Jump to content

Alan Niven about Gn'R


Iras

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I think he was bad menager.In 1988-89 Gnr were the biggest band in the world and still played like opening acts(aerosmith menager confirmem:"They were more popular than us but they were opening for us")

14377.jpg

Edited by Flayer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think he was bad menager.In 1988-89 Gnr were the biggest band in the world and still played like opening acts(aerosmith menager confirmem:"They were more popular than us but they were opening for us")

They were still a fledgling band during that time and they only really took off in '88. Plus I would not call opening for Rolling Stones a bad thing...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think he was bad menager.In 1988-89 Gnr were the biggest band in the world and still played like opening acts(aerosmith menager confirmem:"They were more popular than us but they were opening for us")

They were still a fledgling band during that time and they only really took off in '88. Plus I would not call opening for Rolling Stones a bad thing...

Aerosmith was just beginning to rebuild in 86-87, and GNR were skyrocketing up by the summer of '88. They're more on an even level now. Tyler and Perry relapsed a couple of years ago, Duff and Slash are no different... I'm sure they worry it could come back to bite them in the ass.

Aerosmith wasn't even inducted all that long ago, and they've been a band 15 years longer than GNR have been.

I don't know how anyone could've managed them at the time. Axl's gone through managers like water. He's a difficult person to deal with, and he'd be the first to admit he's no picnic. But with Beta, who's known him for 20 years, she can read him a lot better than any manager ever could. Now if they need to cancel a tour, they just make the calls and it's done with. They're not going to have the manager trying to play head games and give him a guilt trip into it if his frame of mind's not into it.

The 1991 shows I felt were bad management related. They put on some great shows, but everything that's come out since indicates they weren't ready for the road, and Axl just decided to keep sabotaging the band and pissing off the audience. He's lucky he's so beloved because some nights the crowd was out for his blood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

COMING NEXT - GUNS N’ ROSES SPECIAL PART TWO: Guns N’ Roses, and Niven, make it big

where's the link ?

pressing Next appears to goto to something non GN'R

Don't think part 2 is up on the site yet. Guess they know GNR stuff pulls in lots of readers, so they want to space it out to get people to visit multiple times. Can't wait to read parts 2 and 3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wonder how Duff changed with the money.

Yeah, I hope they elaborate on that. Unless he meant he was this punk rocker with attitude at first but eventually learned he was a softie once you befriended him? I was really confused by that, but I assume he didn't mean it in a negative way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think he was bad menager.In 1988-89 Gnr were the biggest band in the world and still played like opening acts(aerosmith menager confirmem:"They were more popular than us but they were opening for us")

and you don't think Alan had anything to do with that, huh? B4 Alan came into the frey, they couldn't get shit going but 2 yrs later, there opening for Aersmith and were more popular but Alan's a shitty manager? GnR's explosion coincided with that Aersmith tour and it's a safe bet Alan had ALOT to do with it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've heard similar things from guys like Dave Grohl about how Duff went from being a punk rocker from the streets to having an entourage follow him around and cater to him. Can't remember where I saw that...I think it was an old Nirvana show I saw on youtube.

And Grohl's done plenty of douchey things over the years, he'd be the first to say he's no better or worse than anyone else. Dave's gone through as many band changes as Axl has.

Funny thing is that Duff and Dave worked on their debut solo albums themselves, and both are fans of Prince, the last name you'd think would be an influence on either of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Losing Steven was frustrating and painful. But we tried and tried to pull him through. The problem was, he just could not connect to the more intricate material Axl was writing for the Illusion albums. Time and again, Slash and the others would bemoan that he just couldn't get it, and that he would play the same section the same way twice instead of fixing it.

The bullshit that he was fired for his addiction is just that – bullshit. It was a performance matter.

Very important stuff here. Challenges our generally accepted view of the reasons behind it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The bullshit that he (Alder) was fired for his addiction is just that – bullshit. It was a performance matter.

Interesting.

They had to. My understanding of the situation was that Axl stated to the band he would not go on tour if I remained as manager. Didn't give the others much of a choice there, did he?... By this point, Axl was kind of taking over. Let’s look at the first thing he did once I left: He had everyone else in the band sign the name over to him. It was a control move between Axl and Doug Goldstein. They both knew I would never stand for anything like that. Axl never even brought it up when I was the manager because he knew what I would tell him to do with it.

METAL SLUDGE: So what are you saying? Axl and Doug Goldstein had a secret alliance?

That sounds very accurate.

Axl taking over :rolleyes:

I think that both Axl and Goldstein were, at that time, both controlling and greedy. Axl complained all the time that Steven Adler got a percentage of composing royalties. I had recommended that the band have a share-and-share-alike approach to such income -- as did Van Halen, Great White, and others – because my observation was that the primary factors that destroyed bands were women and arguing over differential splits of income, especially mechanical royalties. Hence, I would recommend equal sharing of royalties -- and not women!

Alan Niven just says it like it is. No BS :thumbsup:

Edited by vaida
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Losing Steven was frustrating and painful. But we tried and tried to pull him through. The problem was, he just could not connect to the more intricate material Axl was writing for the Illusion albums. Time and again, Slash and the others would bemoan that he just couldn't get it, and that he would play the same section the same way twice instead of fixing it.

The bullshit that he was fired for his addiction is just that – bullshit. It was a performance matter.

Very important stuff here. Challenges our generally accepted view of the reasons behind it.

Why? Its nothing new, I thought it was common knowledge that it wasn't solely about the drugs but whether he could still function under the influence (which he could not) and general lack of skill. Even Slash mentions it in his book.

METAL SLUDGE: Oh, one thing I was wondering about: Was there ever a time when Guns N’ Roses almost broke up before all the success?

Yes, in Phoenix. There was a riot. I sat the band down and said, “Look, I made a commitment to this band, but if you decide on another singer, I’ll stand by you.” They thought about it, too.

Now this has always been interesting to me. There were apparently many instances where Axl was almost fired but they never went through with it and I wonder why. From the sound of things it seems like he was a major pain in the ass all around (controlling, temperamental, unprofessional, etc) so why did they decide against canning him every single time? Also if they had, would GnR have made it to the height that they did? That is the question I would ask Niven if I was interviewing him.

Its kinda obvious that Alan had no love for Axl from the gekko, he seemed to have more faith in the band itself since he states suggesting to fire Axl on more than one occasion. Perhaps he deemed Axl replaceable? That the music would have held its own regardless?

Edited by KiraMPD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...