Jw224

11 minutes ago, cremefraiche said:

In my opinion it looks like a mixture of really wanting to impress Angus, shutting the AC/DC fans up, and staying true to the style of AC/DC songs, and on the flipside preserving his voice with GNR, the fact that a lot of studio GNR recordings actually feature very little rasp, and it seems like people are impressed/happy with what he's giving them with GNR - why try any harder? 

I think the acca dacca shows are definitely evidence that he still has that voice, and always has, it's just up to him how and when he utilises it. Sounds like it fucking hurts a lot of the time tbh i.e Hell's Bells, Back in Black etc.

Yeah I was thinking it must hurt too, but he's been doing it show after show with AC/DC without letting up. 

12 minutes ago, GNR 1991 said:

The way you worded this contradicts itself. You say he achieved the same vocal nadir as in the 90s, then pose the question whether he still has that or not, so it's confusing.

We know he can still pull out the chainsaw rasp and solid mid range that we thought was unthinkable in 2011-14 (w/ very few exceptions). He sounds to be in more control than in years past, except for the really high parts in the DC set where his voice sometimes cracks. Basically, we have the best Axl vocals this year in at least 10 years, and on par w/ his all-time performances for sure. And I'm only talking about his stuff w/ AC/DC.

Yeah I could have worded it better  I guess I should have said do we think it's just these little moments and he isn't actually able to this consistently. It's only a few times I've noticed he sounds exactly like he used to. 

I just thought I'd make this thread so we could all discuss this. At a recent AC/DC show Axl did something with his voice that sounded exactly like he sounded in the 90's, not similar, exactly the same. Do we think it's a case of "Ok, I could use rasp™ all the time, but that will definitely ruin my voice, I've got advice from a vocal coach and this is just how things are". Or do we think it's just that he doesn't have that voice at all anymore? 

Axl's voice doesn't suit queen Queen at all. He's terrible at it. Apart from that one tribute concert performance. Every other time I've heard him sing Queen it made me cringe. 

Yeah I would very much like this to be played. One of my favourites on CD. 

Until pitman returns this isn't a real reunion to me. 

He certainly does like to tweet stuff them delete it 

6 minutes ago, Slash787 said:

I like Steven, so I want them both to be there. 

I'm in same the boat, would be great to have them all back, however unlikely that may be. 

3 minutes ago, Jane M. said:

That's very disrespectful to the current hybrid cash grab nostalgia lineup.

Shame on you.

I have to ask, would it still be the same cash grab nostalgia line up if Izzy was back but Steven wasn't? Or is it just because Izzy isn't in the band? Just curious. 

2 minutes ago, Slash787 said:

So will I be kicked out if I wear this tshirt?

Axl will jump off stage and crush you with his massive beer belly. 

I'm just saying how the band is run and the business side of things are very relevant to the situation we now find ourselves in with Izzy, to just dismiss it is ignorant and shows that some people just want Izzy to somehow magically be back in the band, that isn't how it works unfortunately. Pretending that the business side doesn't exist, or not caring about it, is stupid Imo. One needs to understand the business side to understand what's going on with Izzy and why he may not be in the band again. I do hope they can work something out as it would be good to see them on stage again. 

6 hours ago, DieselDaisy said:

I'm not interested in any of this shit. It is all business and money and branding and ''Axl's version'' of what Guns is which is in effect the ''partnership'' (none of the others wanted the partnership). When Guns were formed and Appetite was released it was five equals.

Just because you're not interested in it doesn't mean it isn't reality. Guns is run as a business and has been for a long while. I agree, I wish it was just a band, with them all getting equal, but just because that's what I wish doesn't mean I can just ignore the current reality and how things actually are. Just because you don't care doesn't make it irrelevant. It's very much relevant actually. 

3 minutes ago, sanity_lost said:

One of my favorite things about this thread is that we don't even really know what Izzy was referencing in his tweet. It may have been his fees for showing up on stage with the band as everyone is assuming here, but that may not necessarily be the case. If the rumor of him showing up to the venue are true (and I don't know that I believe them) then it is also possible that he was perfectly fine with what they were going to give him to show up, but was unhappy to suddenly find out that he was not going to get a percentage of merchandise sales for the show and was insulted and pissed of that hadn't been disclosed and the reply/fall out from that. 

 

 

Yeah it really could be anything at this point, we know nothing, really. 

4 minutes ago, marunic said:

After listening to a lot of 2006, i can't help but feel 2006 Axl was a treat to hear and dare i say better then himself in the 90s. In the 90s, I feel he added way too much rasp to every song, while some songs sounded sick with the extra rasp some didn't make sense (sweet child). I've been listening to so much 2006 Axl that i don't even remember him being this good. The power and cleanness in his voice in the KOHD clip is actually amazing. I love 90s Axl but 2006 is above the 90s. Its a shame his voice sounds like a mix of madonna and an average british grandma nowadays.

Axl Ranking:

1) 80s
2) 2006
3)90s/2010

 

 

 

bonus points for anyone who can tell me where to get that jacket from in KOHD rock am ring

I really love his voice in 2006, although it did sound forced and painful at times. Also, to the bolded 

4 minutes ago, 1418Music said:

I'll work on my comedy routine in future.

Just like to say I think the music I've heard so far rocks 

3 minutes ago, Slash787 said:

If he wanted to make money, he would have done solo shows, done interviews for money. 

He wants to have a peaceful life, he does what he likes.

When it comes to GNR, many of you are pointing out that Izzy is greedy, he is NOT. He had started the band with his friends, now when they are back, why shouldn't he get the equal amount? So this pissed him off. 

You know like that everyone is greedy. Axl, Duff and Slash are way more greedy. 

He got paid all sorts a few times to show at concerts with Axl so I don't see how he isn't motivated by money. If he wasn't he would have came when Axl asked him or not at all. I'm not trying to say that Axl and Co aren't motivated by money, but there's a theme going on that Izzy somehow isn't? 

6 minutes ago, Juliette said:

Izzy was there for the BIG money Axl gave him, not for loyalty.  Izzy´s motivation is the $$$$$$$$, takes first place for what have shown. Now Axl is in another positiion, has to share with Slash and Duff.

Adler would perform a guest spot for free, that´s the difference with Izzy.

 

 

I have to say, I really have no opinion on Izzy one way or the other but the posts and examples given in this thread have really given me the impression he is primarily motivated by money. Which is fine if that's what he likes, he can't be expected to get the short end of the stick compared to the others. Although I do think there's more going on, if he wanted to be a full time member again, for instance, opens up whole new realms of discussion and legal procedures that could cause some disagreements. 

7 minutes ago, ZoSoRose said:

3 minutes ago, Silent Jay said:

Izzy is gone, long live Chinese Democracy

???

16 minutes ago, liers said:

He was probably never offered a full time gig because Fortus was still on board, and since he was only going to be part time he probably wasn't going to be paid as much as the full time members. Same situation as Adler.

Yeah that's probably it. Makes sense. 

1 minute ago, Estranged Reality said:

My gut instinct is that Izzy isn't exactly the most transparent guy in the world, and I think it's probably a little bit of a one-sided view of things. I'm sure there's more to the story. 

I'm sure a lot of people here will believe it straight away because it's Izzy saying it and it's what they want to hear, but yes I agree with you. 

Well if that's true it's what a lot of people here have thought for a while. 

4 hours ago, stephenchesneymusic said:

Hey, this is not GNR. Just me and some friends! I have a couple of songs I've been working on for fun! i will release it next year or not haha

preview
https://mega.nz/#!KUwxjSKQ!xqRxabTpwEgTJHMez7QxmIQM3Pp-K_uZzbGZsJpuL6Q

Very cool stuff man

Am I the only one thinking what Axl could do in a studio setting if he can do this live with AC/DC? New music is needed sooner rather than later me thinks lol. 

1 minute ago, Slash787 said:

The music is not "fake"

Its just a random musicians making music and as they like GNR, they are trying to sound like GNR.

I don't blame them, that Axl FA Club should be blamed for spreading lies.  

I'm pretty sure you knew exactly what I meant by "fake", as in not GNR, the validity of these tracks as GNR or not had been being discussed for the past 10 pages, so I don't know why you felt the need to specify that. Yes I agree, I think the music sounds pretty good honestly, and would like to hear more if it comes to fruition. 

So, the consensus then is that these are fake? I honestly thought they could be real at first but once you think about all the things that aren't right about it, it just doesn't add up. I mean, it doesn't sound like Axl as we know him right now. I do think we could pull vocals like that off in a studio setting,  as I said earlier, but I doubt they'd release it on some random guys instagram.