kyrie

classicrawker, on the US X SA thing I really don't know.

I mean... GNR played 13 concerts in Canada on small venues, and 15 in Latin America in big, sometime huge venues. So I don't know...

They just can't draw here anymore Manets. The last couple of U.S. tours many of the shows were half full so I don't blame Axl for touring where his fan base is as it is smart business.

In the U.S. just about every major city has a football and or Baseball stadium and at least one large indoor sports arena. They also have outdoor amphitheaters which hold 15K plus fans. Many small cities have indoor sports arenas and many big colleges have their own football stadiums and indoor arenas. I live 15 minutes from Worchester Mass, which is a small city and it even has a 15K sports arena but does not have a Major League sports team. I saw Guns there during the UYI tour..

For bands who are still popular here, like AC/DC, Metallica, U2, Bruce Springsteen etc., they could do 50 - 100 shows in large venues here in the U.S. alone and sell them out. No other part of the World can compete with the sheer volume of large venues and ticket sales here.

In the past Bruce Springsteen sold out 10 consecutive shows in old Giant Football Stadium at 50K tickets a show so he sold close to 500K tickets in a couple of weeks near NYC alone..What other country can complete with that?

It is not about whose fans are better, but for the big name bands the U.S. is where the big money is..The Stones have known this for years which is why they started their tours here in the U.S. as they make huge money here touring the Footbal Stadiums and indoor Arenas..........

To be fair - it's not only Guns that can't draw anymore. Alice Cooper/Rob Zombie were playing to half empty amphitheatres last summer. So was Megadeth/Slayer. STP, with a new album, wasn't even selling upper deck tickets. Guns would easily outdraw those. And I'm talking major markets. Last year was the worst year for concerts in ages. Read some of the industry trades on the topic - tours were cancelling shows left right and center.

The American economy is in the dumps. People do not have the money for shows at the prices today's gigs cost. GN'R puts on a very expensive show to produce (remember even the Illusions tour barely broke even). This is likely playing a large part in why you haven't seen the band out yet.

What shows have been announced this year? Rammstein is playing a 10 date limited North American tour. Major markets only.

A Perfect Circle is doing a tour, not a very big one, and since they haven't toured in ages, they'll get some notice, but they're also doing several festival gigs on that tour route ensuring they'll do decent business.

Foo Fighters is touring, with a new album - we'll see how that goes.

Motley Crue made hypocrites of themselves and are touring with Poison - it will sell tickets for nostalgia reasons only.

Korn are touring with Disturbed - not selling all that well (at least the date here, well, Guns outdrew them with no major support act)

You claim Metallica can sell out 100 shows but they didn't sell out every show on their last tour in the U.S., and they're still pretty huge.

What else is even announced for this year in the rock world? Bands are very wary of the US market right now. There's more money to be made in Europe and elsewhere. All this talk that "America has the most arenas" means shit when you can't fill them because people are broke. Europe has an amazing transportation system, which is why you saw the band tour there - they've got lots of arenas as well and if you really get down to it, the countries are just geographically smaller than America, but add them all up and it's pretty even. Then Canada, who were toured likely because the economy is in better shape than the US, and South America where the band is huge.

Really what Guns should do this summer, if they don't do the US (and don't get me wrong, I hope they do) is go over to Germany, Ukraine, Poland, and the other European nations they missed last year and do some gigs as a warm up before Rio.

In any case the days of America being the first choice for shows are coming to an end. It's just economics.

how do we know the zodiac killer wasn't just writing gibberish?

Because some of his letters were deciphered - just not all of them.

Remember this tweet?:

"Don't know when the next Rock In Rio is or where it will be but it sounds like fun to me. Fingers crossed."

Before Rock In Rio was announced.

So, this could be about GN'R. Or not. Gives us something you yammer about at least

Why not play some "TSI"? too, I would trade in Brownstone anyday just to hear them do Ain't it Fun or Since I Don't Have You. Hell doing Oh My God or Sympathy would be kickass too.

They've done Down on the Farm a few times, but if they do that they risk getting "too many covers" complaints.

Hmm just found cheaper flights, think I might keep an eye on this one

$877 round trip from TO

$815 round trip from Buffalo

hehe just a little further down for me and I will jump on it

That's not bad actually...

If I was a cat.

That made me lol.

It has nothing to do with royalties, you can play whatever you want at a live show.

Logically it makes sense he avoids most of that album because at 10 minutes each, Coma and Estranged are snoozers to a live crowd (especially when you already have a 10 minute song in the set in NR).

Civil War is like 8 minutes, and is a tough vocal to do on a nightly basis. I suspect it gets skipped for the same reason TWAT gets skipped in that it is vocally demanding and he has to pick and choose in that regard.

Don't Cry is the only one I am surprised he really doesn't play, and maybe he has some personal reason for not wanting to play it.

Everything else from that album that isn't played right now never gained huge mainstream attention, so if given a choice it makes more sense to play something popular from Appetite or a CD song.

Those long songs are momentum killers though, and when you couple NR with all the solos adding yet another 8-10 minute song to the set would make the concert flow that much worse than it already is in some parts.

It's one of the best songs GN'R ever composed. I think that he wants to forget the UYI records for some reason.

I don't know if it's just me but he just doesn't seem that happy when he plays UYI stuff. Specially NR.

The old band barely ever played Coma live. I love that song, but it's not surprising they don't do it. Long, hard to do and do well, tough on the vocal cords...

If it was you who suggested losing Brownstone, I could go for that. Keep It's So Easy though.

But see, I think we just uncovered why more doesn't get played - I mean even a small number of us are having a hard time coming to a consensus. Everyone's got their favorites and Axl is balancing what he likes, with what he was most involved in (I'm sure he sees some songs as being more "old band"), and what the fans want, and that includes hardcore fans and the general public. Not an easy gig. But then as they've gone along they're added stuff like Used to Love Her, Down on the Farm, Nice Boys, Whole Lotta Rosie - and in six times seeing this band I only got to hear Used to Love Her out of those four. I haven't had the chance to hear Don't Cry live yet either. I'd love to hear the others. Then again, I've heard There Was a Time and Catcher in the Rye live, and I wouldn't give those up for anything.

I don't agree about November Rain. I mean maybe some nights but I watching him laughing and playing the piano with his foot, seemed happy to me.

I'm sure there's some songs he just doesn't want to play, and maybe others that'll come up eventually.

At first it seems like Dont Cry was not going to be played, but then Ron started playing Dont Cry alone and then in later concerts Axl joined him.

Do you think it is because of Ron we got Dont Cry in 2010?

If Ron or DJ played parts from estranged or Civil War do you think Axl would join him on the next tour?

Why wont Axl play allot of UYI material? If it is because it brings him bad memories you would think sweet child and November Rain would bring back allot of old memories to him as also...

Just asking...

Ron and the fans, perhaps. Don't Cry was probably the most requested song.

However I think too much time is spent worrying over this.

You Could Be Mine, November Rain, and Don't Cry were the three biggest hits from those albums. Yes, fans would like Civil War and Estranged and Yesterdays but as someone else pointed out - at what cost? Drop a CD song (which was written with members on stage like Tommy, Dizzy, Chris) for a song written by guys not around anymore?

Perfect Crime popped up on a setlist once as an alternate so I think we will see another UYI song or two in future, just like they broke out Nice Boys again, and Down on the Farm. As of 2010 anyhow this lineup had a really good library and the ability to throw in a rarer song, or a cover (Whole Lotta Rosie, Sonic Reducer) to keep things fresh.

But i just think it's simply stupid not to play songs from UIY.

Let's face it: they play 4 or 5 songs from a Double Album wich has 15 songs, respectively.

I'd rather hear The Gaden or Dead Horse instead of a You Could be Mine or Live N Let Die.

Me too, but - there are a lot of casual fans who would say otherwise.

And actually, not You Could Be Mine. I love that song live. I could do without Live and Let Die, but it was a pretty big hit for them so I can see why they keep it in.

At first it seems like Dont Cry was not going to be played, but then Ron started playing Dont Cry alone and then in later concerts Axl joined him.

Do you think it is because of Ron we got Dont Cry in 2010?

If Ron or DJ played parts from estranged or Civil War do you think Axl would join him on the next tour?

Why wont Axl play allot of UYI material? If it is because it brings him bad memories you would think sweet child and November Rain would bring back allot of old memories to him as also...

Just asking...

Ron and the fans, perhaps. Don't Cry was probably the most requested song.

However I think too much time is spent worrying over this.

You Could Be Mine, November Rain, and Don't Cry were the three biggest hits from those albums. Yes, fans would like Civil War and Estranged and Yesterdays but as someone else pointed out - at what cost? Drop a CD song (which was written with members on stage like Tommy, Dizzy, Chris) for a song written by guys not around anymore?

Perfect Crime popped up on a setlist once as an alternate so I think we will see another UYI song or two in future, just like they broke out Nice Boys again, and Down on the Farm. As of 2010 anyhow this lineup had a really good library and the ability to throw in a rarer song, or a cover (Whole Lotta Rosie, Sonic Reducer) to keep things fresh.

4 albums worth of material?! Baz said he heard about 3 albums worth and Axl played even that down. The plot thickens.

I think Axl may have been downplaying it because people tend to think that means there'll be three albums released. Three albums worth of material, but don't expect every single one of those songs to be release. Bands discard songs they don't like all the time.

So be it 3 or 4, it might only be 1 or 2 more albums at the end of the day.

New material making its debut would be great even if it's just one song.

Still, even if they play a setlist of mostly CD/AFD stuff and a few UYI tunes... the simple history of the event (headlining in 1991, 2001, and 2011) is just awesome.

Also - it'll just be Axl and Dizzy who have done all three. Tommy and Chris will have done 2001 and 2011. Paul was playing, not Richard, in 2001. Brain not Frank on Drums, and Buckethead/Finck instead of Ron/DJ.

No new album for this band. Still cashing in on songs from over 25 years ago.

Twat. And Slash/Black Eyed Peas weren't doing the same by using Sweet Child O' Mine during the Superbowl?

'cept Slash/Black Eyed Peas never say, "this is guns n roses." they don't try to insult the public's intelligence.

Slash cashes in contantly on GN'R, insulting the public's intelligence on a regular basis. You telling me Fergie flubbing Paradise City with Cypruss Hill yammering in it isn't an insult? Slash popping out with a lit up top hat like a sideshow act at the Superbowl isn't an insult? Trying to keep his name in the news by bringing up the band all the time (again this week), or name-dropping the flavour of the month (Justin Bieber, I'll take the kid to a strip club!) isn't an insult? It's TMZ level tiedium. It makes me embarassed for the guy. It makes me think Axl was right about him. And I love him, as a guitarist, but he needs to shut up and play.

Like him or not Axl has shunned the press, avoided gimmicks, and done little more than finally get an album out, have a vault full of songs, tour, get drunk, get into a couple confrontations - rock star shit. You know, like rock stars are supposed to?

Not chaperone Justin Bieber to his first titty show, or offer to. Not spend weeks on end talking about the "hunt for a new singer" to keep interest up. Imagine Axl giving daily press updates on the search for a new guitarist when they selected DJ?

You may not like that he calls it Guns N' Roses but he isn't a whore for the money or the spotlight. He's simply sticking to his vision for what the band could have been.

Axl owns the rights to the name (hell it's based in part on his name and Tracii Guns) and that's life. If you're still not over the name, well you're just living in the past.

Not sure why the prospect of 1 show featuring the same setlist we've gotten for the past year excites people.

Now if they were doing RIR in support of the next album, and not a continuation of the never-ending Chinese Democracy tour, that would be a different story.

Same setlist or not, it's the history this band has with Rock In Rio. I believe that would make them the first three-time headliner? Or if not, one of the few. They also always seem to pull off awesome shows there, the 2001 gig was excellent.

Also, lets face it:

Guns N' Roses, Rock In Rio 2, 1991

Guns N' Roses, Rock In Rio 3, 2001

Guns N' Roses, Rock In Rio 4, 2011

Thirty years apart and you can't see why that's cool? Btw I've labeled them 2/3/4 because the Madrid/Lisboa shows were named separately (see Wikipedia).

As much as I'd love a new album, they definitely should do this show!

No new album for this band. Still cashing in on songs from over 25 years ago.

Has it been that long since Chinese Democracy already?

Twat. And Slash/Black Eyed Peas weren't doing the same by using Sweet Child O' Mine during the Superbowl?

This has been rumoured a while now, hope it's legit!

Just my two cents, but it's one thing to license a song for a Harley Davidson commercial (and not be in it yourself). It's another to actually be IN a VW commercial. One of those is a bit more "sell-out-esque" than the other. And Harley does have a Rock N' Roll image.

Slash's own lawsuit against Axl showed one of his complaints was that Axl wouldn't license songs to a lot of movies and other works Slash wanted to turn a buck on. I'm fine with him doing whatever he wants for money, but he did sell out long ago. Then again most bands these days have. Axl is one of the last guys in the business who is *very* picky about licensing music and images. Tool would be another (then again they have a whole song on their ideas about "selling out").

HAHAHA IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT YOU THINK! It doesn't amtter what you think about the agreement, the thing is, THERE WAS A DEAL, and Activision did not respect it.

Its an ass deal. Lets hope the judge see's it that way.

It makes sense when an artist is not happy when they are shown playing someone else's music, which is possible during GHIII. But moaning because an artist is shown playing there own music is plain fucking stupid, deal or no deal.

Actually the original poster was right - it really doesn't matter what you think. A broken contract is a broken contract (agreement, deal, whatever you wish to call it).

Further, this isn't all about Slash in the end. It's not like Axl said "take out Slash and put in the new band."

It was: no one's going to be in the game associated with the song. Use the song, but no imagery past or present to go with it. Which is fair. The media continues to call Slash "Guns N' Roses Guitarist" 9 times out of 10, forgetting the word "Former." It's perfectly understandable that Axl does not want to continue that association, as he owns the rights to the name, the band is active with another lineup, and Slash *chose* to quit the band in 1996.

Imagine, as a business owner, lets say an animation business, Disney. And you have this great artist, and he leaves, goes to Dreamworks, but he's still getting his name out in conjunction with Disney. Now, it's one thing to be paid royalties for past work, but it's another to get a new cheque for promoting a new product that uses that past work, even if you were part of that team originally. It makes it look like said artist is still with Disney, and all the while you're like "he doesn't work here anymore."

This would be so much different if Axl said "fuck Slash put me in the game" or Richard or Ron or Finck or Bucket or DJ (ok the long list of guitarists is amusing, should I add Gilby?) - but he didn't.

Slash makes a ton of money off the Guns N' Roses name. You don't see Axl trying to make money off Slash. I see people complain about how "People think Slash is still in the band, they show up at shows and expect him" - those accusations have been made on this forum. Yet when Axl tries to do what he can to make it clear that the association with Slash is long over, people get mad at him.

It's pretty clear that most of the people here have chosen sides, and those sides are *not* based on the reality of this lawsuit, which is that Activision, if it violated the agreement, was wrong to do so, whatever you think of that agreement.

didn't Stinton have to state the obvious. Axl's already said there were plans. Something, someone could be blocking the way.

If the GNR/Azoff issue hasn't been settled in or out of court, it would prob. get in the way of a North America tour. That's the question people should be asking the GNR org, but that wouldn't stop GNR from working in the studio or releasing music, or touring elsewhere. Also those private gigs wouldn't be affected.

If Azoff were to be seen as interfering/blocking a potential tour, he'd play right into the hands of Axl's lawyers. Plus the LiveNation deal was under intense scrutiny from anti-trust lawyers and the DOJ. I don't think Azoff is that stupid. Remember, Guns played LiveNation venues in Canada and Europe, and used TicketMaster at least for Canadian dates. It's the same company.

You know with yet another thread dragging up lateness again I couldn't help but be amused:

http://www.torontosun.com/entertainment/columnists/jane_stevenson/2011/03/04/17490181.html

Gaga in tears after Winnipeg girl duet

Lady Gaga's never-ending Monster Ball Tour got a sweet-sounding Canadian pick-me-up in the form of 10-year-old Winnipeg singer Maria Aragon on Thursday night at the Air Canada Centre.

Especially since her Ladyship started the show an hour and 10 minutes later than scheduled in front of a sold-out crowd that alternated between chanting, "Gaga! Gaga!" and booing, while they cooled their heels.

If this was Guns there'd be more headlines and crying on the boards, but because it's Lady Gaga, it's a brief mention in an otherwise positive article... as someone who goes to multiple shows per year, I experience waits all the time. Not every band is on 15 minutes after the opener and I've often waited an hour or more between sets. Why are we not over this already?

There are a lot of problems with that article. Chronological ones, and sources on some of the information.

Honestly anyone who reads these boards on a regular basis could have done a better job.

So any of you guys in the states who have Pointfest, you getting GNR played on the sponsoring station? They are doing it pretty regular here, right before they hype up the festival. They never play GNR, not even on shuffle. And festival is at the same place where the St. Louis riot was. We just had the pigeon incidence with Kings of Leon last year--lol Yeah Axl ain't going to stand for that shit either. I'd never believe it was possible but the line up gets announced on the 25th.

That could be interesting...

I've seen radio stations pull that before (suddenly start playing an artist because they're headlining a local show, an artist they wouldn't play otherwise but the radio station is a sponsor) so maybe there's something to it.

Festival gigs could be interesting...

do you want vintage guns or more like a chinese sound? or maybe they can make an album that will change rock forever.....again

First up, this is actually a pretty decent question, a lot of speculation threads are lame but the sound... maybe it's just because I had a GN'R mix going on my iPod today, but certain songs mixed in perfectly, and others stood out.

There Was A Time and The Blues mixed in with Estranged and Locamotive perfectly - whereas Shackler's Revenge really stood out. Catcher in the Rye fit right in despite its obvious Beatles influence - it's a really, really good Guns N' Roses song.

So, I'd like more of those. Lose the "electronic" edge. I'm cool with darker, heavier, I really want to hear Soul Monster. I'm less interested in heavily Buckethead influenced stuff. I like Bucket but I think his style is rather jarring when put together with Guns. Now, when his style was a bit more traditional - he still does that well.

So yeah... a Chinese edge, as in the more Illusions-esque Chinese stuff, and I'd love for the current lineup to record at some point.

Perhaps we could just let it play out instead of manufacturing animosity and contreversy?

I have no idea why Jarmo isn't letting that interview be posted on HTGTH but at this point I don't really care since it's been posted everywhere else anyway.

Well he performed on UYI although doesn't have writing credits. He does for CD however, plus whatever he gets from GN'R as a member, cuts of touring, etc. Plus the solo stuff he does.

As someone who used to work in a media related field, I am fairly used to seeing these types of letters from celebrities. The way the band went about it here leads to me to believe whatever MSL had was in fact fake. Otherwise, I'm not sure what legal ground they'd have to stand on telling people they can't print that stuff. If it was fake and he was attempting to slander the band, I don't blame them one bit for telling people not to print it. As you can see, very few media outlets did anyways for this very reason. Metal Sludge I think is the only one that did.

If I were still working in media, I'd have never printed this stuff or put it on my website. There is no way to prove it's real, even MSL can't promise you it's real if he indeed got the info the way he claims. I also laughed at his notion that Classic Rock or any other magazine was willing to pay him money for this. First of all you don't pay someone for information that isn't 100% exclusive. Since he claimed the info was emailed to him, who's to say it wasn't emailed to others out there? And then there's the problem of proving it's legit, which would be impossible.

So I don't blame you for taking it down, Eric. Thats what I'd have done. I also don't blame GNR for being mad. Especially if this guy is a fake or if he was attempting to extort them like he said was. Glad it's over.

I came on here to say something very similar, and you beat me to it in very plain English. I hope a lot of people pay attention to this post. Legal intervention doesn't mean MSL was legit. Slander is a major issue and like therealdoofey said, only Metal Sludge bothered to run with this story - and that's a site that hates Axl which is run by a washed up 80s rocker with jealousy issues. Ron specifically denied the stuff about DJ and I fully believe him, which means at least some of what MSL claimed was garbage.

Hopefully we can all move on to being fans of the band again, instead of watching a sideshow.