Do you think Nu Guns will eventually become a band that can stand on their own?

[Cosmo]

They are about to headline a major festival. And then are touring the US. All this without a new album.

They are doing these things on the back of the old band's material. I wish more than anyone that Axl would release CD II and take another shot at the fortune and fame, but I don't think he wants to do it. The record company obviously isn't going to support him, so he would have to self promote; which he's still got a big enough name that he could do that, however he doesn't seem to have the eye of the tiger anymore.

UMG may be a pain to deal with but why assume they won't relish making money off of GNR? UMG is into $$$ and GNR is a marketable asset. The previous lineup was done in 1996,I hardly think they are "doing it on the back of the old band"

I said that they were doing it on the back of the old band's material. Do you think most people are buying tickets to hear Axl sing Chinese Democracy or Sorry?

UMG knows that they can make way more money off an album by a GNR that includes Slash, so they aren't going to go out of their way to promote another New GNR album. Axl himself would have to take the bull by the horns when it comes to marketing, and I don't think he can be bothered.

My guess is, the majority will show up to see Axl. Some will be there as they are the types that simply go to gigs, whatever the gig. Few will be there to see what they believe is a great new band. I bet there's some dumb asses who to turn in the belief Slash, Duff, Izzy will be on stage

I think the dumb asses who expect Slash, Duff & Co. probably don't know their names, maybe just Slash... not a GnR fan, just there for the hype... but you can expect anything...

[sailaway]

They are about to headline a major festival. And then are touring the US. All this without a new album.

They are doing these things on the back of the old band's material. I wish more than anyone that Axl would release CD II and take another shot at the fortune and fame, but I don't think he wants to do it. The record company obviously isn't going to support him, so he would have to self promote; which he's still got a big enough name that he could do that, however he doesn't seem to have the eye of the tiger anymore.

UMG may be a pain to deal with but why assume they won't relish making money off of GNR? UMG is into $$$ and GNR is a marketable asset. The previous lineup was done in 1996,I hardly think they are "doing it on the back of the old band"

I said that they were doing it on the back of the old band's material. Do you think most people are buying tickets to hear Axl sing Chinese Democracy or Sorry?

UMG knows that they can make way more money off an album by a GNR that includes Slash, so they aren't going to go out of their way to promote another New GNR album. Axl himself would have to take the bull by the horns when it comes to marketing, and I don't think he can be bothered.

Speculation.No fact.

[sailaway]

Do you think Nu Guns will eventually become a band that can stand on their own?

**I am a stupid cupcake;Just Ignore my post**

NO!

YES! Guns N' Roses are headlining RIR and touring,you haven't heard?

NO! They will still be remembered as second best and just a bunch of replacements. All the touring is doing is making Axl (although I see nothing wrong with it) more money. If he was interested in making a name with his replacements and a band that could stand on their on merits he would have called it something besides GNR! Axl hides and when he comes out lives on his past. Sorry Axl but it is the truth.

But that is only the truth to you - I don't feel that way at all.

I've got no problem with Axl using the name. He created it, before slash was in the band.

To me it isn't a competition against the old band.

When Matt came on, it wasn't a competition again adler. When Gilby played, I didn't compare him against Izzy.

I don't care about the name. The music doesn't change if it is by GnR or axls ball sacks. You are Hung up on the name, whereas I could not care less about it.

Your Hung up on replacement players.....that doesn't interest me. I judge each album by the music. Not by who played on it. Was it Izzy? Gilby? Robin? Dj? For me it is about the song......some of u guys are too focused on the name or who played on the song.

When I go see GnR this month it will be to enjoy 2 hours of rock music. I won't spend 1 second comparing the band on stage to any other incarnation of GnR.

My thoughts exactly. Also Ron,Dizzy,Richard,Frank,Chris,and DJ are very proficient musicians,the band has a good chemistry. I will enjoy seeing GNR live again,am excited for the future but I tend to live in the minute.

Nice post Groghan,as usual.

[sailaway]

Do you think Nu Guns will eventually become a band that can stand on their own?

**I am a stupid cupcake;Just Ignore my post**

NO!

YES! Guns N' Roses are headlining RIR and touring,you haven't heard?

NO! They will still be remembered as second best and just a bunch of replacements. All the touring is doing is making Axl (although I see nothing wrong with it) more money. If he was interested in making a name with his replacements and a band that could stand on their on merits he would have called it something besides GNR! Axl hides and when he comes out lives on his past. Sorry Axl but it is the truth.

It is this type post that contributes nothing worthwhile :sleeper:

Your right your post contributed nothing to the conversation yet you felt the need to respond....

Sleeper on the other hand was expressing his opinion even if you don't agree with it.............

Why do you subject yourself to such misery mate? HTGTH forum is calling your name.............

I have an account there already.

An opinion is one thing but to come here daily only to expess hate on a fan forum is ridiculous and not appreciated.

Guns N' Roses is touring,I'm excited and optimistic that won't change.

A lot of people here are attending shows,and RIR is coming up quickly.There is not another band I'd rather see.

[Snowmass]

Who are "nuguns"?

I agree, 'Nuguns" or whatever is a lame ass term. It's 'NEW' not 'NU'. I just see 'NU' being used and thought that's what the kids on here use, so I used it. Glad i'm not alone in the thinking that it's retarded.

Edited September 22, 2011 by Snowmass

[star]

..they can stand on their own already. Give it some time, and then the zimmer frames might emerge

[Bobbo]

Do you think Nu Guns will eventually become a band that can stand on their own?

**I am a stupid cupcake;Just Ignore my post**

NO!

YES! Guns N' Roses are headlining RIR and touring,you haven't heard?

NO! They will still be remembered as second best and just a bunch of replacements. All the touring is doing is making Axl (although I see nothing wrong with it) more money. If he was interested in making a name with his replacements and a band that could stand on their on merits he would have called it something besides GNR! Axl hides and when he comes out lives on his past. Sorry Axl but it is the truth.

But that is only the truth to you - I don't feel that way at all.

I've got no problem with Axl using the name. He created it, before slash was in the band.

To me it isn't a competition against the old band.

When Matt came on, it wasn't a competition again adler. When Gilby played, I didn't compare him against Izzy.

I don't care about the name. The music doesn't change if it is by GnR or axls ball sacks. You are Hung up on the name, whereas I could not care less about it.

Your Hung up on replacement players.....that doesn't interest me. I judge each album by the music. Not by who played on it. Was it Izzy? Gilby? Robin? Dj? For me it is about the song......some of u guys are too focused on the name or who played on the song.

When I go see GnR this month it will be to enjoy 2 hours of rock music. I won't spend 1 second comparing the band on stage to any other incarnation of GnR.

That is truth to most fans. GNR was built by the ground up by four other men besides Axl. They are every bit as responsible for where GNR stands now as Axl is. The fact that Axl continues performing under the GNR name isn't so much a "competition" as it is disrespectful. What makes it worse is that the nu guys are living in yesteryear, playing mainly just songs they contributed nothing to, despite being a band for 14 years. They're living off other people's work, playing another bands material, and yet have barely anything to show for themselves but one album that took 14 years, divided the fanbase, didn't make much noise in terms of sales after it's debut, and had a mixed reception at best. And they barely play anything off that anymore anyways (if the end of the last tour was any indication of the future of the set list). That's why they're just seen as a cover band, hacks, and it makes fans uneasy. It's a bigger picture than "just a name" and "Slash not being in the band anymore".

As for "not caring" about who played on whatever song, each to their own. And while I'm not saying "OMGZ SLASH ES DA BEST GUITARIST EVA, NO ONEZ CAN TOUCH HIS SICK SKILLZ (or however teenyboppers talk)" I personally have yet to see the band have a lead guitarist that complimented Axl's mean growls, and vocals as Slash did. That's something that's really missed by the overall fan base altogether. The Nu guitarists, while very talented, arguably don't have that chemistry with Axl. I find that's because the band was frankensteined together for the goal of a paycheck, rather than the classic band's goal of making awesome rock tracks. But that's just my opinion. Maybe they are more than just a great cover band. Only time will tell. And I honestly will be willing to give them a fair chance to prove me wrong. I WANT them to prove me wrong.

I honestly do love Axl and although I don't agree with a lot he has done the past several years, I rather see him succeed with what we have, than just falling off the map altogether. I would miss him too much if we never heard from him ever again. The band just has yet to prove that they can take the world by storm with their own music. But I keep my mind open for future opportunities.

Edited September 22, 2011 by Bobbo

[Apollo]

Valid ideas Bobbo.

But if Duff and Izzy don't feel disrespected by it, why do you?

And this happens all the time in music and in real life. I could name u a ton of bands that have replacement players. Heck, VR does old GnR songs......is that disrespectful? Is Brian Johnson disrespecting bon scott? Hell, Scott wasn't even the original lead singer.

What would u do if u were a guitar player? Would u turn down the gig, because u didnt want to disrespect slash?

And if u were the music czar and made all the rules what would u do? Tell Axl that he cant use the name that he created for the band that he owns? And then say that this group of grown men can't tour unless they put out at least two new albums and 75% of the songs played live are not from the old band?

I understand why u are mad or frustrated. I just don't understand why that is your cross to bear. Seriously, not being a wise guy, but a fans level of frustration should not be more than that of the people who were actually involved. And if Duff, Izzy have actually played onstage with the "hired hands"........if they have moved past the anger stage, so should the fans.

And I would bet that slash and all the old guys would not call the current guys hired hands. I would bet anything that if u asked Duff he would say "they are a bunch of talented musicians and I hope they do the name proud."

I really think some fans care more about the legacy and respect and all that stuff than the actual band members do.

Nothing axl does now, nothing (good or bad) the current lineup does in the future will Ever change what the old songs mean to me. CD2 could sell 25 million copies or be a polka album and sell 37 copies.....and neither one changes one Damn thing about the magic created on appetite, lies and illusions.

That's just me tho. I understand u care about legacy and respect. I just enjoy rock and roll music.

[SunnyDRE]

I care about the music and the legacy. If that means I'm stupid, a cupcake, hater, or just crazy, I don't care. The legacy is just as important as the music to me.

I don't need Slash, Axl, Duff, Steven, or Izzy to give a damn, for me to care.

Edited September 23, 2011 by SunnyDRE

[WhazUp]

I have been thinking why people put up more of a fuss over the new guys than they ever did with Matt and Gilby when they joined - why people don't consider this lineup to be GNR while they consider any lineup from 85-96 to be GNR

IMO it is because people attach to the personality not necessarily of the people playing the music, but what they can do with the music that makes it larger than life. For a lot of people, Guns N' Roses was the perfect combination of dueling guitars (one is flashy while the other is laid back and plays a "scratch" rhythm to compliment the music), hard hitting drums, soaring vocals, and undeniable energy. Personally I think people didn't mind when Gilby and Matt came along because their musical personalities matched up with the original sound more that the 1999-2011 Guns N' Roses lineup has. Gilby provided the laid back complimentary guitar, while Matt provided the hard hitting drums (and even though his style is different from Steven's, he still fits the personality of the music well enough where he was accepted by fans - even though a lot of people here think he sucks lol)

IMO the problem that arises from having the name Guns N' Roses is not necessarily that there are new guys in the band (well maybe for some people that is what the issue is), but that their musical personalities do not match up with any GNR incarnation from the past. Some people go "This is not GNR, it doesn't sound anything like GNR." Sure bands evolve, but they always retain that special quality that you can tell it is the same band. IMO the only thing that is in common is Axl's voice. To me it sounds GNR-inspired but it doesn't have the GNR essence that makes up what made the band so damn successful in the first place

GNR has larger-than-life music, and in my opinion no contract or legal right can change the fact that GNR is known for something specific, and to provide the public with something entirely different but advertised as GNR is well... not right IMHO. Not that I think Chinese Democracy sucks. The new guys fucking rock, Axl fucking rocks, and Chinese Democracy fucking rocks, but I find myself questioning whether this truly is musically GNR

But anyway, what's done is done. They have the name, regardless of my own personal interpretation of the band. So I am left with my own view of what this is - a entirely new band with the name GNR. And nothing is going to change my opinion. With that being said, I don't expect other people to share the same opinion as me and I respect that - everyone has their own view of what GNR is and there is no point in calling each other names over this

Sorry for the long tangent, I guess my point is that everyone is not going to agree that this is truly Guns N' Roses. Telling people who don't agree with calling this band GNR "get the fuck over it stop living in the past" or on the other side going "the new guys suck, old GNR 4eva!" is just counter productive IMO. Regardless of the name issue, I love all incarnations on the band and support the new guys 100 percent. Let's show each other respect and engage in intelligent, civilized, and thought provoking conversations and enjoy some kickass music

PS: I know this doesn't really address the OP, sorry about that haha. But it is still very much relevant to basically every topic here, seeing that there are arguments in every single thread nowadays about this very topic

Edited September 23, 2011 by WhazUp

[SunnyDRE]

I have been thinking why people put up more of a fuss over the new guys than they ever did with Matt and Gilby when they joined - why people don't consider this lineup to be GNR while they consider any lineup from 85-96 to be GNR

IMO it is because people attach to the personality not necessarily of the people playing the music, but what they can do with the music that makes it larger than life. For a lot of people, Guns N' Roses was the perfect combination of dueling guitars (one is flashy while the other is laid back and plays a "scratch" rhythm to compliment the music), hard hitting drums, soaring vocals, and undeniable energy. Personally I think people didn't mind when Gilby and Matt came along because their musical personalities matched up with the original sound more that the 1999-2011 Guns N' Roses lineup has. Gilby provided the laid back complimentary guitar, while Matt provided the hard hitting drums (and even though his style is different from Steven's, he still fits the personality of the music well enough where he was accepted by fans - even though a lot of people here think he sucks lol)

IMO the problem that arises from having the name Guns N' Roses is not necessarily that there are new guys in the band (well maybe for some people that is what the issue is), but that their musical personalities do not match up with any GNR incarnation from the past. Some people go "This is not GNR, it doesn't sound anything like GNR." Sure bands evolve, but they always retain that special quality that you can tell it is the same band. IMO the only thing that is in common is Axl's voice. To me it sounds GNR-inspired but it doesn't have the GNR essence that makes up what made the band so damn successful in the first place

GNR has larger-than-life music, and in my opinion no contract or legal right can change the fact that GNR is known for something specific, and to provide the public with something entirely different but advertised as GNR is well... not right IMHO. Not that I think Chinese Democracy sucks. The new guys fucking rock, Axl fucking rocks, and Chinese Democracy fucking rocks, but I find myself questioning whether this truly is musically GNR

But anyway, what's done is done. They have the name, regardless of my own personal interpretation of the band. So I am left with my own view of what this is - a entirely new band with the name GNR. And nothing is going to change my opinion. With that being said, I don't expect other people to share the same opinion as me and I respect that - everyone has their own view of what GNR is and there is no point in calling each other names over this

Sorry for the long tangent, I guess my point is that everyone is not going to agree that this is truly Guns N' Roses. Telling people who don't agree with calling this band GNR "get the fuck over it stop living in the past" or on the other side going "the new guys suck, old GNR 4eva!" is just counter productive IMO. Regardless of the name issue, I love all incarnations on the band and support the new guys 100 percent. Let's show each other respect and engage in intelligent, civilized, and thought provoking conversations and enjoy some kickass music

PS: I know this doesn't really address the OP, sorry about that haha. But it is still very much relevant to basically every topic here, seeing that there are arguments in every single thread nowadays about this very topic

Great post. Don't agree with every word, but for the most part, it is pretty much spot on.

[Apollo]

I care about the music and the legacy. It that means I'm stupid, a cupcake, hater, or just crazy, I don't care. The legacy is just as important as the music to me.

I don't need Slash, Axl, Duff, Steven, or Izzy to give a damn, for me to care.

Why? That's what I don't understand. Honest question. I don't "get" why a fan would care more than the people who were actually involved.

Remember when a reporter asked brett farve if he was hurting his legacy by coming back and brett laughed and basically said he played football because it was what he loved to do. He didn't care about legacy, he just wanted to play and have fun.

And how does anything Axl does now effect what the old band means to you?

Why does the legacy mean so much to you? For me, its all about the songs. I could not care less how popular the band is. Where rolling stones ranks them in rock history is fun to read, but it doesn't change or effect how good Scom or Civil War is. I don't need the approval of some music critic in new York to justify me liking a band.

Honest question for u guys who care more about the legacy and name than the actual old band members do......why? How does the legacy have any effect on your favorite songs?

[sleishman drums]

never... it lacks everything guns n roses was.. apart from axl rose.. it's a good band.. but it's not guns n roses..

[Apollo]

never... it lacks everything guns n roses was.. apart from axl rose.. it's a good band.. but it's not guns n roses..

Who was guns n roses to you?

Axl, slash, Duff, Izzy, adler

Or was it with Gilby and without Izzy.

Or was it with Gilby and sorum, without Izzy and adler?

To me guns n roses isn't about who is in the band. Guns n roses are about the songs.

To me, GnR aren't slash's top hat and guitar shredding and Axl's red hair and bad attitude. Guns n roses is scom, jungle, November rain, yesterdays, coma, civil war, better and catcher. And I know which specific musicians created each song. But more importantly than that.....I have the song. And the song is more important to me than the artists who created it.

It is about the song and the music. Not the name of the band.

The name of the band gives you a cool shirt. The song touches your soul and changes your life.

[Del Norte]

Caring who is in the band, and about the music they make go hand in hand. I don't get how you can question that really. If you liked old guns, you liked the music they made how can you be satisfied with an all new band? Obviously the songs are not going to be the same style and that will tarnish how you feel about them while destroying the legacy because many othrs feel the same. What's not to get? Why would a fan care more than the people involved? Well, listen close because you constantly ask this and the answer is so obvious, do you think duff and izzy listen to gnr all the time? No, its doubtful. So when guns ended they went their separate ways and no longer had to play with people they hated. When guns ended for the fans they still loved them and wanted more music. Again, to one of your main questions you constantly ask, what's not to understand?

Edited September 23, 2011 by Del Norte

[Apollo]

Easy. Because Duff Izzy and slash quit the old band. And have went on to new things. They are not stuck and Hung up on a band they were in 15 years ago....neither am I.

And wtf. I guess the old songs mean more to me than they do to you. Why in the world would anything Axl does now effect how I feel about the old songs? Nothing axl does now changes estranged coma or scom.

You and a couple others are so obsessed with the legacy. Why, it isnt your legacy or your career or your life. Again, slash Duff and Izzy have moved past it, but u can't? You are more upset than duff......that's weird.

We will just have to agree to disagree. For me GnR is the song. For you, its their legacy. Music touches my soul and it doesnt matter who made it, the name of the band, how popular that band is, what that bands legacy is. those things are important to you. Whatever floats your boat.

[Cosmo]

Easy. Because Duff Izzy and slash quit the old band. And have went on to new things. They are not stuck and Hung up on a band they were in 15 years ago....neither am I.

And wtf. I guess the old songs mean more to me than they do to you. Why in the world would anything Axl does now effect how I feel about the old songs? Nothing axl does now changes estranged coma or scom.

You and a couple others are so obsessed with the legacy. Why, it isnt your legacy or your career or your life. Again, slash Duff and Izzy have moved past it, but u can't? You are more upset than duff......that's weird.

We will just have to agree to disagree. For me GnR is the song. For you, its their legacy. Music touches my soul and it doesnt matter who made it, the name of the band, how popular that band is, what that bands legacy is. those things are important to you. Whatever floats your boat.

nice!

Some people care too much about a 'legacy'. Trust me. If NuGnR stopped today, the 'legacy' still wouldn't 'be safe'.

[moreblack]

the 'legacy' still wouldn't 'be safe'.

at this point it's probably not at risk, RNRHOF coming up and all.

[Bobbo]

Easy. Because Duff Izzy and slash quit the old band. And have went on to new things. They are not stuck and Hung up on a band they were in 15 years ago....neither am I.

And wtf. I guess the old songs mean more to me than they do to you. Why in the world would anything Axl does now effect how I feel about the old songs? Nothing axl does now changes estranged coma or scom.

You and a couple others are so obsessed with the legacy. Why, it isnt your legacy or your career or your life. Again, slash Duff and Izzy have moved past it, but u can't? You are more upset than duff......that's weird.

We will just have to agree to disagree. For me GnR is the song. For you, its their legacy. Music touches my soul and it doesnt matter who made it, the name of the band, how popular that band is, what that bands legacy is. those things are important to you. Whatever floats your boat.

Duff and izzy have also expressed their displeasure with him keeping on with the name. But their hands are legally bound. And also "the ones who really lose out are the fans". And that's exactly right. Duff and izzy still get their royalty checks, so it must be hard to get too upset.

Izzy and duff had a personal friendship with axl that went beyond the music. We didn't. Our personal relationship with axl is strictly through the music. And while his screw ups and mishaps may not erase his great moments on a musical standpoint, sometimes to fans, it gets over shadowed by the stupidity.

[Apollo]

What is funny, is that all the legacy people are actually insulting the old band.

In their mind, the old material isn't strong enough to stand on it's own - or to stay relevant/strong if Axl doesn't put out new music now, or puts out music they don't like.

But for me, the old music is sooooo strong, that nothing the new band does can tarnish it.

Axl could put out a polka album with Justin Beiber today, and it won't change how amazing the old songs are. But to some people, the old songs and band's legacy depend on what Axl does now.

I guess I just love the old band and the old songs more than some people on here do.

[Bobbo]

No. Gnr will always be remembered for their greatest hits. It's axll rose and the nu band alone who's credibility gets over shadowed by the stupidity and antics.

Edited September 23, 2011 by Bobbo

[moreblack]

We will just have to agree to disagree.

can't see you doing that.

[Bobbo]

I have been thinking why people put up more of a fuss over the new guys than they ever did with Matt and Gilby when they joined - why people don't consider this lineup to be GNR while they consider any lineup from 85-96 to be GNR

IMO it is because people attach to the personality not necessarily of the people playing the music, but what they can do with the music that makes it larger than life. For a lot of people, Guns N' Roses was the perfect combination of dueling guitars (one is flashy while the other is laid back and plays a "scratch" rhythm to compliment the music), hard hitting drums, soaring vocals, and undeniable energy. Personally I think people didn't mind when Gilby and Matt came along because their musical personalities matched up with the original sound more that the 1999-2011 Guns N' Roses lineup has. Gilby provided the laid back complimentary guitar, while Matt provided the hard hitting drums (and even though his style is different from Steven's, he still fits the personality of the music well enough where he was accepted by fans - even though a lot of people here think he sucks lol)

IMO the problem that arises from having the name Guns N' Roses is not necessarily that there are new guys in the band (well maybe for some people that is what the issue is), but that their musical personalities do not match up with any GNR incarnation from the past. Some people go "This is not GNR, it doesn't sound anything like GNR." Sure bands evolve, but they always retain that special quality that you can tell it is the same band. IMO the only thing that is in common is Axl's voice. To me it sounds GNR-inspired but it doesn't have the GNR essence that makes up what made the band so damn successful in the first place

GNR has larger-than-life music, and in my opinion no contract or legal right can change the fact that GNR is known for something specific, and to provide the public with something entirely different but advertised as GNR is well... not right IMHO. Not that I think Chinese Democracy sucks. The new guys fucking rock, Axl fucking rocks, and Chinese Democracy fucking rocks, but I find myself questioning whether this truly is musically GNR

But anyway, what's done is done. They have the name, regardless of my own personal interpretation of the band. So I am left with my own view of what this is - a entirely new band with the name GNR. And nothing is going to change my opinion. With that being said, I don't expect other people to share the same opinion as me and I respect that - everyone has their own view of what GNR is and there is no point in calling each other names over this

Sorry for the long tangent, I guess my point is that everyone is not going to agree that this is truly Guns N' Roses. Telling people who don't agree with calling this band GNR "get the fuck over it stop living in the past" or on the other side going "the new guys suck, old GNR 4eva!" is just counter productive IMO. Regardless of the name issue, I love all incarnations on the band and support the new guys 100 percent. Let's show each other respect and engage in intelligent, civilized, and thought provoking conversations and enjoy some kickass music

PS: I know this doesn't really address the OP, sorry about that haha. But it is still very much relevant to basically every topic here, seeing that there are arguments in every single thread nowadays about this very topic

Great post. Like sunny, don't agree with every word, but overall great post. Paragraphs 2, 3, and 4 specifically. Answers groghan's question of why people were more accepting of the first couple line up changes than the total renovation we have now.

Edited September 23, 2011 by Bobbo

[Apollo]

We will just have to agree to disagree.

can't see you doing that.

But you"can" see the people doing that that agree with you, right? Funny how that works.

Again -

It's a shame that some of you regulars on here don't feel strongly enough about the old music and the old band as people like volcano, sailway and others do.

For me, the old music/band will live on FOREVER. Their legacy will always be strong. Nothing will ever change how epic of a band they were.

But for some of you (bobbo, star, moreblack, norte, sunny, etc), anything Axl does now can change or ruin the old band's legacy. Shame that you guys don't think the legacy or the mark they left on music is that strong.

I look forward to seeing what the current band does. It will only add/subtract to my feeling of the CURRENT line-up. Nothing will ever change what the old band created. Sadly, what a group of "hired hands" does in 2011 will have an effect on the staying power and legacy of what your favorite band did in 1988.

I mean this sincerely, from the bottom of my heart. Even though we debate a lot on here and disagree a lot. I really hope the current group puts out 2-3 amazing albums, so your "legacy" of the old band will not be ruined for you. Old GnR music is so amazing, that I really hope you guys are able to "enjoy" it forever, share it with your friends and your children. I've got a 3-month old, and when he starts listening to music, I will slowly introduce him to GnR. Regardless of what the current band does - my love for the old songs will never change.

I wish you guys had that sort of love for the old band/songs. Hopefully the new band will put out good enough music to allow the old band/music to stay relevant to your future music listening.

[moreblack]

Ya, but that quoted statement was from a convo between yourself and the person you were disagreeing with. And I can't see you agreeing to disagree. History and the way this place is, dictate that this thing you said just isn't going to happen.