invisible_rose

16 hours ago, AtlasShrugged said:

I think, as always, with GN'R, it could have been better.

Understood the initial silence and mystique but they could have branded themselves in such a strong way after that. New music, proper interviews and promotion, more interesting ways of touring. Instead it's just petered out. 

Maybe two years in was the way to do it. World tours, we're back.. then onto stage two. 

They're clearly now a legacy act but not even playing the role of that particularly well.

Totally agree. Another round of stadiums, one per country, generally, is pretty frustrating. I appreciate their age and the need to get around the world. But they’ve done the same thing 3 times now. I suspect they’re gonna milk it as many times as possible then disappear with one last retirement tour.

18 hours ago, PatrickS77 said:

But with the likes of Beyonce it's less jarring. Prices just went up gradually tour after tour, but with GNR everyone of the alumni and "GNR" itself had decent prices in the years between '93 and '16 and we all kept them afloat, supporting their various prices. Then they get back together and boom, we have to pay ticketprices 3 times as high, than what they were before. That too me is the most annoying thing. There was no need to jack up prices like that. It should be enough for them that instead of arenas they now can play stadiums again a make more money per show. There was no need to also raise the fee they are getting on top of that. And no, it's not just Ticketmaster that is to blame for this. All the prices start with what the artist is getting. If an artist is making 3 mio per show, that dictates what ticketprices will be.

 Ticketmaster are absolutely to blame for much of it. Are you aware of the Platinum Artist policy?

In terms of GNR jacking prices - they’re charging pretty much the same as any other band. Def Leppard & Motley Crue are charging even more. At the end of the day, a partially reformed GNR is a bigger pull than Axl & Friends for the vast majority of people/fans - so the price reflects that. This isn’t a specific GNR issue. This is an industry issue IMO.

Ticket prices everywhere are disgraceful. 

2 hours ago, PatrickS77 said:

TICKET PRICES

Sadly, that's a universal thing across most bands/artists the size of Guns. I managed to get Beyonce tickets for my better half and her sisters, £300 each! Ticketbastard are the real bent fuckers in all this. The artists and management are just complicit. It stinks. 

For me, the worst thing is very much Axl's voice. 10yrs too late. How many times can we say that about Axl's career - everything was late. Slash hasn't really covered himself in glory either. I just hope Oasis sort their shit out before they get too old.

1 hour ago, Shacklermyrye said:

21 minutes ago, JasmineSwe said:

Yup, exactly what I had in mind. Kind of a Black Friday in the US chaos 😁

Just you two fighting it out then?

18 hours ago, Spiritual_Chaos said:

This was a very, very cool look. Better than the ageing rockstar clinging on to his 20s & 30s that we have now.  I suppose the 2006 look doesn't really marry up with the nostalgia act which GNR currently is.

1 hour ago, Trin9498 said:

His relationship with Beta and TB. It’s his de-facto family. If he’s happy with them, Godspeed. 

100% this. Regardless of what any of us think about TB's ability to manage the band, those guys have been there for Axl through thick and thin and he's always been protective over them.

Axl gets a lot of shit for being a volatile character, but it is only seemingly when he's crossed. Until that point, he's clearly a very loyal friend.  

On 1/5/2023 at 12:08 PM, SoulMonster said:

Why do you think Duff and Slash has barely wanted anything to do with Steven then in all these years? Never have they chosen Steven as the drummer for any of their many projects, all he got was one track on one of Slash's solo records.

I will tell you why: Because Steven has been an unreliable fucked up addict. And that's the main reason why he was kicked out of the band and why he isn't in the band today.

Totally agree. Someone above mentioned "a sober Steven". Sadly, a sober Steven is a Steven that's probably about to relapse.

11 hours ago, -W.A.R- said:

I'm pretty sure he was told that but Axl was being Axl.

Yeah, imagine trying to warn Axl or tell him about anything, especially in the 90s, and expect him to listen to you.

Really, if GNR was going to be what they were/are, all the 'mistakes' needed to happen - otherwise we wouldn't have the music and that band that the legacy now provides. 

On 1/1/2023 at 8:44 PM, Gordon Comstock said:

 

There was millions of dollars on the table for years before the reunion happened.

The huge payday from Coachella was a factor, but the bottom line is Slash and Duff came back because Axl needed replacement musicians.

Residency at Vegas vs the 3rd highest grossing tour of all time...

On 12/29/2022 at 1:48 PM, allwaystired said:

If Izzy had been there, I'm sure he wouldn't be now. 

I agree. And to be perfectly frank, I can imagine that was one of the big reasons Axl, Slash & Duff had no interest in giving Izzy a share in GNR. Axl has been dealing with that situation for years, he wasn't about to walk back in to another potential complication having got Slash & Duff back.

47 minutes ago, We love Axl Rose said:

https://blabbermouth.net/news/tommy-stinson-i-wasnt-intending-to-quit-guns-n-roses

Former GUNS N' ROSES bassist Tommy Stinson spoke to Rolling Stone about his 2014 departure from the band, which happened after his marriage "went fuckin' south in a bad, bad way" forcing him to become a "fuckin' full-time dad — and happily a full-time dad."

"I wasn't intending to quit GUNS N' ROSES," he said. "But I had to tell them, I think, five times in a row my situation at home was so screwed up I couldn't tour. I hope that was the thing that pushed the reunion [with Slash and Duff McKagan] to happen, because I know all those guys and they're having a ball. I saw the tour twice. I'm glad for them."

That's some ego there, Tommy. I'm sure the lure of millions and millions and millions of dollars was what pushed the reunion. Not an interchangeable bassist bailing. 

On 12/16/2022 at 5:48 PM, allwaystired said:

But we all HAVE seen it.....quite a few times. And it's the same thing, more expensive each time and not as good each time. 

Money only goes so far and a lot of us are big music fans in general and want to see different or fresh things, even though GNR are our favourite band. 

This is the exact situation I'm in and these are my views entirely. Guns aren't the only band to do it, but I'm sick of having to travel to London, to either have shit seats or pay obscene prices, then to dump a load of cash on travel & accommodation, to see the same thing as last time, but this time spend more. There's only so many times I'm going to do that. The sooner people stop being prepared to be ripped off and start boycotting shows, the more these bands will put back fair pricing and actually tour like bands are supposed to.

3 hours ago, BangoSkank said:

I really don't mean to sound naïve, but is $93 million really that much for a tour this scope? An international tour, with private jets, big staffs, tons of crew, the record company, Axl, Slash, & Duff getting guarantees, the rest of the band, the promoter...

I know they're not hurting for money, and that is obviously a ton of money to me, but I really wonder how much there is to go around when you consider everything listed above.

It's only 27 shows though and I'd imagine the figure is based purely on ticket sales. You then have merch etc on top. I'd love to see a full breakdown of the accounts though, purely out of interest to see how many people have fingers in the pie. 

I feel I need apologise for my divorce comment - it was tongue in cheek, but somehow it was taken seriously 

On 12/10/2022 at 5:46 PM, allwaystired said:

In a world where Ticketmaster can do 'variable pricing' there's pretty much nothing illegal about selling the same tickets at different prices. Ticket sellers can do what the hell they like these days. 

Amen to that. 

With Slash's divorce payments to Perla, there's no way he's leaving this money train again.

Sadly, and I never thought I'd say this, but I have absolutely zero desire to go back to London to see them again - especially in another large/stadium type setting. 

If they put a UK tour on the back of it and play some other venues, I could be tempted, but I'm not dropping about £1k for me and my partner to travel to London to see the same rehashed show. It would appear I'm done - and that makes me sad.

6 minutes ago, allwaystired said:

People tell me this quite often! I think because I'm very passionate about music and it takes up all my free time and money, I sometimes don't realise it isn't that important to a lot of people (even though everyone says how much they love music). 

I did look in Primark recently actually....they seem to have moved on from 'accesorize with an iconic rock band' shirts to a massive selection of American football/basketball team shirts and hoodies. Which explains why so many people in my city are wandering around with 'LA Lakers' and 'Chicago Bulls' stuff on.

That's even weirder really- wandering around with the merch of a sports team you not even don't support but don't even know the rules of the game they play! 

I think that's exactly it - you've hit the nail on the head.

43 minutes ago, allwaystired said:

Oh undoubtedly that's the big earner now, hence why they do that and not much else. 

I've always thought of GNR to be the biggest band in the world to have so few fans. It's quite amazing really- I heard people at the NITL shows, right at the front saying Estranged must be a 'new one' and having never listened to UYI, let alone CD. Yet they're there, head to toe in merch, having paid a lot for a ticket. 

They just don't seem to have the fanbase other bands do....yet can still shift tickets relatively well. 

I think you'd probably be surprised how many people go to gigs because they have either too many money and just want an evening out or they wanna post videos on Insta and tell everyone they saw <insert cool band name here>. You only have the look at how many metal bands have t-shirts in Primark, for example. I don't think it's unique to GNR tbh. I think you'd have the same at a Metallica gig, especially if it was somewhere such as London where the cost of a ticket compared to income isn't so huge (to some).

1 hour ago, DoMw94 said:

Of course they will. The Rolling Stones refused to allow the first half of their set to be broadcast. Glastonbury/the BBC obliged.

And before you say "yeah, but that's The Rolling Stones", it's the festival that asks the acts to come – if the act says it doesn't want it broadcast, there's a good chance something will be worked out in the band's favour

Dude, the BBC puts the main acts out live each year. I just don't see Glastgo agreeing to forego the BBC coverage of the headliner to get GNR. 

2 hours ago, Rovim said:

I mentioned the Spur stadium incident and Axl's apology from the stage to demonstrate that he cares about the quality of his performance. Not sure exactly what your point is, what is there to worry about for Axl as a fan? even in his prime there were shows where he struggled and even some where he could barely sing.

I get that there are new vocal limitations cause he's older now, but this is not his first rodeo. I think it will be fine, even if it will end up being a vocally weaker show.

I think the big difference between showing up with a sore throat in the 80/90s is that it won't get coverage around the world, and all over Social Media and on terrestrial TV live, like Mickey turning up to one of largest festivals in the UK in the 2020's will. That's where my concern comes - not necessarily for Axl per se, but more the legacy of my favourite band, I suppose. Perhaps I'm acutely aware of the coverage Glastonbury has, the kind of people who tend to go and the press around it, more so than RIR for example. Dunno, just seems like a high risk, low reward show for me. Hopefully I'm wrong!

3 hours ago, Rovim said:

we know Axl cares cause he slept at the venue at Spurs stadium and apologized to the crowd for the condition of his voice. but I think it's supposed to be the other way around in this genre of music. It's not an opera concert and Axl seems to be doing whatever he can to deliver so bottom line let them mock imo. 

That's because he had a genuine issue though, not because he just can't hit certain notes or sing with rasp anymore. Very different set of circumstances. Glastonbury won't take any shit about Axl dictating what can and can't be used for TV. For me, that's the only real issue I can foresee. The guy is more than capable of running to schedule these days, so that's a big box ticked. In terms of Axl's voice - we all know where it is and most of us have come to accept it. I'm not sure most of the pop/glamping crowd that goes to Glasto, or even watches on TV, will be though. Personally, I don't see it ending well, and I only worry for Axl as a fan, but he's a big boy and I'm sure will be water off a ducks back should they chose to play and Mickey rocks up.

On 10/31/2022 at 5:11 PM, Nice Boy said:

What exactly is it that a vocal coach can tell someone who has been singing for 50 years? 
 

Genuine question 

I'd suggest minimal. Besides, I don't buy the whole theory of Axl not using a vocal coach and doing the required warm ups etc. I think he does everything he can, but just isn't capable of what he once was. He now probably finds the falsetto comfortable, and prefers performing this way. Not only that, it's the only way he'll get through a show, let alone a full tour.

The only thing a different vocal coach, who has worked with a lot of older performers, could offer is how to get the best out of this current voice - and chances are, Axl already is. Axl simply isn't capable any more. He might be able to smash out a single or two, or add some backing vocals to tracks, but performing a full show live or recording a full, brand new album - no chance.  It's done and gone. 

Milk the tour, get the CDII stuff out and anything from the early 90s with vocals, and wrap it up. 

1 hour ago, We love Axl Rose said:

At least we now that this was sarcastic as fuck. I was indifferent about Tommy. Seemed like a genuine guy, but I wasn't really a 'fan' as such. Not like I was of Bucket, Brain and Freese. They were superb musicians.  

But I have to say, these quotes got me. He clearly despised DJ and thought he was a really fucking average guitarist - and that's something I can totally get onboard with. Bravo Tommy, bravo.

1 hour ago, tsinindy said:

No, it's the exact opposite of the same thing. 

You're being pedantic and as I said, you're missing the point entirely. 

1 hour ago, tsinindy said:

Brian didn't say Axl did a great job...he said he was told he did a great job.  How could he say he did a great job when he never watched or heard him perform with the band lol. 

 

Way to miss the point. It wasn't supposed to be a literal quote, I was paraphrasing, but ultimately it's the same thing, isn't it?