WhenYou'reTalkinToYourself

37 minutes ago, RONIN said:

So where's this great album then? What have they accomplished as a band since Izzy left? Nothing.

Since Izzy left they are touring (with a big 23 years lasting break).

1 hour ago, RONIN said:

Well, they haven't done much as a band since Izzy quit so it remains to be seen what they are truly capable of doing as far as new songs go. Their inability to release shit only proves the theory further that this band cannot truly work without the four principals together. 

I'm not sure that the reason behind the lack of a new album is their inabilty or their (Axl's) unwillingness. I believe it's the latter.

My objection was that it cannot be seen as a FACT that they cannot release a good album without Izzy, as stated earlier in this thread.

My opinion is that if they can write Coma or Estranged without Izzy, then they surely can put out a great album.

Unless Slash cannot write any new music after World On Fire and Axl has lost his ability to write good lyrics and melodies. Or he cannot be inspired by Slash's playing any more.

1 hour ago, RONIN said:

Of course they're all individually capable of writing a good song, but Guns N' Roses is Axl, Izzy, Duff and Slash. Remove one person out and the songs will be of a lower quality imho. The magic comes from them all collaborating. If you're purely an Axl fan or Slash fan, you may see things differently I suppose.

If I had to chose between a new album with Izzy or an album without him, the answer is obvious.

On the other hand, I don't consider Estranged, NR and most of the non-Izzy songs to be of a lower quality.

Most of them may not be on the AFD level, but we won't get another AFD even if Izzy and Steven return.

59 minutes ago, RONIN said:

Theoretically, yes. But again, we don't know how involved Izzy (or Duff) were in these "Axl" and "Slash" songs on Use your Illusion. As mentioned before, they wrote AFD, Lies and most of UYI as a band.

True, but the same could be said for the Izzy songs. 

1 hour ago, RONIN said:

They could not overcome this in the 90's and broke up for 20 years. Hence, the importance of Izzy to the songwriting formula for Guns N Roses.

It's a bit stretched to say that they broke up because they couldn't write new songs imo.

I think the real reason was that they tried (or believed that the others tried) to take the control of the band.

Izzy was there when all the drama started to escalate and he couldn't do anything to prevent the worst.

13 minutes ago, Free Bird said:

The only way SCOM is related to Axl are the lyrics and SCOM is way more than lyrics

And who was the one who insisted on creating SCOM? Slash who hated it?

1 minute ago, Darkenchantress said:

Where did i call Patience an Izzy song? I put it as an example of a GnR ballad that I think is better than NR, I don't care who wrote it. I'd like it the same if it had been written by Axl alone (as long as it sounded the same, of course) But as I said, the same way Axl wrote SCOM for Erin, it is known Izzy wrote Patience for Angela, so is very likely he is the main songwriter of that particular song. Probably the whole band or at least, Izzy and Axl had a hand in both songs, which is only logical, but as SCOM is known as an Axl's song, the same could be said about Izzy and Patience.

Patience was an example of a song that is widely considered to be an Izzy song. I could have used PTU or DTJ instead.

My point remains: is Izzy the so called main songwriter of the band (he and Axl) or did they all had an input in everything?

Are there Izzy songs, Axl songs, Slash songs or there are all team songs?

If there are songs that we have to consider them as Izzy songs, then there are non-Izzy songs as well (I mentioned them before) and they would constitute a great album.

So the 3 can make a great album without Izzy.

4 minutes ago, Darkenchantress said:

Nop, sorry. Izzy was still in the UYI's, of course he didn't write every song but he was a part of the band that recorded the album and probably had a hand in every song anyway, so UYI's is a GnR album with Izzy. What happened after he left was a cover album and CD that is as GnR as Izzy and the Juju's or Velvet Revolver (well, actually VR was more GnR than those who released CD anyway. ). So, as I said in my post "so far" they didn't prove they can make a decent album without him and believe me, I'd be happy if they proved me wrong.

And btw, Slash in his bio says that Locomotive was a song that he and Izzy started to write together. Maybe Slash's mind is messed, maybe the credits are messed too. We will never know.

If you believe that Izzy helped in the creation of Coma, Estranged, Dead Horse, NR, Civil War etc as much as to be considered his songs as well,

then OK, but we'll have to accept that ALL of them had a hand in every song. So why do you call Patience an Izzy song for example?

If Patience is an Izzy song, then Civil War or NR are not. Sorry. You can't have it all. 

13 hours ago, RONIN said:

And that's just like, your opinion man. I actually think his lyrics are very rock n' roll and lacking any of the heavy handed pretensions of some of Axl's stuff. Civil War's lyrics to me are a bit sophomoric and heavy handed.

We don't need to diminish one person's contributions to make the other look better. I think Izzy and Axl are overall great songwriters. Yes, I even like what Axl did with Chinese Democracy (for the most part). They both complement each other well which is what the author of the article brings attention to. They balance each other out.

Also - here's the other thing, every member brings their influence to the songs. An Izzy song, by itself, would sound like a stones song. Slash's stuff would go more in an Aerosmith or metal direction. Duff brings his punk influences to the equation. That's what Guns is. You can't remove one of these elements out and expect the final result to "sound" like Guns N' Roses.

That's why the idea of having Fortus on an album or Gilby was and is preposterous. And to make matters worse, Izzy was Axl's main songwriting partner in the band. You're missing one half of the team essentially and that's really the point of this article.

So, Civil War has sophomoric lyrics but Pretty Tied Up (which I listen to all the time btw) is a masterpiece with cohesive lyrics.

Anyway, of course Izzy was a vital part in Guns and is (was) a super songwriter. I love most of his songs.

My point was that the other 3 are fully capable of writing great songs as well.

I don't need to wait to see what they are able to to do without Izzy.

I've seen it on the UYIs, so no, it's not a fact that they cannot release a decent album without Izzy as @Darkenchantress said.

And it would be amazing if they could make a new album with songs like Coma, Locomotive and the others.

After all, I became a fan after hearing Estranged... the second that the Slash's first solo kicked in I was a fan.

(It would be even more amazing if they had Izzy with them of course. I didn't say anything about Fortus or Gilby. They can't replace Izzy in the songwriting part.)

Just now, Sosso said:

I know it's OT but I prefer the original version of Look at your Game, Girl.

I don't like it either way 

4 minutes ago, bucketfoot said:

Can't remember The Who covering any GN'R songs. Enlighten Me?

Well, GN'R (unfortunately) have a tendency to do covers, that doesn't mean anything...

They even covered Charles Manson, so what?

42 minutes ago, RONIN said:

A band is a collaborative effort. Guns N' Roses used to be like that back in the day. 

They all probably contributed in their own small way to each song, but as Izzy has mentioned in the past, he would write a song and the band would proceed to add/subtract to it. But the substratum of the song is from Izzy. He's the foundation of a lot of GnR's songs.

Use your Illusion is a tricky affair because the song crediting system became notoriously complicated. Locomotive for example was written by Slash but we have no idea if Izzy contributed to it or not -- the song was written when Slash crashed at Izzy's house in 1990 iirc. There have been rumors that a lot of tracks had contributions from Duff and Steven which were not included in the final credit listing. Izzy as well. Whether this is true or not is anyone's guess.

To come back to the point, I'm assuming an "Izzy" song is one he wrote or co-wrote. If that's the definition we're going by, then Izzy contributing a little riff or flourish to Locomotive would not give him any writing credit for that song. As far as your argument that Dust N' Bones was weaker than the other efforts, that's all fine and dandy but all those songs are again, collaborative efforts. November Rain wouldn't be half the song it is without Slash. And yet, I can't really listen to Slash's solo albums much. Meh. 

Point being, what you're saying goes both ways. An Izzy solo song isn't all that great perhaps. But neither is an Axl solo song or a Slash solo song. Time and the critical/commercial consensus has proven that point. 

I would say that an Izzy song is a song that Izzy wrote by himself or at least the other members' input was minimal.

The same goes with the Axl songs. All the other songs are a joint effort. Neither Izzy's nor Axl's solely.

I don't disagree that Izzy wrote the skeleton of a big portion of the GNR catalogue,

but on the other hand, one could say that the additions made by the others were very significant, since Izzy wrote rather simple stuff.

Even Slash has said that Axl always knew how to take a simple Izzy structure and convert it into a great song.

And also imo the lyrics and the melody of a song are as important as the music.

So I consider Coma and Locomotive Slash and Axl songs for example, even though they originated from Slash.

The solo is also very important as you said, but that goes for the Izzy songs as well. For example, DTJ is an Izzy-Slash song for me. I don't go by the credits.

Izzy had one of the most basic parts in the songwriting, but even without him they wrote great songs.

Axl was a better lyricist and wrote far more musically versatile and deeper songs.

We aren't talking about Axl or Slash or Duff solo albums, since they are together the 3 of them now.

I think that they were (are?) fully capable of making a great album without Izzy, considering all the non-Izzy songs on the Illusions.

2 minutes ago, Darkenchantress said:

Of course it's a matter of taste. I'm a fan of simple things and I get tired easily of such long pompous songs.  November rain especially, I only like the last part, I'd take Patience any day over it as the big GnR ballad.

It's a matter of taste indeed and I really like most of the 'simple' songs / rockers, however the others usually carry a lot more emotions, so they are actually deeper.

Patience was co-written by Izzy and Axl, so let's leave it out of the equation. Tell me an Izzy-exclusive song that can objectively face NR or Estranged in that aspect.

Regarding the lyrics, I don't think Izzy could write a Civil War or a Locomotive. You may prefer DTJ for example, but could you seriously claim that it has better lyrics than those two?

The same thing again and again...

At first, the article lists the songs written or co-written by Izzy and then lists the songs that Izzy didn't contribute, and compares them.

So, the songs co-written by Izzy are Izzy songs.

Why don't they make a list with the songs written exclusively by Izzy and then a list with the songs that Axl wrote or co-wrote? And see then which album would be more 'solid'?

Dust N' Bones is a great song, but Civil War, November Rain, Estranged, Locomotive and Coma beat hands down anything Izzy wrote by himself (imo).

Just now, Silent Jay said:

It was about AC/DC

I'm joking...

1 minute ago, killuridols said:

I don't know about that....

Axl is very jealous and maybe he thought "things" of Scott. But that we'll never know...

Scott went overboard with his response because probably Slash told him he never said that and that Axl made it up, so he must have believed Slash.

This and also the fact that the VR guys believed that Slash was going to rejoin GN'R at that point.

Well, the good thing is that Axl and Weiland nearly became friends later when Scott finally was able to understand Axl. 

Everyone has made Axl out to be this horrendously crazy person, this bad guy, and I don't know him very well at all. He and I for whatever reason got almost tricked into this little media spat for a moment because one of our band members happened to run into him and said that he said something. So, my point being that having been in a band with Velvet Revolver now for five and a half years, I'm not quite so sure that it was all Axl's fault.

32 minutes ago, BorderlineCrazy said:

Steven wished for peace of mind.

32 minutes ago, BorderlineCrazy said:

Another case of Steven making shit up 

Well, maybe.

Just now, killuridols said:

If he wanted to target Slash, he could have said a lot of things without mentioning the rest of band.

But he added that paragraph as some sort of "gossip". It didn't really add anything but provocation.

Weiland could have not responded to that but it was his right to respond because he was dragged in by Axl's statement.

Had Axl not mentioned his name at all, there would have been no room for Weiland to step in.

That's what you get when you open a can of worms.

OK. My initial point was that I don't think that Axl had anything personal against Weiland. And Weiland went overboard with his response. It was a really big can of worms. 

1 minute ago, killuridols said:

We don't know if those Slash words are true or made up by Axl. Either way, it was never his place to get involved in another band's problems so by dragging Scott in, he asked for what he got in return.

I think it's clear that Axl was targeting Slash and not Weiland, Sorum or Duff.

I would say that it was neither Weiland's place to get involved in the Axl-Slash feud.

3 minutes ago, killuridols said:

Bullshit.

Axl issued an statement where he claimed Slash called Weiland "a fraud". That was the shot that made Scott reply back with all those hilarious comments about Axl's looks.

True but,

4 minutes ago, killuridols said:

he claimed Slash called Weiland "a fraud".

So Axl was saying what Slash (supposedly) said. He never expressed his opinion on Weiland as far as I know.

3 minutes ago, killuridols said:

It is weird all people Axl has feuds with end up dying

Bruce Dickinson and James Hetfield for 2017? 

(Axl didn't have any feud with Weiland. Weiland had with Axl.)

2 minutes ago, Top-Hatted One said:

You know what else is funny? The notion that Steven is erratic and cant be counted on. And that there is too much money on the line to be messing around. Meanwhile Axl keeps getting stuck in traffic knowingly. The other guys don't get stuck in traffic. You know why? Because they get their by 4pm and earlier for lunch and soundcheck. 

If you are familiar with Slash and Duff's history they don't like sitting around past start time as the crowd grows anxious waiting for their singer to show up. They like to honor their commitment. Especially when multi-millions are at stake. Was one of their major issue with Axl back in the day and again with Scott Weiland.

Go figure

Well, if Axl is unreliable they can always throw him out like Adler. (sarcasm)

Fuck Slither, can Axl sing Locomotive, Dead Horse, Perfect Crime, Don't Damn Me or The Garden?

If he had to sing a VR song I would prefer Fall to Pieces.

3 hours ago, Modano09 said:

I think they just don't want to talk about the personal issues/relationships within the band publicly. During that Axl/Duff interview, when Axl's asked if he felt everyone had to change over the years to make the reunion work today Duff jumps in to answer it and starts talking about Chinese Democracy. Whatever was said between Axl/Slash/Duff to make amends (or at least agree to appear so publicly) isn't something they want to talk about.

Yes, I agree that this is mostly the case.

And even though I would like to know what exactly did they say to each other, I think its better that they keep it to themselves at least for the time being.

And most importantly, if everything was running smoothly with this band, then it wouldn't be Guns N' Roses. 

1 hour ago, Archtop said:

I think Stevens has been played, the band and management must have known that as soon as rumours of a regrouping/rehash/reunion (whatever), got going the first person to shoot their mouth off would be Steven if he wasn't censored.

I don't know how much damage Steven potentially could have caused by stating from the start that he and Izzy were not in on the initial talks, and that Fortus and Frank would be playing with Axl, Duff and Slash. I am sure nobody was willing to take the risk. A lot of money was riding on those first shows being successful, didn't Coachella want the exclusive reveal that Axl and Slash would be sharing the stage? It was all marketed ambiguously nobody came straight out and said "reunion" but it wasn't made clear Izzy and Steven were not involved either. Instead Izzy did that on Twitter and guess what; Steven who was most likely to do an exposé was kept quiet because he was under contract, believing he would get to play his songs.

So why give him the dates he did play? I think Steven realised he had been duped and a potential law suit wouldn't keep him quiet, it's not in his nature.(I love him for that). So to keep image intact ahead of rolling out a world tour he gets a phone call two days ahead of being asked to play. How bad could it be? Added bonus, It now looks like there might be 4/5 of the original line up playing at future shows.

I know I am being very cynical, and please go ahead and debunk my theory- it would make me feel heaps better, but I have no explanations for why Steven was asked to sign that contract if they didn't really want his involvement, other than to exert some control over him.

1. Didn't we know from the beginning that Duff will be in the band? If Stradlin and Adler were to have a big role in the shows, we would have learned it from the very first announcement. It would be extremely dumb to have the AFD5 and not market it as such. But there was no Steven or Izzy in any vid they published.
2. If they wanted only to silence Adler and that was the only reason for getting him at those shows, then his injury would have been the perfect opportunity for them to get rid of him once and for all (he had already signed the contract).
3. You say "So why give him the dates he did play? I think Steven realised he had been duped and a potential law suit wouldn't keep him quiet". But everyone knew that Izzy and Steven was out by the time Steven did his first show. Cincinnati was the 13th show of the tour (and of course Izzy had already made that tweet). So what would they have to lose? They even got him to play in Argentina.
4. The decision to not give any interviews applied to all of them and not only to Steven. Maybe to avoid akward situations.
5. The NITL tour has proven that the casual fans (who are the big majority of the crowd at each show) care mainly for Axl and Slash (and Duff maybe)...

3 minutes ago, Top-Hatted One said:

It's really sad and must be excruciatingly difficult for him after doing everything right and keeping  quiet for over a year. Being a good soldier only to be undercutted last minute. After practicing for over a year. Think about that for a minute. So dirty!

Adler said that Slash and Duff contacted him on 2/1/2016, so who had told him to practice for over a year and be quiet?

In fact he did that interview with Eddie Trunk back in September 2015. He was quiet for a year (2016) because he was on contract (and having his guest spots).

He probably had learned from a third party that an Axl and Slash reunion was in the works, so he decided by himself to start practising. Nobody asked him to do so...

53 minutes ago, bigpoop said:

The point of the Troubadour is what is symbolizes. The history of Guns n Roses. Going back to where it all started. Nothing to do with the '93 lineup' or whatever.

Do you think the average person that heard that did the math in their head and instantly thought of this bit with the 93 lineup? Do you think the average person even knows what the 93 lineup was without looking it up?  Of course not.  They hear that and think, "Wow. Guns n Roses got back together. This is a really big deal. I can tell by the way this guy's shouting 23 years!"

Anyone who says they weren't hyping this as a Guns n Roses reunion is either lying, just playing some kind of word game, or such  an extreme Axl loyalist that they can't think straight. Just because they never explicitly said it doesn't mean that's not what they were selling.

 

And just because I know someone's gonna come back and say it's my own fault for expecting...blah blah...I didn't. I didn't expect it.  I'm not saying I felt personally deceived or that I expected a full reunion. I'm saying that's what they were selling.  If  people can't see the distinction I don't  know what to say.

 

The reason I didn't really expect it is I follow this stuff enough to know not to.  Most people don't.  Most people don't look at boards like this or follow bands on twitter etc. They just hear/see advertising and go Wow! Guns n Roses!  Not "oh this is probably GnR '93, augmented by Richard Fortus and Frank Ferrer of Nu-Guns fame. Great."

But the average person cares only for Axl, Slash and the hits.

Or do you think that after all those months the concert-goers still believe that they're gona see the full classic lineup?

Of course the whole marketing could have been better / more accurate,

but on the other hand they were showing vids with only the 3, so I don't agree that they sold this as a full reunion.

1 hour ago, Jane M. said:

1. He doesn't want to. 

2. He doesn't need to.

3. The idea was to have the 5 originals playing (with the extras) like in the good old days. 

4. If he ever feels like doing shows on his own, he has 11 albums to choose music from. 

Maybe he doesn't want to tour? Maybe when they told him about touring the world doing 100+ stadium shows with a huge production he backed down?

Maybe when they told him that he will have to take his share of the responsibilities of the tour he said to them that "I'm not in your partnership, I just want to have my share of the loot"?

I could speculate all day and all night long, but I prefer to say that I don't know what happened and I want to hear the other side of the story as well.

Sometimes I think that if Duff was out of this and it was only Axl+Slash celebrating their personal reconciliation nobody in here would be so pissed off as now.