Draguns

2 hours ago, Tom2112 said:

This is a fair and reasonable point, they could use the tech available today.

My argument against is that 1. I'm a purist and don't want to hear robot music. I'm ok with some autotune here and there but the idea of AI enhanced Axl makes me nauseous. I'll take current day Axls attempt for better or for worse. 2. If Axl uses that tech to sound like a younger voiced version of himself, he paints himself into a corner of not being able to perform it live. 3. I'd have to imagine Slash would be seriously against this, he is a pure traditional rock guy and barely likes using pro tools. 

This idea is fine for deceased musicians to finish off demos like the Beatles etc. but Axl is still alive and fit to work. I think the point of the post is the reality of Axls vocal ability and the reality of performing live and that it's not going to get any easier so now is the time to release music and tour while he still can pull it off. I don't think he's going to be able to do jungle etc. in another few years. 

On topic. I would love to read an Axl book. 

I would not like to be the editor though🤣

Who's to say that GNR has to perform new songs in a live setting, though?! Don't Damn Me is one of the best songs ever  from GNR and it has never been performed live by GNR.  There's no rule stating that songs have to be performed at a concert. 

17 minutes ago, Avillart said:

 

Yes some made it a sport last summer to collect the bandaids he wears on his hands to keep the jewelry from slipping off his fingers. I also couldn't believe it at first but they proudly posted photos and told their stories how they supposedly got the bandaids from the security guys after the gigs and collected them. Every time one of them got one she posted it and got congrats from the others. 

That is very odd! 

3 minutes ago, Avillart said:

 

Well, Axl seems to be home🤷 One of the fans that collect his used bandaids stalked his house yesterday and posted a video and screenshots on FB. To me he doesn't even look like Axl, something is off there and other people say in the comments these pics must be from 2002 but some saw the video and say it's legit and it was indeed yesterday. 

Did I read that correctly??? A fan collects used Band- Aids?!  That sounds gross! 

6 hours ago, Free Bird said:

Anybody knows Dorothy? I’m not familiar with their/her songs but there’s a Slash guest appearance in the Troubadour on Gifts From The Holy Ghost. Not bad. I also like the studio version. Here’s the song with Slash

I don’t know the song she sings on Slash’s album either so I have no idea what to expect.

She has a fantastic  voice!!  I have  started to listen to her. 

I like the Dr. Feelgood album, but I would not want to see Motley Cru perform since they aren't performing live. I'm also doubting what Nikki Sixx is saying given the fact that Axl and Vince Neil never  publicly made up. Additionally, you have Crash Diet, which was about Vince killing the drummer of Hanoi Rocks. 

Wow! Not to change the subject, but some people really need to take business classes or learn somehow as to how a business  can be structured.  Even if you don't want to own a business, it's good knowledge to have for finding a job or maintaining your job. 

10 hours ago, allwaystired said:

I suppose my definition of an 'employee' is always someone who works for someone else.....so if they're not equal partners, they are employees really. That's the way I see it, in any business really. Probably not an accurate way of seeing it though, in the legal sense. 

I'd be amazed if it was a continuation of the 1992 agreement. Surely Slash/Duffs management could get them a better deal than that on their business negotiations? 

That's not how business works, though. My suggestion for you is to take business classes or do research. 

Here's a good example. Mike Bloomberg owns about 80% of Bloomberg LP. Bloomberg LP is a private company. Theoretically, Mike  is the ultimate decision maker. However,  there are several others who have shares that own a certain percentage of the company. These people do not have Mike as a boss. Mike formed a management committee to share the responsibility of decision making with the people who own the shares.  These people are their own bosses at the company. 

As @Blackstar mentions, we don't know how the  partnership is structured. We don't know if they went back to the 1992 partnership or something else with different percentages of ownership.  What we do know is that there was a 2017 filing in California showing that the three of them are partners in the  business entity of GNR. We also know that they were listed as partners in the lawsuit against the brewery. This confirms that Slash and Duff are not employees. They are in fact bosses. Partnerships in business does not mean that they are or can be equal partners.  They can have different percentages and structure decision making responsibilities differently. 

6 hours ago, ChrisW said:

At this point, I totally believe what they've said, that before some concert, Axl refused to go on stage unless Slash and Duff signed paperwork giving him complete ownership.  Doesn't matter if they could sue, they'd have to want to sue to make a difference, and they were just willing to walk away.

"He (Slash) has been 'OFFICIALLY and LEGALLY' outside of the Guns N' Roses Partnership since December 31, 1995." (Axl, 10/30/96)

If Slash and Duff have their co-ownership status back, they can release a new Guns'n'Roses song any time they want.  If Axl's the only one who can approve that, he's in charge and they're just employees.

A couple of years ago, @Blackstar and I did research. We both posted on this forum. The three of them are partners. I found a legal document in the California business registry that was filed in 2017. Just a bit of background on me, part of my previous job at Bloomberg was to search for legal filings pertaining to Private Equity and Venture Capital firms regarding partnerships and funds. So I know what I'm talking about.  Additionally, @Blackstar posted the lawsuit that they filed against the brewery as partners. 

I really wish people would research things before yapping on the Internet. 

5 minutes ago, jamillos said:

Why is why I literally said he doesn't owe us anything. You're confusing two different posters, mixing their posts together. Pay a bit more attention next time.  

Not confusing either one of you.  If you reread your post, you would see how you were contradicting yourself. On the one hand you were saying he doesn't owe the fans anything. On the other hand, you were using  the argument to say that Axl produced 19 songs.  It was a backhanded and sneaky way  to support Jim's argument. 

Anyway I have work to be done. Have a nice day!

6 hours ago, jamillos said:

Way to completely ignore what I said and just repeat your mantra, congrats. God forbid you'd try for a real dialogue here, i.e. trying to understand what and why the others are actually saying, which could lead to mutual enrichment and is one of the reasons people communicate. It's called a dialogue. Some people mistake this for two monologues being spat at each other, but no, that's not the same thing.

Over and out.

This is exactly why I had blocked you a long time ago. You are trying to make an argument when you really don't have any ground.  I heard exactly what you said. You were trying to equate new music with buying a ticket for a concert. The two  are totally separate.  Additionally, you were using the ticket  sales argument with saying that apologetics was produced. If anything, you didn't listen to what I was saying. In a backhanded way, you were trying to say that I was defending  Axl and not releasing new music.

I get the frustration of  not getting new music. I am disappointed as well. It is what it is though. If new music gets released then that that is great. If not then I'll just listen to songs by GNR and the solo efforts.  It is what it is.   With that being said, buying tickets for a concert or show does not mean that I am owed new songs. That argument is  illogical to say the least. 

1 hour ago, jamillos said:

No, not unless you take it out of the context and really strive not to be caught looking at things from the poster’s point of view for a split second. I mean, I definitely wouldn’t use the word "owe" in this context, especially not here, knowing what kind of reactions it will trigger... So yeah, this may be a bit unfortunate; however, if you try, I think you might see what he’s saying. 
And no matter how much apologetics will be produced here, the kinda disturbing fact remains that Axl’s released about 19 songs in the last 2 decades... and the last time these 3 guys put something new together was five US presidents ago, most of them with two terms. Think about it for a second. 
No, I don’t think Axl owes us anything. He just doesn’t, that I'm sure about. But I do get the... apathy. Not gonna use the word "frustration" here, as that would trigger a different bunch of we-never-sleepers with yet another batch of their repeated texts. 
So I get both sides, that’s my point I guess. 

As Stone Cold Steve Austin would say: What???

No matter the performer, the only obligation they have  to the customer that bought ticket(s) for a concert or show is to  perform at that place of venue. To say that an artist or band owes you new songs because you bought a ticket to a show, it's just ABSURD!!! The contract is the ticket for the performance. It's NOT a contract for new songs.  Wow!

The logic from here is really out there!!

8 hours ago, JimiRose said:

I still find it strange people say Axl really cares about getting these songs out there. it's 2024 and of the 32 done in 2006, 18 have been released officially. considering nearly all of those songs came from the 98/99 sessions we're talking 26 years later. I mean, did he even expect to live this long? he's 62. and he still hasn't released them. That doesn't smack of someone that gives a damn about these songs. maybe he did between 98-2008. but he hasn't given a damn since. 

I think it's much more, those are the songs he's got and his vocals for the most part are still amazing on them and he cannot be arsed to go through the whole writing recording releasing process again, even with slash and duff. Plus he can't sing in his most famous register anymore. I don't blame a guy in his 50s and 60s for not giving a damn anymore, but it's the tease to the fans and the promise of so much more. 

The worst thing is idiots here will say 'Axl don't owe you a thing' - well actually he kind of does. If he says he has songs to release that GnR fans will like, and I buy tickets to his show and invest in his product and brand etc, then yes he does owe me. He owes me those songs. That's not entitled. that's literally the transaction between musician and fans. And if he doesn't want to do that anymore, that is fine, just tell us. The 16 years since CD has been cruel on fans. So to justify it, people make out he's tinkering away and trying to give us the absolute best product possible coz he doesnt want to let us down. Then releases the 4 worst mix and mastered songs in the bands entire catalogue! I actually like all 4 songs, but they are dreadfully produced and do not smack of anyone spending any quality or caring time on them. 

This is a strange post. I don't get your logic in buying tickets and owing you songs. When you buy tickets for a concert, the band or solo artist owes you a performance. They don't owe you new songs. This post reeks of entitlement. 

I must say that I do miss the young Axl that was passionate and had the attitude of  victory or death. I'm happy for Axl being older and enjoying life much more now. He is in a better place mentally than back in the early 90s. 

I would say that Slash  was the big winner from the Oscars. I saw this morning how the media is still talking about Slash  performing at the Oscars.  

 

11 hours ago, Blackstar said:

Eric Carmen has passed away

https://www.cleveland.com/entertainment/2024/03/cleveland-native-eric-carmen-who-had-hits-with-raspberries-and-as-solo-artist-dies-at-age-74.html

 

I wonder if Axl tweets something, since he's been a big fan (and played Everything by Eric Carmen as an intro to November Rain in 1993)

 

Wow! I really like the song "Make Me Lose Control". It was such a great 80s tune. 

1 hour ago, OTHAFA said:

There is almost no chance a full-fledged new Guns record is ever released. The absolute best-case scenario you can hope for is that they decide to release an original (as in, completely new - not a rehash of any Chinese era song) track as part of a movie soundtrack or something. If someone writes a big enough check, I think that's a possibility somewhere down the road.

Is that the reason why we had NITL tour? I mean there was no chance of that happening. LMAO. 

I just read that Slash performed at  the Oscars. 

4 hours ago, Blackstar said:

I didn't expect anything more than a vague answer, but it was less vague than I would have thought.

That's an interesting response. They'll probably have something for next year since it'll be 40 years. 

45 minutes ago, evilfacelessturtle said:

Axl sang on Gilby's solo album. And so what if people consider it a GNR song? That would be pretty braindead considering it's clearly marketed as a Slash album. Nobody thinks Anxious Disease is a GNR song, so I doubt that would happen.

The two situations that you just described are completely different to Slash's solo album. The first being that it's Gilby. The casual fan didn't know who Gilby was back in the day.  A lot of casual fans mistaken Gilby for Izzy.  Gilby wasn't a GNR member. Regarding  Anxious Disease,  that was on West Arkeen's album.  As I said with Gilby, the casual fan didn't know who he was. I do remember  on the HTGTH website along with Jeff's (  first website dedicated to GNR back in 95), there were hardcore GNR fans who thought that Axl and Slash would reunite  when they collaborated on this song.

With that being said, I did read a rumor on Facebook that Metal Chestnut is a collaboration between  Axl and Slash. If it's that's great. If it's not that's cool too. However, the expectation that Axl will be on the album takes away from Slash. There's a reason why he didn't have GNR and SKMC members on the album. 

6 hours ago, AxlRoseCDII said:

No Axl is monumentally dissapointing. Guess those two are just never going to collaborate on a piece of new music for the rest of their lives? How hard would it have been for Axl to drag his lazy ass into a studio for one day to help out his friend who saved his entire band from playing bowling clubs?

Why would you expect Axl to be on a Slash solo album? If that happened then people would consider it to be a GNR song or album. It's not. Heck, Slash didn't  have Myles on a track. No offense, but it's a weird take. 

I noticed the tour for SMKC ends in April. Is Slash touring  behind the blues album? If so, for how long?

It seems like the tour for the blues album might be short. I'm curious as to when GNR will reconvene. I know there were rumors about a 40th anniversary tour starting next year. 

9 hours ago, Tom2112 said:

Absurd is the best only track that Slash seemed to get with, the other ones that seemed obvious for him have been a bit shit. Just unfortunate Absurd is ruined with that vocal 

I have to respectfully disagree.  The guitar  on Hard Skool for the Village leaks were a mess. The song  was clearly not ready to be released. Slash and Duff cleaned up that mess. Slash also did well with Perhaps. 

1 hour ago, Ratam said:

It "new old songs" that Slash to add his set seem an hint to Axl.

I was just thinking this. I wonder if playing these songs are hints to Axl. 

25 minutes ago, evilfacelessturtle said:

Quite a surprise, really. Slash never seemed to care for UYI that much. He'd mostly play AFD tunes with SMKC, until now.

I wonder if it's because of the UYI box set that came out. It could have propelled Slash to practice Don't Damn Me and Bad Apples on his own. 

In my opinion, this case will probably get dismissed. There's a legal precedent with Steven Tyler's case. 

9 hours ago, Scream of the Butterfly said:

Even if Sheila herself didn't use the word "rape", a lot of people recognized that was what she was describing even in 2016. Read the comments to the Daily Mail interview:

'He raped her then. Because that's what she's describing. No need to euphemize rape with "had sex with her."' (This comment has 332 upvotes, 31 downvotes.)

'Re: Axl Rose: Dear Daily Mail, Usually they call that scenario "rape", not "had sex".' (180 upvotes, 14 downvotes)

'I get tired of hearing about people who think saying "Sorry" after they have done something awful, makes it ok...' (286 upvotes, 30 downvotes)

'I'll never think of Axl Rose the same again.' (186 upvotes, 73 downvotes)

And so on. I think it's safe to say that the story did hurt his reputation and wasn't interpreted as a mere account of consensual sex by many/most readers. Also, Little Michelle has been accusing him of rape with that very word for years and he hasn't taken legal action against her either.

 

This story never affected Axl in 2016. The big stories at that time were the GNR reunion and Axl being the lead singer for AC/DC. Even my employer, Bloomberg LP, wrote articles about the reunion and Axl fronting AC/DC  at the time.

I never even heard about this story until this lawsuit and I work for a news company.