, too, Absolutely Live, was I heard pieced together from various performances--I mean individual songs--Because most of the songs were from their 1970 tour, in which Jim was bombed most of the time:

"Absolutely Live is the first live album released by American rock band The Doors in July 1970. Many shows were recorded during the 1970 tour to create the "Absolutely Live" album. The Doors producer, and long time collaborator Paul Rothchild painstakingly edited the album from many different shows to create one cohesive concert. For example, the best part of a song from the Detroit show may have been spliced together with another part of the same song from the Boston show, again trying to create "the ultimate concert". It can become very difficult to identify what parts are from what shows. Rothchild has said "I couldn't get complete takes of a lot of songs, so sometimes I'd cut from Detroit to Philadelphia in midsong. There must be 2,000 edits on that album"

It still doesn't make it right. Its like a girl with natural cans - sure they aren't perfect but isn't it much better to have the uncut, natural thing - flaws and all?

Axl can't carry 15k seaters anymore. He needs to find the sweet spot of 5-7k places. Or he COULD do the arenas, its just that they'll be half empty.

Pretty much all bands 'fix up' their live albums. Was 'live like a suicide' a "fucking joke" also?

No. Slash approved of those edits on Live Like a Suicide and the deliberation misleading of the public caused by it, so therefore it's cool. Whatever Slash approves is always 100% A-OK!

Live Like a Suicide was different - up and coming band adds fan cheering for a gag but the vocals were the vocals. Live Era was released with music from a band that was off the radar for quite some time, and controlled by the 'owner' of the name who felt it ok to completely cheapen the recordings for the 'numb and naive' fans. When Live Era was released, the 'nobody gives a shit about GNR' phase had already started (and continues to this day). If any sort of relevancy is desired, then Slash must be brought into the picture. The Axlites hate that this is true.

Has anyone ever answered the question of why LE was even released? Cash grab for Axl? Hypocrite?

But what a minute--I thought Axl was being pulled along and propped up by Slash, that the rest of the band only worked "in spite" of him?

Either he was this untalented guy who was riding the coattails of others', or he was this ambitious guy who wanted to take GN'R into the 21st century. Can't really have it both ways.

I never said Axl was untalented Miser those are your words...also never said he did not contribute but he did make things difficult to get done during the UYI years as all the other band members have said in numerous interviews..........your reading things that are not there trying to change he subject since I caught you making up a false alternate GnR history to fit your agenda.....try harder Miser as some of us are actually reading your propaganda and calling your bullshit............

Did he set them back anymore than Izzy not showing up to the studio for most of the sessions or Izzy, Duff and Steven arguing over whose contributions should take precedence did? Did he set them back anymore than Slash being fucked up or Steven being too fucked up to even play did?

Personally, I'm happy for the delays. If the UYIs had been released in 1989, they would've lacked many great songs written after 1989 like Estranged, Coma, etc, and also would've cemented them in history as being purely an '80s band and all of the negative feelings that go along with that. The delays allowed them to take what might've been a subpar 'sequel' to AFD and turn it into what are (IMO) their best albums.

I will give you one thing Miser you are very resiliant and fast on your feet by continually changing the subject after being caught bullshiting.............In any case I was simply responding to a poster who made Axl out to be some driving force which kept things moving which based on written history is just not the case.

Whether the delays Axl caused resulted in making UYI better is impossiible to prove but there is no denying there is some brilliant music on those albums and Axl had a big hand in creating it...Personally I would still love to hear the rough UYI demos without all of Axl's overdubbing Slash mentioned as being kick ass to compare to the finished products..... Then we would all have something interesting to debate!

He says in his book he doesn't have them anymore, or that they don't exist anymore. Something to that effect. Besides, the "rough UYI" was played on the Skin N' Bones tour, or at least that's how Slash makes it seem in his autobiography--that the Skin N' Bones tour version of the songs is the way HE wanted them.

I do think the delay made things better. A lot of the better songs were written in 1990. The big delay it seems was 1989. Slash writes in his book that he was worried they might break up due to a lack of activity and boredom that year. But I can understand Axl being hesitant. I mean, the aftershocks of going from being a nobody, a hick from Indiana, to one of the most popular singers in the world virtually overnight probably caught up with him that year. You have to remember--Slash was raised around rockstars, I mean David Bowie used to hang at his house as a kid. He was used to this sort of thing. Axl was a nobody who came from a tiny bumfuck town. It was probably incredibly overwhelming.

Mick Wall writes in his book that Axl tried to go incognito that year, growing a big red beard and wearing thick horn rimmed glasses to hide his identity--and I have seen pictures of him exactly like that, probably from that year. I think 1989 was basically a transitional year for all of them due to AFD becoming huge in '88.

Slash also writes that once Axl came out of his shell, things moved rather quickly--He actually felt like their recordings in 1990 were probably like what the Stones' recordings in the '70s were like--very "Family like" atmosphere. And 1990 had it's own problems too--They had to deal with Steven and the search for a drummer, which set them back, as well, plus Doug Goldstein set them up for the Rio gigs which Slash seems to imply none of them really felt ready to do, even though in retrospect it was a good thing.

Slash may not have them anymore but I am willing to bet they exist in the vaults somewhere as Axl had to have a copy to work on adding all his overdubs and I have to believe there is a safety copy somewhere...Personally I thought the Skin N Bones tour was one of the best of the UYI tours and I preferred the stripped down sound but they did not play all of the songs from UYI which is why I would love to hear all of the UYI songs stripped down to the 5 man group......If nothing else it would make for some fresh debates on the forum.............

It's possible that Axl has them, but we'll never know I guess.

He did imply he kept the '94-'96 rehersal tapes in his chats here, so I would imagine he probably keeps most Guns stuff.

I hope ALL of it--Everything the band recorded from '90-'97--finds it's way to the public someday.

BTW--We do have some of the rough UYI recordings. There's a rough version of Civil War, there's a rough version of Coma, there's a rough version of Don't Damned Me and several other songs. There's an early acoustic version of "Yesterdays" out there, and some others. Plus we have the Q Sound demos as well.

If Axl was a big enough dick to fuck with Live Era by shamelessly re-recording bits of it, then there's NO WAY he's letting demo and rehearsal tapes out - that is unless - he re-records those too.

That said, I would absolutely love to get demo's from post UYI up until '96. I think it's pretty clear that there is simply not enough GNR material accessible to the public. Not even a good live cd.

Axl really can do no right in your eyes. Every post of yours is either bashing Axl or his appearance.

Have you heard the actual shows which some of those instrumentals came from? For example, YCBM, Tokyo 1992 (which is where the Live Era version comes from), Axl's original vox sounds like shit; weak and strained. The re-recording on Live Era is better.

If it sounds like shit on the Live Era CD, then take it from another fucking concert. Don't re-record it 8 years later from your bunker in Malibu. Its a fucking joke and you know it.

Go to iTunes and check out the Pearl Jam section - there must be >50 live CD's from the soundboard which you can purchase.

Maybe less threads about Axl's moustache, more about the music?

When new music comes out, then perhaps a focus on the music. Supporting and half-touring the same album for the last 10 years is going to result in threads about his mustache, hairplugs, etc, etc.

Hey George check this out:

http://www.tmz.com/2...ns-n-rosario/2/

Looks like it's not Axl that needs the hair plugs

Anyway like indigo mentioned we could pull that card also. Get a grip dude.

Axl doesn't need hairplugs because he already got them - botched initially then fixed just before RIR '01. And regarding Slash's thinning hair - I am not denying or confirming he supplements his own hair, but at least it looks natural and didn't/doesn't look like the roadkill that was stapled to the front of Axl's head. Revisit the '98 mugshot and the incredibly thick braids he sported from '02 to '06. It was compounded by the botox and chemical peel which ultimately turned Axl into an Alien until he stopped his treatments, probably around '05 or so since he resumed some normality for the '06 "tour". Its fine for someone to want their hair back, but it was done so terribly wrong for Axl in the late 90's. Combine that with people here actually thinking he's had nothing done, and it's laughable.

He looks fairly normal now - but for a time it was frightening and everyone knows it. It is sad to not have seen the natural progression of Axl Rose from late 20's to late 40's.

Um, no.

If you look at his hair in 2000 with Gilby, it looks in between the '98 mugshot and RiR--A little longer than in '98 (because it was growing, the '98 arrest report describes it as "over ears") and about as thick, same as in 2001. Same as now, but now his hair is a bit thinner than in 2001.

His braids were not "incredibly thick." If I push my hair back--As the braids were, pushed back--it looks thicker than it would if I parted it as Axl had done in the '90s.

As to the botox and chemical peels, again, I've shown pictures from 1991 and 2001 where Axl looks the same but a little older. No chemical peels. No surgery.

No, not "everyone" knows it was "frightening." Unlike you, I have pictures which disprove all your theories. And I feel Axl has had nothing done outside of getting his teeth whitened. Besides, Axl always thought plastic surgery was freaky and laughable. He once mocked Vince Neil's plastic surgery, saying that Vince's face would probably cave in if Axl punched him.

Axl also said that all the UYI shows were "live, not memorex...this isn't a Motley Crue concert"...and here we see him in '09/'10 using horrendous backing tracks because the live performances can't replicate all the complication from the studio recording. So what he once mocked, he became.

ONLY teeth whitening??????? http://landonkeywest.com/axl_rose_after_plastic_surgery.jpg-762164.jpg

But what a minute--I thought Axl was being pulled along and propped up by Slash, that the rest of the band only worked "in spite" of him?

Either he was this untalented guy who was riding the coattails of others', or he was this ambitious guy who wanted to take GN'R into the 21st century. Can't really have it both ways.

I never said Axl was untalented Miser those are your words...also never said he did not contribute but he did make things difficult to get done during the UYI years as all the other band members have said in numerous interviews..........your reading things that are not there trying to change he subject since I caught you making up a false alternate GnR history to fit your agenda.....try harder Miser as some of us are actually reading your propaganda and calling your bullshit............

Did he set them back anymore than Izzy not showing up to the studio for most of the sessions or Izzy, Duff and Steven arguing over whose contributions should take precedence did? Did he set them back anymore than Slash being fucked up or Steven being too fucked up to even play did?

Personally, I'm happy for the delays. If the UYIs had been released in 1989, they would've lacked many great songs written after 1989 like Estranged, Coma, etc, and also would've cemented them in history as being purely an '80s band and all of the negative feelings that go along with that. The delays allowed them to take what might've been a subpar 'sequel' to AFD and turn it into what are (IMO) their best albums.

I will give you one thing Miser you are very resiliant and fast on your feet by continually changing the subject after being caught bullshiting.............In any case I was simply responding to a poster who made Axl out to be some driving force which kept things moving which based on written history is just not the case.

Whether the delays Axl caused resulted in making UYI better is impossiible to prove but there is no denying there is some brilliant music on those albums and Axl had a big hand in creating it...Personally I would still love to hear the rough UYI demos without all of Axl's overdubbing Slash mentioned as being kick ass to compare to the finished products..... Then we would all have something interesting to debate!

He says in his book he doesn't have them anymore, or that they don't exist anymore. Something to that effect. Besides, the "rough UYI" was played on the Skin N' Bones tour, or at least that's how Slash makes it seem in his autobiography--that the Skin N' Bones tour version of the songs is the way HE wanted them.

I do think the delay made things better. A lot of the better songs were written in 1990. The big delay it seems was 1989. Slash writes in his book that he was worried they might break up due to a lack of activity and boredom that year. But I can understand Axl being hesitant. I mean, the aftershocks of going from being a nobody, a hick from Indiana, to one of the most popular singers in the world virtually overnight probably caught up with him that year. You have to remember--Slash was raised around rockstars, I mean David Bowie used to hang at his house as a kid. He was used to this sort of thing. Axl was a nobody who came from a tiny bumfuck town. It was probably incredibly overwhelming.

Mick Wall writes in his book that Axl tried to go incognito that year, growing a big red beard and wearing thick horn rimmed glasses to hide his identity--and I have seen pictures of him exactly like that, probably from that year. I think 1989 was basically a transitional year for all of them due to AFD becoming huge in '88.

Slash also writes that once Axl came out of his shell, things moved rather quickly--He actually felt like their recordings in 1990 were probably like what the Stones' recordings in the '70s were like--very "Family like" atmosphere. And 1990 had it's own problems too--They had to deal with Steven and the search for a drummer, which set them back, as well, plus Doug Goldstein set them up for the Rio gigs which Slash seems to imply none of them really felt ready to do, even though in retrospect it was a good thing.

Slash may not have them anymore but I am willing to bet they exist in the vaults somewhere as Axl had to have a copy to work on adding all his overdubs and I have to believe there is a safety copy somewhere...Personally I thought the Skin N Bones tour was one of the best of the UYI tours and I preferred the stripped down sound but they did not play all of the songs from UYI which is why I would love to hear all of the UYI songs stripped down to the 5 man group......If nothing else it would make for some fresh debates on the forum.............

It's possible that Axl has them, but we'll never know I guess.

He did imply he kept the '94-'96 rehersal tapes in his chats here, so I would imagine he probably keeps most Guns stuff.

I hope ALL of it--Everything the band recorded from '90-'97--finds it's way to the public someday.

BTW--We do have some of the rough UYI recordings. There's a rough version of Civil War, there's a rough version of Coma, there's a rough version of Don't Damned Me and several other songs. There's an early acoustic version of "Yesterdays" out there, and some others. Plus we have the Q Sound demos as well.

If Axl was a big enough dick to fuck with Live Era by shamelessly re-recording bits of it, then there's NO WAY he's letting demo and rehearsal tapes out - that is unless - he re-records those too.

That said, I would absolutely love to get demo's from post UYI up until '96. I think it's pretty clear that there is simply not enough GNR material accessible to the public. Not even a good live cd.

Maybe less threads about Axl's moustache, more about the music?

When new music comes out, then perhaps a focus on the music. Supporting and half-touring the same album for the last 10 years is going to result in threads about his mustache, hairplugs, etc, etc.

Hey George check this out:

http://www.tmz.com/2...ns-n-rosario/2/

Looks like it's not Axl that needs the hair plugs

Anyway like indigo mentioned we could pull that card also. Get a grip dude.

Axl doesn't need hairplugs because he already got them - botched initially then fixed just before RIR '01. And regarding Slash's thinning hair - I am not denying or confirming he supplements his own hair, but at least it looks natural and didn't/doesn't look like the roadkill that was stapled to the front of Axl's head. Revisit the '98 mugshot and the incredibly thick braids he sported from '02 to '06. It was compounded by the botox and chemical peel which ultimately turned Axl into an Alien until he stopped his treatments, probably around '05 or so since he resumed some normality for the '06 "tour". Its fine for someone to want their hair back, but it was done so terribly wrong for Axl in the late 90's. Combine that with people here actually thinking he's had nothing done, and it's laughable.

He looks fairly normal now - but for a time it was frightening and everyone knows it. It is sad to not have seen the natural progression of Axl Rose from late 20's to late 40's.

Great version from maybe one of the best Guns bootlegs of all time:

Maybe less threads about Axl's moustache, more about the music?

When new music comes out, then perhaps a focus on the music. Supporting and half-touring the same album for the last 10 years is going to result in threads about his mustache, hairplugs, etc, etc.

Is it just me, or:

1) Is the band on fire this tour? I mean this tour has seemed tighter and livelier than even 06-07. Axl and the band sounds great and it seems like they're really having a good time.

and

2) The band actually LOOKS like a band. They look like 8 diverse, yet together personalities. Ron with his whole vagrant look--He looks like a biker. The beard is awesome on him IMO. Axl looks awesome for the first time in years. Richard looks like the lovechild of Izzy and Sean Penn. DJ looks awesome and very modern; Chris reminds me of Brian Jones for some reason; Tommy is still a Punk Rocker. Dizzy is Dizzy lol. And Frank looks cool too. They really look like an awesome, modern, 2010 Guns N' Roses.

Yes they look like a great cover band.