Stinson: "Thousands of people will see it every night because he is Axl"

[Guest Len B'stard]

I think GNRs influence is more inspiration than cultural or social impact. Because there style is more conservative, it's not like a revolution. Which I think is fair, its just good music. It's more about attitude or ambition. Maybe not the most worthy of causes but bands like Manics, Oasis, Avenged Sevenfold, Buckcherry, Strokes have all name checked them. In someways GNR really opened the door for grunge bands. GNR brought back the rougher edge, Nirvana just took it further. GNR turned spandex to leather.

There we go, thank you, the first poster speaking in defence of GnR that actually clocked on to what the fuck i was talking about and actually made a fair point, herein lies the difference between ironmt going on and on about record sales and failing to address a single thing being discussed and someone actually making a point relevant to the discussion, makes a lot of sense too

[Midnight Rambler]

Tommy Stinson - better known as the man who pretends to be in Guns N 'Roses Duff McKagan

Bollocks, i ain't havin' that! Tommy Stinson was Tommy Stinson of The Replacements when he was 13 years old in fucking 1979 before anybody had even dreamt of a Duff McKagan or even a Guns n Roses. Fuck that. Tommy was a fucking legend before there even was a GnR, he don't need to pretend to be no one.

The Replacements are an integral part of a history that was far more important to music than anything GnR ever had anything to do with.

Right on!

[ITW 2012]

Guns N' Roses have had a huge influence on people who like to party, and I'll take that legacy any day over being the bastard fathers of a 1000 indie bands. Some of us still remember the days when you had to fight for your right to party. Thank you GNR for setting us free!

Edited January 13, 2012 by ITW 2012

[Rovim]

It's like someone said earlier, about the Slash thing. He did made me pick up the guitar. The influence is just different, but it's there.

I love Tommy, I think he's the real thing. The replacements probably were more influential then Gn'R in a way.

I think Guns is one of those bands that had that unmistakable identity, with the great songs, and the right attitude, that just took the best elements from some of the biggest bands that came before them and melded it together to their own thing.

It wasn't something totally new, and yet it was... probably because of the sheer charisma, chemistry, honesty and distinct delivery.

Gn'R were like a sequel of a movie that was better or just as good as the first classic, masterpiece and was made by a different director. heh.

Edited January 13, 2012 by Rovim

[ironmt]

I think GNRs influence is more inspiration than cultural or social impact. Because there style is more conservative, it's not like a revolution. Which I think is fair, its just good music. It's more about attitude or ambition. Maybe not the most worthy of causes but bands like Manics, Oasis, Avenged Sevenfold, Buckcherry, Strokes have all name checked them. In someways GNR really opened the door for grunge bands. GNR brought back the rougher edge, Nirvana just took it further. GNR turned spandex to leather.

There we go, thank you, the first poster speaking in defence of GnR that actually clocked on to what the fuck i was talking about and actually made a fair point, herein lies the difference between ironmt going on and on about record sales and failing to address a single thing being discussed and someone actually making a point relevant to the discussion, makes a lot of sense too

Address this question. It was not uncommon for the group to play entire sets of covers, ranging anywhere from Bryan Adams' "Summer of '69" to Dusty Springfield's "The Look of Love" to Led Zeppelin's "Black Dog." Now Is that your Idea Of a band that were trend setters and making a huge mark on the music Industry? By the way, It's pretty much common knowlege, If you have ever listened to the Appetite album ,that they opened the door for grunge bands and brought back the rough edge. Good points Wasted.

[Midnight Rambler]

As far as the mats playing a whole set of 'terrible' covers, ill try andf explain, they were like kings of irony before irony was everywhere (at least it was in the 90s), really self deprecating band, i love em to bits. And they were hugely influential on the whole alternative scene that followed them, they were a seminal band. I think Gnr were just as good a band but they werent nearly as influential. And for that journalist to call tommy stinson a duff impersonator is fucking laughable.

[ironmt]

As far as the mats playing a whole set of 'terrible' covers, ill try andf explain, they were like kings of irony before irony was everywhere (at least it was in the 90s), really self deprecating band, i love em to bits. And they were hugely influential on the whole alternative scene that followed them, they were a seminal band. I think Gnr were just as good a band but they werent nearly as influential. And for that journalist to call tommy stinson a duff impersonator is fucking laughable.

My only point In this whole debate was and still Is that The Replacements being more Influential than Guns N Roses Is an OPINION. sugaraylen has tryed to convince myself and anyone else that will listen, that It Is FACT, and thats just simply not the case. I do agree that any journalist calling Tommy Stinson a Duff Impersonator Is ridiculous.

[wasted]

I think GNR would have inspired kids to pick up guitars want to be in bands. Maybe by the time they got signed they were going the same kind of music. Also they kind of keep big fun stadium bands alive and a link to Zepp and Queen.

Edited January 13, 2012 by wasted

[vaida]

Beyond the translation,

Stinton makes a valide point. Axl could jump on stage with any musicians, as people arn't going to see Guns N'Roses these days, they go to see Axl Rose, and Stintons knows that.

They're all being paid more than they would performing with anyone else right now, so thats makes everyone happy.

[wasted]

He's being a bit modest as they recent tour has won awards and plaudits. and he's been Axls right hand man for. Going on 15 years. But true Axl is a living legend he could probably take any group of musicians for a ride.

[Bruno P.]

I was actually getting at the notion of changing the history of rock n roll and being one of the core influences behind a decades worth of underground of underground music and a worldwide explosion of alternative music and culture from the early 90s onwards, lets be clear about this, it's a helluva lot more than "a few alternative bands" but look, it's clear you don't actually have a point to make or anything to refer to, you're just gonna shag the same dead horse here nor do you appear to have much of an awareness about what you've taken upon yourself to comment on

It's crystal clear to me. He simply doesn't want to accept the truth. He probably thinks that Slash is/was a way more important guitarist than Eddie Van Halen because he sold more than him. Popularity equals quality, ya know?

I mean you've yet to even cite one single way in which Guns n Roses were at all influential in music in a historical context except to say that they sold a lot of records so lets just draw a line under this, until you feel like you wanna have a discussion or something, in which case, i'll be around, thanks, good talking to ya

Britney Spears is more important to music history than Nirvana because more people bought her records. Hell, Bon Jovi is much, much more important than Jimi Hendrix because he sold way more records. Hell, even Backstreet Boys are way more relevant than Kiss or Deep Purple.

Fuck, judging by this logic Justin Bieber is way more relevant than Chopin and Mozart combined these days - create a poll in a big teenagers website and you'd be surprised.

You people amuse me. You really do.

[wasted]

I think for some people GNR were are the gateway band. So without them they would have been different. AcDC or Aerosmith werent going to connect. But once GNR made the impact from there you could appreciate or discover Zeppelin or Hanoi Rocks or The Pistols or Queen. In someways CD is the same a GNR fan might not get Korn or even heard of some band but Shacklers or Better could open or connect. So influence isn't always direct, it can be pretty indirect. Like the way I understand The Clash is I see them like The Stone Roses.

Edited January 13, 2012 by wasted

[Guest Len B'stard]

I think GNRs influence is more inspiration than cultural or social impact. Because there style is more conservative, it's not like a revolution. Which I think is fair, its just good music. It's more about attitude or ambition. Maybe not the most worthy of causes but bands like Manics, Oasis, Avenged Sevenfold, Buckcherry, Strokes have all name checked them. In someways GNR really opened the door for grunge bands. GNR brought back the rougher edge, Nirvana just took it further. GNR turned spandex to leather.

There we go, thank you, the first poster speaking in defence of GnR that actually clocked on to what the fuck i was talking about and actually made a fair point, herein lies the difference between ironmt going on and on about record sales and failing to address a single thing being discussed and someone actually making a point relevant to the discussion, makes a lot of sense too

Address this question. It was not uncommon for the group to play entire sets of covers, ranging anywhere from Bryan Adams' "Summer of '69" to Dusty Springfield's "The Look of Love" to Led Zeppelin's "Black Dog." Now Is that your Idea Of a band that were trend setters and making a huge mark on the music Industry? By the way, It's pretty much common knowlege, If you have ever listened to the Appetite album ,that they opened the door for grunge bands and brought back the rough edge. Good points Wasted.

Again, i have NO idea what you're talking about and what relevance playing covers has to making a huge mark on the industry, what on earth has that got to do with anything?!?! This is getting so like...ridiculous, OK, The Beatles played entire sets of covers, would you say that they weren't influential? What has playing covers got to do with making a mark on the industry, unless you're trying to suggest that the playing of covers invalidates your original matierial, what has that got to do with anything, explain it to me. Guns n Roses recorded an entire album of covers, as did any John Lennon as did Johnny Thunders as have any number of artists, what on earth has that got to do with anything? You've mentioned that they played entire sets of covers but you haven't made an comment about what significance you believe that to have so until you explain that i'm afraid i can't answer your question.

And as far as Appetite opening the doors for grunge, you're just basically copying what Wasted said and i agreed with, in the entire thread up until that point i kept asking you over and over and over the same question and you just didn't have an answer and once i've agreed on it with someone else you're going "yeah, yeah, that!!", where the fuck were you the 40 million other times that i was asking you?!?! Did you really have to make me repeat the same question over and over and over until someone made your point for you?

And yes, there is a school of thought that says Appetite had SOMETHING to do with the notion of bringing about a certain authenticity back to rock n roll but to suggest that that is the reason the mainstream embraced grunge and not the prior decade of work put in by the underground punk scene, music which has a direct audible link to the grunge bands (i.e. you can hear it in their music) and music that the grunge bands themselves cited as their influence, the music that grunge was actually a part of the lineage of, instead of Appetite which is basically good time rock n roll with a sort of sleazy edge to it, to suggest that Appetite is responsible for that shit more than that other stuff, is just ridiculous.

I mean, what, bands like Nirvana and Mudhoney and Tad and have more in common with Appetite era Guns n Roses than bands like Husker Du or The Replacements or Black Flag, the bands they actually sounded like, played the same circuits as, had much of the same ethics as and cited as their influences, is that honestly what you're trying to say?

The most mileage you could get out of that point as far as i'm concerned is, in a vague sense, the success of Apetite was indication of the fact that the mainstream was perhaps more willing at that point in musical history to embrace something a little more authentic than what was around at the time, thats about it.

My only point In this whole debate was and still Is that The Replacements being more Influential than Guns N Roses Is an OPINION.

Right, an opinion that i was discussing and then backing up with facts, now you can disagree with it, you're welcome to but so far you haven't managed to dispute it very well at all. See this is the thing, everything in opinion and theory and then you back it up with facts and prove your point. Obviously, y'know, there ain't an all purpose guage to this shit, all one can do in a discussion is to discuss or debate based on the evidence at hand or knowledge they have or variables that they can take into consideration, i'm not writing the fuckin bibles sequel, i'm saying what i think and, more importantly, WHY i think it and if you disagree then do it and if you can prove it and point out facts that corrobrate your point, do it.

So what the fucks wrong with that?

Edited January 13, 2012 by sugaraylen

[wasted]

I think bands like Soundgarden and AIC might have been influence by GNR. Big Jim from Faith No More respected Slash as a guitar player and a man.

[auad]

I think bands like Soundgarden and AIC might have been influence by GNR. Big Jim from Faith No More respected Slash as a guitar player and a man.

Soundgarden and AIC are so good than GNR. and no have been influence by GNR, for sure.

I swear, auad's whole day is spent googling no-name blogs for the worst translations of ENGLISH interviews. If the interview was in english, then what's the fucking point of translating it to some other language, and then back again? Oh right, I see- so auad can bastardize the original quotes yet simultaneously use quotation marks on the re-translated interview, to make it appear as if it were a legitimate quote. I swear, this forum is filled with more people who have no idea what putting quotation marks around text even means.

Oh well, auad's agenda is crystal clear.

What is the site he linked to anyway? Prison-discount-translators-R-us?

Hiding behind a monitor is easy. Please tell me this nonsense in the face. instead of trying to solve my day by day, try to collaborate more with this forum. My only intention is to share information about GNR. if the translation is not good, fuck it. what matters most is the general context of the topic. Give respect, and maybe win some. go to walk in the park.

[ironmt]

I think GNRs influence is more inspiration than cultural or social impact. Because there style is more conservative, it's not like a revolution. Which I think is fair, its just good music. It's more about attitude or ambition. Maybe not the most worthy of causes but bands like Manics, Oasis, Avenged Sevenfold, Buckcherry, Strokes have all name checked them. In someways GNR really opened the door for grunge bands. GNR brought back the rougher edge, Nirvana just took it further. GNR turned spandex to leather.

There we go, thank you, the first poster speaking in defence of GnR that actually clocked on to what the fuck i was talking about and actually made a fair point, herein lies the difference between ironmt going on and on about record sales and failing to address a single thing being discussed and someone actually making a point relevant to the discussion, makes a lot of sense too

Address this question. It was not uncommon for the group to play entire sets of covers, ranging anywhere from Bryan Adams' "Summer of '69" to Dusty Springfield's "The Look of Love" to Led Zeppelin's "Black Dog." Now Is that your Idea Of a band that were trend setters and making a huge mark on the music Industry? By the way, It's pretty much common knowlege, If you have ever listened to the Appetite album ,that they opened the door for grunge bands and brought back the rough edge. Good points Wasted.

Again, i have NO idea what you're talking about and what relevance playing covers has to making a huge mark on the industry, what on earth has that got to do with anything?!?! This is getting so like...ridiculous, OK, The Beatles played entire sets of covers, would you say that they weren't influential? What has playing covers got to do with making a mark on the industry, unless you're trying to suggest that the playing of covers invalidates your original matierial, what has that got to do with anything, explain it to me. Guns n Roses recorded an entire album of covers, as did any John Lennon as did Johnny Thunders as have any number of artists, what on earth has that got to do with anything? You've mentioned that they played entire sets of covers but you haven't made an comment about what significance you believe that to have so until you explain that i'm afraid i can't answer your question.

And as far as Appetite opening the doors for grunge, you're just basically copying what Wasted said and i agreed with, in the entire thread up until that point i kept asking you over and over and over the same question and you just didn't have an answer and once i've agreed on it with someone else you're going "yeah, yeah, that!!", where the fuck were you the 40 million other times that i was asking you?!?! Did you really have to make me repeat the same question over and over and over until someone made your point for you?

And yes, there is a school of thought that says Appetite had SOMETHING to do with the notion of bringing about a certain authenticity back to rock n roll but to suggest that that is the reason the mainstream embraced grunge and not the prior decade of work put in by the underground punk scene, music which has a direct audible link to the grunge bands (i.e. you can hear it in their music) and music that the grunge bands themselves cited as their influence, the music that grunge was actually a part of the lineage of, instead of Appetite which is basically good time rock n roll with a sort of sleazy edge to it, to suggest that Appetite is responsible for that shit more than that other stuff, is just ridiculous.

I mean, what, bands like Nirvana and Mudhoney and Tad and have more in common with Appetite era Guns n Roses than bands like Husker Du or The Replacements or Black Flag, the bands they actually sounded like, played the same circuits as, had much of the same ethics as and cited as their influences, is that honestly what you're trying to say?

The most mileage you could get out of that point as far as i'm concerned is, in a vague sense, the success of Apetite was indication of the fact that the mainstream was perhaps more willing at that point in musical history to embrace something a little more authentic than what was around at the time, thats about it.

My only point In this whole debate was and still Is that The Replacements being more Influential than Guns N Roses Is an OPINION.

Right, an opinion that i was discussing and then backing up with facts, now you can disagree with it, you're welcome to but so far you haven't managed to dispute it very well at all. See this is the thing, everything in opinion and theory and then you back it up with facts and prove your point. Obviously, y'know, there ain't an all purpose guage to this shit, all one can do in a discussion is to discuss or debate based on the evidence at hand or knowledge they have or variables that they can take into consideration, i'm not writing the fuckin bibles sequel, i'm saying what i think and, more importantly, WHY i think it and if you disagree then do it and if you can prove it and point out facts that corrobrate your point, do it.

So what the fucks wrong with that?

Thank you for finally stating this point "i'm saying what i think and, more importantly, WHY i think it". Thats all I was looking for. I am out of this discussion. Take care.

[Black Horse]

Tommy´s right, most people go to see GNR because of Axl, he is the soul of the band and a living legend, one of the real rock stars remaining. BUT once you go to a show and see those guys live you realize that those guys are fucking ace and kick some serious ass. He shouldn´t be so humble, he and the other guys contribute a lot to this band.

[Rovim]

Tommy´s right, most people go to see GNR because of Axl, he is the soul of the band and a living legend, one of the real rock stars remaining. BUT once you go to a show and see those guys live you realize that those guys are fucking ace and kick some serious ass. He shouldn´t be so humble, he and the other guys contribute a lot to this band.

It's way more weird for me to see Tommy on stage with Dj then to see Axl and Tommy on stage. Maybe it's because Duff was in the band, but then again Duff and Slash was kind of weird too.

I know Izzy really liked the song Chinese Democracy and Tommy seem to really dig it too. I think Axl, Tommy, Izzy, Fortus and Frank could create interesting songs or come up with cool musical ideas together.

Edited January 13, 2012 by Rovim

[truadmirer]

Tommy Stinson - better known as the man who pretends to be in Guns N 'Roses Duff McKagan

Bollocks, i ain't havin' that! Tommy Stinson was Tommy Stinson of The Replacements when he was 13 years old in fucking 1979 before anybody had even dreamt of a Duff McKagan or even a Guns n Roses. Fuck that. Tommy was a fucking legend before there even was a GnR, he don't need to pretend to be no one.

The Replacements are an integral part of a history that was far more important to music than anything GnR ever had anything to do with.

The Replacements do not have a far more Important music history than GNR.

Yes they do, HUGELY. GnR were a big band that made it big and then receeded, a derivative band at that, The Replacements were a part of something that literally changed the face of music, music hasn't been the same since punk, The Replacement were among the early touring punk bands that made it so the indie circuit actually came into existence, they were on of the earliest alternative bands to get signed to a major record label, they were seminal, they were a part of changing the music industry, the effects of those changes are still felt today, Guns n Roses don't really compare in that regard. Axl Rose and them were still learning to wipe their noses when The Replacements got signed to a major record label, as an alternative band coming out of the hardcore punk scene thats about as groundbreaking as an Al Qaeda member being made a US senator.

More than that, bands like The Replacements were part of the groundwork of alternative independent rock n roll that would eventually rise up and sink Guns n Roses in the early 90s.

Sorry, but what sunk GNR was their split, not anything else