Rant

[ironmt]

I am just curious as to the average age of the board members(35 here, probably classified as an old fuck). It seems to me that there Is alot of recent posts reiterating how much better the current band Is, as opposed to the original band. The most confusing part of the whole situation Is that most of these members making these claims probably weren't around or were to young to have even seen the original band, so how do you compare the original and new version when you weren't around. Watching videos or youtube Is one thing, but as anyone that has been there live will tell you, It's just not the same, not even close. In all fairness , If you have seen the original and the new version and you come to the conclusion that the new band Is better, than that's great, you are entitled to your opinion, but for all those making the claim that the new band Is better without ever experianceing the original, well that leaves me more than a little confused.

[SoulMonster]

I am just curious as to the average age of the board members(35 here, probably classified as an old fuck). It seems to me that there Is alot of recent posts reiterating how much better the current band Is, as opposed to the original band. The most confusing part of the whole situation Is that most of these members making these claims probably weren't around or were to young to have even seen the original band, so how do you compare the original and new version when you weren't around. Watching videos or youtube Is one thing, but as anyone that has been there live will tell you, It's just not the same, not even close. In all fairness , If you have seen the original and the new version and you come to the conclusion that the new band Is better, than that's great, you are entitled to your opinion, but for all those making the claim that the new band Is better without ever experianceing the original, well that leaves me more than a little confused.

36 here. It's hard to compare the old with the new. The music is much better now and the shows longer, the old band was sloppy (not as good musicians under influences) and the sound was often sparse and simple. But the old band delivered more exciting concerts because back then everything wasn't choreographed down to the smallest movement, the shows were unpredictable, and there was this sense of danger all the time. Another thing is back then there was anger, aggression and danger. Not much of that lately -- for better and for worse.

[ironmt]

I am just curious as to the average age of the board members(35 here, probably classified as an old fuck). It seems to me that there Is alot of recent posts reiterating how much better the current band Is, as opposed to the original band. The most confusing part of the whole situation Is that most of these members making these claims probably weren't around or were to young to have even seen the original band, so how do you compare the original and new version when you weren't around. Watching videos or youtube Is one thing, but as anyone that has been there live will tell you, It's just not the same, not even close. In all fairness , If you have seen the original and the new version and you come to the conclusion that the new band Is better, than that's great, you are entitled to your opinion, but for all those making the claim that the new band Is better without ever experianceing the original, well that leaves me more than a little confused.

36 here. It's hard to compare the old with the new. The music is much better now and the shows longer, the old band was sloppy (not as good musicians under influences) and the sound was often sparse and simple. But the old band delivered more exciting concerts because back then everything wasn't choreographed down to the smallest movement, the shows were unpredictable, and there was this sense of danger all the time. Another thing is back then there was anger, aggression and danger. Not much of that lately -- for better and for worse.

Thank you for the Intellegent response and giving your opinion. I have to respectfully disagree and have a different opinion when It comes to the music being much better now. I believe that Appetite and both Illusion albums are far superior to Chinese Democracy. There are a few good songs on the new album, just not enough for me to say that Is's better than the bands previous material.

[SunnyDRE]

Even though I don't agree, I can see how people like the new band more...especially if CD is the album that got you into GNR.

Big Smashing Pumpkins fan here. Most of their fans say Mellon Collie..is their best work, but I adore Adore. Big PJ Harvey fan and most of her fans say To Bring You My Love is her best work....I adore Stories...Huge U2 fan. Most say Joshua Tree or Achtung is their best work....for me its October.

See my point.

Tis all nothing but opinion. It's fun and entertaining to discuss this "stuff", but at the end of the day it doesn't matter. What matters is what you enjoy listening to.

Edited December 22, 2011 by SunnyDRE

[spunko12345]

Even though I don't agree, I can see how people like the new band more...especially if it is the album that got you into GNR.

Big Smashing Pumpkins fan here. Most of their fans say Mellon Collie..is their best work, but I adore Adore. Big PJ Harvey fan and most of her fans say To Bring You My Love is her best work....I adore Stories...Huge U2 fan. Most say Joshua Tree or Achtung is their best work....for me its October.

See my point.

Tis all nothing but opinion. It's fun and entertaining to discuss this "stuff", but at the end of the day it doesn't matter. What matters is what you enjoy listening to.

Speaking as a huge Smashing Pumpkins fan I would agree, but for me its Machina/The Machines Of God. Before that album released I thought I had peaked as a SP fan, but that record was near enough perfect.

Edited December 22, 2011 by spunko12345

[Lose Your Illusions]

I am just curious as to the average age of the board members(35 here, probably classified as an old fuck). It seems to me that there Is alot of recent posts reiterating how much better the current band Is, as opposed to the original band. The most confusing part of the whole situation Is that most of these members making these claims probably weren't around or were to young to have even seen the original band, so how do you compare the original and new version when you weren't around. Watching videos or youtube Is one thing, but as anyone that has been there live will tell you, It's just not the same, not even close. In all fairness , If you have seen the original and the new version and you come to the conclusion that the new band Is better, than that's great, you are entitled to your opinion, but for all those making the claim that the new band Is better without ever experianceing the original, well that leaves me more than a little confused.

You can bitch all you want, it just shows that this lineup is relevant to the youth. I don't think many bands who started in 1985 can say that.

[HowlinWolf]

I have been to hundreds of shows and nothing has ever came close to the ammount of energy from the fans and the band at Guns N' Roses shows back in the day. It was so over the fucking top that you just cannot believe it unless you were there. I also agree that the new band uses alot of pyro and stuff to make up for that lack of energy. If you think they put on a great show now, that is great. They are probably one of the better live acts out there today but the onl;y way you can trash the old line-ups shows is if you weren't there or you are really devoted to the Axl vs. Old band argument. Like a politician disagreeing with the other side even though they know the other side is right.

[Kill Devil Hill]

Age doesn't really have to do with it. If you talk to the average teenage GN'R fan, he probably hasn't even heard ChD because "it's not real Guns N' Roses." I've faced struggles trying to turn younger people on to new Guns, far more struggles than I get when I want to show them an old Guns song.

I actually think younger people are less receptive to new Guns because, in my observations, younger people weren't around to build a strong enough bond with Axl to get past the media crucifixion he went through. You know what I mean? Like, when the media talks trash about someone who you don't have any sort of attachment to, you just accept it because you don't care enough to argue against it. And since younger people weren't around when GN'R imploded, they just accept everything at face value. It's just an accepted truth that new Guns is a poser band, and Axl stole the name, etc.

But I guess I'm just generalizing a casual or a less than casual younger fan. The same could be said about older fans, I guess, but I think it would be to a lesser extent.

You're finding a lot of people on here saying the new band is great because they're hardcore fans. Not saying you aren't, but I think you'll find fan forums are more "accepting" of the music of a band they support. Guns N' Roses fans are more accepting of ChD than any other fan site. Some people who are old enough to see GN'R in their heyday may not have become hardcore fans until ChD. I know there are a handful of users on this forum following the band solely for Bumblefoot, so of course they'd prefer the new band to the old band.

Or maybe people prefer the old band, but accept that the new band is "better" live, because technically they are. Personally, I prefer the danger factor, the unpredictability of an old GN'R gig, but I think it's pretty factual this band is better, tighter. In terms of technical skill and execution, they're lightyears ahead of the old band. But people who prefer the old band see a magic, a specialness about it unmatched by anyone. I see it, too, so I understand it.

Actually, just take a look at our most vocal posters. Volcano and Sailaway are both a lot older than Bobbo, yet they always argue that new is better than old, while Bobbo defends the old band like his life depends on it.

I can see why you would think younger people prefer the newer band, though. Generally, it's easier for a younger person to change his opinion than an older one, so perhaps new Guns can convert a younger person easier than an older one. But I don't think it ha to do with being "old enough to appreciate" the old band. Albums like AFD are timeless, and they have a special appeal to younger people.

So while I just wrote a long paragraph about why younger people would prefer the older band, I sincerely doubt age matters when it comes to preference toward the old or the new band. It's just down to musical taste and maybe open-mindedness.

[saber_]

Hollywood Rose is better than all of them.

; )

[Brodie]

Seen both. Like both.

Love the new tunes, love the old tunes...

Hating on either is childish and wont bring Lineup X back.

That being said, kinda pisses me off that Bucket and Rob are gone.

Cover band of a cover band. Band needs to stand on their own merit.

Release new music...

[ironmt]

I am just curious as to the average age of the board members(35 here, probably classified as an old fuck). It seems to me that there Is alot of recent posts reiterating how much better the current band Is, as opposed to the original band. The most confusing part of the whole situation Is that most of these members making these claims probably weren't around or were to young to have even seen the original band, so how do you compare the original and new version when you weren't around. Watching videos or youtube Is one thing, but as anyone that has been there live will tell you, It's just not the same, not even close. In all fairness , If you have seen the original and the new version and you come to the conclusion that the new band Is better, than that's great, you are entitled to your opinion, but for all those making the claim that the new band Is better without ever experianceing the original, well that leaves me more than a little confused.

You can bitch all you want, it just shows that this lineup is relevant to the youth. I don't think many bands who started in 1985 can say that.

Not bitching about anything, you might want to let your high school friends know that Chinese Democracy was released so they can purchase It, than we can actually make the band relevant again. Playing to an average crowd of 5-6000 people per night Is pretty disheartening.

[saber_]

[watchman]

I'm 35 and I've seen all lineups, Axl on a good day, Axl on a bad day, Izzy, Buckethead, DJ clubs, stadiums - everything, everyone.

Technically, the new band is better.

Anything else, the chemistry, the creativity, the sincerity, the authencity, the HEART - all that was better with the old band.

And even the 2002 lineup was lightyears better than the current one.

If you were born in say 1990 and see Guns today it's not hard to be impressed compared to what else is on the market TODAY. But the older generation maybe goes home with the sour taste of smokes and mirrors, knowing that the greatest rock show on earth needs nothing but only a bunch of guys pouring their heart out on stage, pushing the envelope.

These "new" guys have heart but they keep it locked away for when the show is over. No one of them is their real self on stage. No one but Axl and perhaps Tommy. The others are just doing their job, playing it safe. You might like that or not, but it affects the music massively.

[Cosmo]

I'm 21. Never seen original GnR live, only DVD, etc... I've seen this line-up live twice. Seen Slash and Duff live too. Have to say CD is the album that got me into GnR. It will always be my favorite album of all time by any band. TWAT is my favorite song of all time period. That's probably why I'm currently against any possible reunion. Plus, I think this band is awesome live, probably the best live playing I've ever seen, and I've seen quite some.

[Lumikki]

I'm 22. And while I like the new band, I vastly prefer the old band and would love a reunion.

[grouse]

I'm 21. Never seen original GnR live, only DVD, etc... I've seen this line-up live twice. Seen Slash and Duff live too. Have to say CD is the album that got me into GnR. It will always be my favorite album of all time by any band. TWAT is my favorite song of all time period. That's probably why I'm currently against any possible reunion. Plus, I think this band is awesome live, probably the best live playing I've ever seen, and I've seen quite some.

Dude I respect your opinion, I honestly do and I can't blame you, Nugnr is the best thing currently out there but there's just no comparing the old line up and the new.

I mean just the pure emotion and rawness at those early shows, there is no band out there today or the last 20 years for that matter that has managed to come close to it.

I've had a couple of beers so don't mind my spelling hehe B)

[Apollo]

Music is all a personal choice. What touches your brain, heart and soul. So in the end, it really doesn't matter what anybody else thinks about a song or a band. I still listen to my favorite late 80's bands and could not care less if people think I'm stuck in the past. Cinderella, Tora Tora, Dangerous Toys, Tesla will always be in my IPOD.

What I don't understand is how people keep saying the current band has no chemistry or energy or emotion. I wonder if anybody saying that has actually attended a live show this year? I've seen GnR three times and last week was the best show I've ever seen live. The band was having an absolute blast together.

Chemistry???? All the reports show that the old band pretty much was fighting almost all the time. Slash and Izzy. Everybody and Steven. Axl and Duff/Slash. THis new band appears to have a great relationship amongst the guys. THey aren't all fueding and fighting with the lead singer.

Emotion? The current band is pouring their souls out on stage. They aren't just playing by the numbers, collecting a paycheck. At the end of the shows the are all exhausted. They interact with each other. They interact with the crowd. They are laughing and smiling and having a great time.

At the end of the show, which dressing room you think is happier? GnR 2011 or GnR 2003?????? Which band got along better together, from top to bottom?

Again - love which ever version you want. Praise the old band as the Kings of Rock and take offense if anybody dare praises the new guys. Whatever floats your boat. But to say the current band has no chemistry or emotion is just absolutely false, in every way shape and form.

People like to bash DJ for being a poser - and heck, I even did at first. But watch this guy play live. He is having more fun than anybody out there. In Seattle, he brought a kid up from the crowd onto the stage. He left the stage and went over to the seating section and chatted with fans. More than anybody else, he was slapping hands with people in the crowd. At one point, because the height of the stage, somebody slapped the bottom of his foot. So everytime he went to that side of the stage he would stick his leg out and fans would go crazy slapping the bottom of it, while he smiled like a kid. He played his guitar with drum sticks and then threw about 10 of them into the crowd. DJ is ALL about pleasing and entertaining the crowd.

Was the old band more raw? Sure. But through no fault of the current band. THe old band was a bunch of young punks, early 20's, broke, fighting to make a name for themselves. Today????? No. Even a reunion isn't going to reach the old levelness of rawness and unpredictability as back in the day. I think the reunionists don't think about that. Axl, Slash and Duff are almost in their 50s. All are extremely rich. They aren't going to be as raw and agressive as they were at 22 years old and broke.

Finally, I think CD is a masterpiece and as good as either Illusion. Not as good as Appetite.

Why?

A quick reason is diversity. My son loves GnR. And I have two friends who are into GnR. And all four of us have different favorite songs from CD. We all love different songs, and we all dislike different songs. It isn't an album with 3 classic songs, 5 fillers, and 3 songs everybody hates. It's one of the only albums I've seen where if you took 10 fans of the album and asked what their favorite song was off of it....you could get 10 different songs as answers.

On a final small side note.....I was a casual fan of Shacklers. But imo it came off amazing live. My third favorite live song last week (if I had to rate each song).

If you go to a show this year or next with an open mind, just wanting to see a good rock and roll show - I think you will really enjoy yourself and the current band.

If you go with anger already in your heart, wanting to compare every note to the old band, wanting to compare every guitar move to Slash, every drumbeat to Steven, every bass part to Duff, every note to how Axl sounded 25 years ago.......then you might not enjoy it.

[AXL_N_DIZZY]

35 years old and I can certainly verify that Old Guns was AMAZING. HISTORIC. LEGENDARY. All those things and more. That said- that era is over and has been for quite a long time. So though I have a VERY healthy respect for what it was like in 87-93- my focus on GN'R these days is almost 85 to 90 percent on the current line-up- which not only rocks live night-in and night-out- but frankly produced my favorite Guns song of all-time ("Prostitute") and another in my top 5 to 10 ("This I Love").

As a Dallas Cowboys fan (ducking from the virtual flying objects some of you are probably throwing at me- haha)- I kind of see it similar to the fact that though Aikman, Smith, Irvin and Co. were INCREDIBLE CHAMPIONS in the early/mid 90's that I'll always love... as of 2011 I have no problem at all watching and cheering like crazy when Romo, Jones and Bryant or whoever do great things (though I'd like it to be a hell of a lot more often!) in the present... and in many ways it's more interesting as their chapter has not yet been fully written. In other words you bet your ass I'll be watching Eagles-Cowboys this weekend rather than a replay of Super Bowl XXX or whatever...

Actually, I guess in that Cowboys-GN'R comparison Axl is kind of the "Jerry Jones" figure. One of the big architects along with Slash/Izzy (Jimmy Johnson) in the initial great success and trying to find that formula again today on his own while taking a lot of abuse and with a sort of a mixed bag of successes and failures to show for it thus far. Yet hope springs eternal... Also, like Jerry- 15-20 years later Axl still hangs out with lots of gorgeous women!!

Finally- and echoing Groghan's great post above- at the very end of the day- at some point rock n' roll's gotta be about fun and enjoying memorable experiences. For me it's a heck of a lot more fun to enjoy current Guns blow the doors off arenas, get along reasonably well with each other by all appearances and move towards (knock on wood) becoming a real functioning band with increased emphasis on fan interaction and hopefully new music- than it is to sit around and shed tears over something that was great (87-93 Guns) but long gone...

With Axl closing in on 50- I just think it's so important to focus on the here and now while it's... well... here. Sometimes reflecting too much on what once was can really take away from that... Just my .02 cents.

Edited December 23, 2011 by AXL_N_DIZZY

[ironmt]

Music is all a personal choice. What touches your brain, heart and soul. So in the end, it really doesn't matter what anybody else thinks about a song or a band. I still listen to my favorite late 80's bands and could not care less if people think I'm stuck in the past. Cinderella, Tora Tora, Dangerous Toys, Tesla will always be in my IPOD.

What I don't understand is how people keep saying the current band has no chemistry or energy or emotion. I wonder if anybody saying that has actually attended a live show this year? I've seen GnR three times and last week was the best show I've ever seen live. The band was having an absolute blast together.

Chemistry???? All the reports show that the old band pretty much was fighting almost all the time. Slash and Izzy. Everybody and Steven. Axl and Duff/Slash. THis new band appears to have a great relationship amongst the guys. THey aren't all fueding and fighting with the lead singer.

Emotion? The current band is pouring their souls out on stage. They aren't just playing by the numbers, collecting a paycheck. At the end of the shows the are all exhausted. They interact with each other. They interact with the crowd. They are laughing and smiling and having a great time.

At the end of the show, which dressing room you think is happier? GnR 2011 or GnR 2003?????? Which band got along better together, from top to bottom?

Again - love which ever version you want. Praise the old band as the Kings of Rock and take offense if anybody dare praises the new guys. Whatever floats your boat. But to say the current band has no chemistry or emotion is just absolutely false, in every way shape and form.

People like to bash DJ for being a poser - and heck, I even did at first. But watch this guy play live. He is having more fun than anybody out there. In Seattle, he brought a kid up from the crowd onto the stage. He left the stage and went over to the seating section and chatted with fans. More than anybody else, he was slapping hands with people in the crowd. At one point, because the height of the stage, somebody slapped the bottom of his foot. So everytime he went to that side of the stage he would stick his leg out and fans would go crazy slapping the bottom of it, while he smiled like a kid. He played his guitar with drum sticks and then threw about 10 of them into the crowd. DJ is ALL about pleasing and entertaining the crowd.

Was the old band more raw? Sure. But through no fault of the current band. THe old band was a bunch of young punks, early 20's, broke, fighting to make a name for themselves. Today????? No. Even a reunion isn't going to reach the old levelness of rawness and unpredictability as back in the day. I think the reunionists don't think about that. Axl, Slash and Duff are almost in their 50s. All are extremely rich. They aren't going to be as raw and agressive as they were at 22 years old and broke.

Finally, I think CD is a masterpiece and as good as either Illusion. Not as good as Appetite.

Why?

A quick reason is diversity. My son loves GnR. And I have two friends who are into GnR. And all four of us have different favorite songs from CD. We all love different songs, and we all dislike different songs. It isn't an album with 3 classic songs, 5 fillers, and 3 songs everybody hates. It's one of the only albums I've seen where if you took 10 fans of the album and asked what their favorite song was off of it....you could get 10 different songs as answers.

On a final small side note.....I was a casual fan of Shacklers. But imo it came off amazing live. My third favorite live song last week (if I had to rate each song).

If you go to a show this year or next with an open mind, just wanting to see a good rock and roll show - I think you will really enjoy yourself and the current band.

If you go with anger already in your heart, wanting to compare every note to the old band, wanting to compare every guitar move to Slash, every drumbeat to Steven, every bass part to Duff, every note to how Axl sounded 25 years ago.......then you might not enjoy it.

Went to two shows this year Wilkes Barre Pa and Youngstown Oh, both excellent shows and they left It all on the stage. It still doesn't compare to seeing them In 1992 on the Illusions tour. We are all entitled to our own opinions and In mine there Is nothing on Chinese Democracy that comes close to the appetite album, Estranged, November Rain,Don't Cry,Breakdown,Locomotive or Coma.

[Kosonen]

old band = danger danger danger, rock n roll gods. not technically that great players or anything, but still gods

new = great band with great professional musicians, not bad at all

[KiraMPD]

Was the old band more raw? Sure. But through no fault of the current band. THe old band was a bunch of young punks, early 20's, broke, fighting to make a name for themselves. Today????? No. Even a reunion isn't going to reach the old levelness of rawness and unpredictability as back in the day. I think the reunionists don't think about that. Axl, Slash and Duff are almost in their 50s. All are extremely rich. They aren't going to be as raw and agressive as they were at 22 years old and broke.

Thank you SO MUCH for stating that! It really bugs me when people call the current lineup "fake-o-band" (at least those are the choice words that a friend of mine likes to use) and believe that if a reunion happened that all will be back to the way it was. They forget the fact that most, if not all, of the songs written in the old era were made while they were drunk, high, broke and living in 12x12 foot space. Once fame hit they went their separate ways and crumbled (you can literally hear that song-to-song on the UYI album). Even Slash mentions in his book that they only way they were able to function was when they were all equally distressed and confined together.

There is no way they will be able to reproduce that RAW sound now because the truth is that they are no longer a bunch of 20-something gutter-rats living hand to mouth. They simply don't have those life experiences to feed off of anymore. If people want some thing akin to the miracle AFD was, I'd suggest they start looking through downtown clubs and bars for a new band, although I think you might be hard pressed to find one... The reckless abandonment that seemed to existed during 80s is gone. There is just too much sensibility in the rock scene now days.

A reunion tour would be a major hit, no doubt about that. But if you expect them to even stand each other long enough to make musical magic like they did in the 80s, forget about it.

Personally, I look forward to new songs (if any) by the current line-up. Seems like the most functional group since '89 with a diverse mix of musicians that seem to have a good PROFESSIONAL chemistry.

BTW; contributing to the original census-like nature of this thread; I am 20. I was introduced to GnR (and rock n' roll in general) when I was six, so I've been a fan for about 14 years. I love the original line-up, they are untouchable in my eyes but the current incarnation is growing on me (especially after last night's stream! XD).

Edited December 23, 2011 by KiraMPD

[wasted]

It's not really a comparison it's like different eras of GNR.

[Apollo]

Ironmt......to each his own!

For me, catcher, better, Twat, prostitute, this I love, street of dreams are all better than locomotive, breakdown and songs like dust n bones, garden, 14 years, so fine, my world, out ya get me, think about you. There are lots of songs I skip on illusions.

[Locke]

39. Loved the original, digging the current lineup. Of course, I'd love to see a reunion, but I would also be happy to hear new music from this lineup. I will admit that I spent years anxiously awaiting Chinese Democracy while still hoping for a reunion once it was released. I've also gone to Duff and Steven solo shows (always miss the Slash shows due to one conflict or another), and saw Velvet Revolver right around the time of their initial release. Basically, I dig all things GNR past and present.

[bigcountry]

37, So I guess I am an old fucker too......

Been into GNR since before Welcome to The Jungle was played on MTV,

Seen the cover artwork of Axls tat and looked at the back seen the band pic and bought AFD without hearing a single note of it.

Been hooked ever since.

Old band, New Band.... It;s all good to me!!!!!!!!!