comparing GNR to a solo project

[SoulMonster]

I was watching this video, and noticed a part, around the 1 minute mark, where Myles Kennedy says that the band members built the songs for Slash's solo record around Slash's ideas. This made me think of the Chinese Democracy recording process, and the things we've heard from a few of the GNR band members...I think Richard or Tommy said it. They said basically the same thing...we come in and contribute what we think works, but ultimately it's Axl's decision what stays and what doesn't...or something along those lines. So what makes this any different than a solo artist? I'm not trying to start a feud here between Axl/Slash or anything of the sort, I just want peoples opinions...because I like CD a lot, like the current band a lot, seen them twice and loved every second of it. I just don't see it as GNR...I view it as Axl's solo project, with some kick ass musicians who I've come to really like...so I don't want anyone thinking I'm trolling or an Axl hater, because I'm far from it. This is just a subject that has always been interesting to me.

Nah, it's no a solo effort because the songs are not written by one person. Many guys contribute and bring in whole song ideas. Axl being able to veto some ideas doesn't make it a solo project, many bands have one or two members who steer the artistic direction of the music. It is quite common in fact to have leaders in bands who take a larger responsibility for how things are done.

And since you insist on comparing it with Slash. With his band Slash is the one that brings in all the songs, and then the "band members" get to contribute to that song scaffold. With Guns N' Roses, other members could bring in whole songs which the other guys, Axl included, embellished (take Shackler's as an example).

I insisted on using Slash as the example because I didn't think about it until after watching the videos of him and his band recording apocalyptic love. When I caught that part, it made me think of Axl/GNR. How many songs on CD were brought in by other members? I know bucket had shacklers, or was at least the inspiration for it. What others? Would you say it's about 85% Axl's input and the rest of the band has 15? Or closer to 50/50? It just seems to me, and I'm sure many others, that ever since the break up (after 94) that Axl has brought in people to contribute, but in a very limited way...like how he had brain copy josh freese's drumming note for note.

I don't know the percentage, and I guess only Axl knows. But what does it matter? As long as other guys contribute and bring in songs it is not a "solo project" per definition, but fits right in there with all the other bands where one or a few members are leaders and have more to say when it comes to songwriting than others. This is not uncommon at all. A band where every members have just as much to say and where each members also contribute equally, is very rare.

And to a guy earlier in this thread: No one is saying Guns N' Roses today is like a classical band where the guys hang out all the time. Hell, even Guns N' Roses in the 90's weren't that kind of band. Usually only young bands are like that. When a band ages, it becomes more like a job for everyone involved. Young kids may not appreciate that, they want the band members to breath, eat and shit together and practically live the band. It happened with GN'R in the 80's, it's not going to happen again. If this is important to you, find another band.

Edited March 4, 2012 by SoulMonster

[kanudo19]

well yeah ultimately axl's word is wht counts, but like they also said he encourages them to write songs and give theyre own ideas, and like (i think tommy) said, he's the one who has the final word because his the one singing it !

and besides people should realize one thing, ever since axl started going his own way with the band, and i have a very personally opinion about this, wich his tht gnr is his dream and tht when he saw that most of the guys were to high to play back during use ur illusions and drugs were consuming the band that he slowly began to get more and more distant from the other members and at the same time , gnr sound began to be more "axlized" (i just made up tht word ) , during afd they were a band, a tight band, during illusions, u get more songs like november rain and estranged, songs became bigger and deeper and that continued until chinese democracy, u get a band in afd, then on uyi u get a band plus axl rose, and in chd u get axl rose's vision of how they're sound should be.

and at the same time axl has been fucked over so many times by record companys , people he used to trust, so called friends that in my personally opinion he didnt "trust" enough on these guys to be close to them, tht's why were seeing now an increasingly relation between band members, and they're getting closer and closer and i think that the next record it's gonna be the next apetite for destruction, and i dont mean in terms of sound but in terms of success .

this is definately a band wich is getting tighter and tighter and tighter by the minute. we just need to wait and see

Edited March 4, 2012 by kanudo19

[GnRDuff1]

If one were of the "solo project" mind (which I am not), GnR has technically been a solo project since Slash and Duff signed the name away.

[Flayer]

I think you are talking of the 1999 to 2004 lineups guys...

The current lineup doesn't write music at all.

This is the real trolling.

[GnRDuff1]

I think Axl has certainly allowed others to contribute to the creative process when writing songs.

To me, what sets this as being Guns N' Roses the band and not an Axl Rose solo project is the choice to keep up with the old band's legacy - to continue playing their songs in concerrt. I think if Axl saw it as his personal solo project he'd stop performing the classics he might be tired of now and focus more on new material.

I think it's also affected how he thinks about the songwriting. Axl has many unconventional ideas that have a hard time fitting in with Guns N' Roses songs, My World being the example we all know best. With all the songs on Chinese Democracy, for example, you have guitar solos, a feature common to just about all GNR songs, but absent on My World, absent on Silkworms, almost absent on Oh My God - the other direction Axl has experimented with. I think in viewing it as Guns N' Roses, he steers his writing more into a certain style.

The difference between Axl's attitude and that of Slash, the other ex-members, and a ton of the fans, is their definition of what the band really means. To most of us it means the people who made up the band; Axl, Slash, Izzy, Duff, Steven, and then Dizzy and Matt were Guns N' Roses. Then when the lineup shifted and we got new people like Brain and Bucket and Robin and Richard and Tommy, we started calling it 'the new band.' As the lineup shifts again, we view it as yet another band, with Ron and DJ and Frank.

In Axl's point of view; the band is defined by the 'sound' or the concept. Guns N' Roses is a musical ideal that is maintained no matter who's playing it. Thus, I don't Axl is recruiting 'hired guns' or slaves and yes-men, but other people that believe in the same ideal of GNR as he does and want to help him reach it. Axl's vision of the band is something a lot more like how King Crimson, for example, has operated.

You sir, are the World Heavyweight Champion of awesome explanation as to why this is still "guns n roses" and not "TARP" (the axl rose project)

[BS11290]

It walks like a solo project, it talks like a solo project, it's a solo project. With the legal powers that be to call it a band. And that's ok, it doesn't mean the music can't be enjoyed for what it is, but most people don't digest this as "Guns N' Roses" or even a band, and that's just a fact. And personally, I think that view is justified.

Sure, sure, use the argument that Bucket wrote the guitar for this, and Robin wrote the guitar for that, blah, blah, blah. Most solo artists do use outside musicians to contribute to make their dreams a reality, all the time. The nu guys have said outright, more than once, that their main job was to try to make Axl's dream a reality. Axl wrote every lyric to every song. Axl decides what part is to be used, what part gets edited, what part goes out the window, and what part best suits his direction without even consulting anybody. Axl decides when it's time to hit up the studio. Axl decides when it's time to tour, regardless of what the others may have planned. Most of the other guys don't even seem to know what the game plan is half of the time, as, "Axl's in charge with that type of "business related" stuff" (paraphrased from a Tommy interview from the fall). One man is in control of virtually everything in every way, shape, and form, and it's his way or the highway in virtually every aspect. That's the definition of a solo project to a t.

And again, that's cool. I guess most people would just prefer that he calls it what it clearly is instead of milking the success of a name with historical value. Especially nowadays where it seems like he's doing nothing but just that.

But it is what it is.

Edited March 4, 2012 by BS11290

[CheapJon]

I'm not trying to start a feud here between Axl/Slash or anything of the sort

Wonder what that would be like. A feud between Axl and Slash? Won't happen, dont worry!

[GnR Chris]

The current Guns N' Roses isn't a band in the true sense. They are a touring act playing other peoples' hits and relying on a name brand built with the AfD lineup.

They haven't released any music (and won't for the foreseeable future). No one but Axl makes any meaningful band decisions. It isn't a democracy.

Every time someone in the band is asked about new music, touring, or anything, they basically throw their hands up and admit to their own ignorance about the matter.

Until they release a couple records of music they all collaborated on together (not Bumblefoot dropping a solo here or there on top of a song created 10 years ago by other people), they will be Axl Rose and the hired Guns.

I support Axl's touring lineup because I'm a fan of Axl. And I'm a fan of the real Guns N' Roses, just as I go see Slash, Adler or Duff or (if he ever tours again) Izzy.

People who say this current lineup is the "real" Guns N' Roses ... they got me on semantics. People who say this current lineup is the best version of Guns N' Roses ... that's not even an opinion. That's idiotic. The current lineup hasn't done an ounce of what the classic lineup did. It shouldn't even be a discussion. All the current lineup does is play the old hits, and sure, they play the hell out of them. But they didn't write them and conquer the world with them.

I'm actually disappointed that Axl has done nothing with the Guns N' Roses name. I believe it created a bigger burden for him than anything. He would have been better off leaving the name alone and calling his project post-Guns "Axl Rose and the Hired Guns." Or anything else, really. Maybe we would have seen more music. And I think you can absolutely say people would have been more accepting of a band that they didn't view as a disrespect to the so-called legacy of the "original" lineup. For too long we heard, "If there's no Slash, it isn't Guns N' Roses."

[Original GNR]

I've said this in another thread before - Chinese Democracy is pretty much an Axl solo record in all but name. Nothing wrong with that by the way - I'm just as interested in the music Axl creates as I am with what Slash comes out with, or Velvet Revolver, Izzy or any other ex-GnR band member.

All solo artists usually encourage creative contributions from other people in the process of making a solo album, and that is no different to Axl with Chinese Democracy. Other people, such as Buckethead and Robin Finke contributed, but as with any project from a solo artist, it is them who have the final word. If Axl doesn't like something, it doesn't go on the album. Simple as that. So in that case, it isn't a "band" in the true sense of the word. It is a solo album but under the name "Guns N Roses" rather than "Ax Rose", because Axl owns the rights to the GnR name.

[rabia]

I've said this in another thread before - Chinese Democracy is pretty much an Axl solo record in all but name. Nothing wrong with that by the way - I'm just as interested in the music Axl creates as I am with what Slash comes out with, or Velvet Revolver, Izzy or any other ex-GnR band member.

All solo artists usually encourage creative contributions from other people in the process of making a solo album, and that is no different to Axl with Chinese Democracy. Other people, such as Buckethead and Robin Finke contributed, but as with any project from a solo artist, it is them who have the final word. If Axl doesn't like something, it doesn't go on the album. Simple as that. So in that case, it isn't a "band" in the true sense of the word. It is a solo album but under the name "Guns N Roses" rather than "Ax Rose", because Axl owns the rights to the GnR name.

Wasnt that the case in the old days? Which songs on GN'R's other albums ended up there if Axl didnt want them?

Bands arent necessarily democratic entities where everyone has an equally influential voice or an equal share in song-writing, one or two members often play a leadership role. Doesnt mean that its a solo project.

Edited March 4, 2012 by rabia

[BS11290]

I've said this in another thread before - Chinese Democracy is pretty much an Axl solo record in all but name. Nothing wrong with that by the way - I'm just as interested in the music Axl creates as I am with what Slash comes out with, or Velvet Revolver, Izzy or any other ex-GnR band member.

All solo artists usually encourage creative contributions from other people in the process of making a solo album, and that is no different to Axl with Chinese Democracy. Other people, such as Buckethead and Robin Finke contributed, but as with any project from a solo artist, it is them who have the final word. If Axl doesn't like something, it doesn't go on the album. Simple as that. So in that case, it isn't a "band" in the true sense of the word. It is a solo album but under the name "Guns N Roses" rather than "Ax Rose", because Axl owns the rights to the GnR name.

Wasnt that the case in the old days? Which songs on GN'R's other albums ended up there if Axl didnt want them?

Bands arent necessarily democratic entities where everyone has an equally influential voice or an equal share in song-writing, one or two members often play a leadership role. Doesnt mean that its a solo project.

Not really. Take November Rain for example. Axl really wanted it on Appetite, the rest of the band thought one ballad was enough. The rest is history. It's true that Axl became more of a control freak during the UYI sessions, but the band was still a band for the most part, with everybody having a say. It wasn't until Slash and Duff signed the name, for whatever reason, and then Axl having leaving "GNR" and taking the name wih him that the band dynamic really died.

It's one thing to have a "leadership" role in a band, it's another to have complete, dominated control over virtually everything as I described in my last post.

Edited March 4, 2012 by BS11290

[Original GNR]

It walks like a solo project, it talks like a solo project, it's a solo project. With the legal powers that be to call it a band. And that's ok, it doesn't mean the music can't be enjoyed for what it is, but most people don't digest this as "Guns N' Roses" or even a band, and that's just a fact. And personally, I think that view is justified.

Sure, sure, use the argument that Bucket wrote the guitar for this, and Robin wrote the guitar for that, blah, blah, blah. Most solo artists do use outside musicians to contribute to make their dreams a reality, all the time. The nu guys have said outright, more than once, that their main job was to try to make Axl's dream a reality. Axl wrote every lyric to every song. Axl decides what part is to be used, what part gets edited, what part goes out the window, and what part best suits his direction without even consulting anybody. Axl decides when it's time to hit up the studio. Axl decides when it's time to tour, regardless of what the others may have planned. Most of the other guys don't even seem to know what the game plan is half of the time, as, "Axl's in charge with that type of "business related" stuff" (paraphrased from a Tommy interview from the fall). One man is in control of virtually everything in every way, shape, and form, and it's his way or the highway in virtually every aspect. That's the definition of a solo project to a t.

And again, that's cool. I guess most people would just prefer that he calls it what it clearly is instead of milking the success of a name with historical value. Especially nowadays where it seems like he's doing nothing but just that.

But it is what it is.

Spot on. And that is exactly how it works with all solo artists.

[DrBrownstone]

I think you are talking of the 1999 to 2004 lineups guys...

The current lineup doesn't write music at all.

This is the real trolling.

jk, seriously though, relax..there's no need for that.

[rabia]

Not really. Take November Rain for example. Axl really wanted it on Appetite, the rest of the band thought one ballad was enough. The rest is history. It's true that Axl became more of a control freak during the UYI sessions, but the band was still a band for the most part, with everybody having a say. It wasn't until Slash and Duff signed the name, for whatever reason, and then Axl having leaving "GNR" and taking the name wih him that the band dynamic really died.

Jt's one thing to have a "leadership" role in a band, it's another to have complete, dominated control over virtually everything as I described in my last post.

That's not a very convincing example. Axl accepted that NR wasn't developed enough to be on Appetite so he let it go to UYI instead but nobody would have imagined it possible to leave it out altogether knowing Axl's determined commitment to the song. You still havent answered my question: which songs on the pre-Chi Dem albums ended up there despite Axl's serious opposition to them?

From what Axl has said, he wasn't having any fun with the old line-up for a long time before things went kaput and there was a general feeling that the band was dead, he referred to a photograph taken during those years with the word DEAD written on the wall behind them. Meanwhile Dizzy was being given the cold shoulder by the other guys because they didnt like Axl bringing him in. Hardly the most affable situation but somehow that meets the "band" test while CD is dubbed a solo project. Why? On what basis do you claim that the "band dynamic" died with the old line-up when Tommy, Dizzy, Chris and Axl have been together for well over a decade and gone through the ups and downs of the project together and are all on CD.

Where's the evidence that everybody had an equal say during the UYI sessions? Matt Sorum has expressed his consternation about November Rain but what difference were his concerns going to make anyway? Duff said that one reason he worked on his Believe in Me solo album was that there wasn't much room for someone like him to do song-writing in GN'R. He was obviously deferring to the power structure within the band which was well-understood and as Axl described it, if Axl and Slash weren't into a song, it wasnt going to be done. This in no way means that only songs written by Axl would be done but that his approval was crucial even back then. Similarly, Axl is the sole song-writer for only one song on Chinese Democracy- all the other songs have been co-written with the other guys. He didnt want This I Love on CD but was convinced by others to go ahead with it.

I've read that during the UYI tour, everything from the pre-show music to the lighting was Axl's decision. Seems like pretty straight-forward dominant position to me. I dont find this surprising either- whatever romanticized notions people might have about the old line-up or about the very idea of a band, the truth is that in human relationships some people happen to be more forceful than others and that shapes the dynamic.

[GnR Chris]

Axl became increasingly more controlling till the other guys had enough and split. With the current band, they're coming in knowing he's the controlling force. The boss. The "everything I say goes" person. There's a difference between someone slowly but surely ceasing control and strangling out others and what the group called Gn'R is now.

[DrBrownstone]

The overall artistic input from the old guys compared to the new guys is very different...these guys basically say "Hey Axl, how does this sound? I thought it would sound cool if I did this" then Axl might say "great" or he might say "eh....no. I like what you did here..and here...but this part needs to be changed...tweak this a little...rework that...then let me know when you're done."

With the old band, it was not like that. Duff's vibe and style of playing was a signature sound of GNR...same with Slash, Steven, Izzy, even gilby and matt...Axl never told Matt to copy Steven's drumming verbatim. There was still a sense of freedom in that they could put what they wanted towards the song. Now, it has to suit Axl's vision. I think that is the main difference. Also you have the financial side of things, which is another big factor, but we don't need to get into that. Overall I just can't see how people consider this a real band, in the traditional sense...but I respect everyones opinions.

[SoulMonster]

Overall I just can't see how people consider this a real band, in the traditional sense...

Cool that people now accept Guns N' Roses anno 2012 to be a real band, just not in the "traditional sense". That's a step forward . But if I could convince you that it has been common in all times that bands have leaders, one or two members who decides the direction of the band, would you then accept that today's Guns N' Roses is a real band, also in the traditional sense? Or would you have to say that, 'okay, it is a real band in the traditional sense, too, just not in the sense that I want my bands to be, where every member have an equal say and contribute exactly as much to all the music'?

Because if you wikipedia "bandleader" you'll see a list of band members who have been a dominant factor in the direction of numerous existing and earlier bands (and many artists we would refer to as solo artists, as well; Axl is included in the list, btw). Bands I suspect you would have no qualms referring to as real bands in every sense of the word, making this all an example of double standards obviously fuelled by some lingering bitterness.

Again, a solo artist is an artist who creates all the music himself without input from others, except usually getting others to play some of the instruments. Guns N' Roses is not a solo project, it is a band where you have one leading member who decides the direction of the band but where other members are free to contribute as long as it fits with Axl's vision.

Here are what some GN'R band members say about it all:

Dizzy, being asked if Axl takes the lead in the studio: For some songs, sure, but I know if we spend time and put together cool ideas and send it his way, and it’s cool, he appreciates it. So some things go a little bit further, maybe. And some things don’t, you know? Everyone brings things in, it just depends. At the end of the day, he’s going to sing it, so it’s got to flow the way he wants it to and the way he feels comfortable and the way he does put what he puts on it [Gazzette.net, February 2012].

Dj: You'd think 'Oh, Axl Rose, this egomaniac' and everything you've ever heard. He's quite the opposite. He lets me write my own solo pieces right before I hit 'Sweet Child O' Mine' every night. It's really funny to me to read some of these things out there on him, because it's just a completely different guy than I know [azcentral.com, December 2011].

Dizzy being asked bout the public image of Axl being a megalomaniac: I think most of it is cruel and malicious and unnecessary. I don’t think he’s like that at all. He’s a good friend. He’s like a brother [Vindy.com, December 2011].

Tommy: Sadly, of course, it took forever to finish the fucking record, but the reason why is because of what he expects out of the band. He likes to actually collaborate with the people he’s playing with. He doesn’t bring them a song and say, ‘Here’s my song. Sing it.’ It’s kind of a strange, old-school, songwriter-producer thing. I don’t think he realizes that. He’s really good at getting people to write something that inspires him [Chicago Sun Times, November 2011].

Dj: Obviously Axl runs the ship but, you know, it's like, with anything, he's very much 'This is a band'. It's very much a family. It's a really tight knit family [sVT Swedish Television, 2010].

Dizzy: Axl is very much into having a band. and he's one of the fairest, coolest, nicest guys that I've ever met... and that's just a fact. And I mean he treats us as band members but at the same time with any situation like that... there's always one person that's more important and you know is in charge and you have to know whose in charge. In every band, in every successful band, has a leader... he's the leader [Madagascar88, September 2005].

Tommy: (...) Axl as a producer is trying to get the best out of eight guys and get them all in a song, like trying to pull everyone in. You know, mush it together like a fucking piece of clay or something. Trying to form a piece of art work out of it. It takes time. (...) He has a way of working with people and pulling them in. Get you to bring something to the plate that's gonna be special and cool for that song. And it just takes a long time. Because you got eight guys you know. So that process takes a while [This tastes like pretzels - the Tommy Stinson interview, Here Today... Gone To Hell!, 2004].

[Original GNR]

There is having dominant band members, and then there is dominance al la Axl in Guns N Roses post-1994. That kind of dominance over every aspect of the "band" is pretty much identical to how a solo artist operates with his touring band, creative collaborators etc etc.

Edited March 4, 2012 by Original GNR

[PITBOSS]

Well what can be said that hasn't already been said? The band is not a democracy lol. I dig the new chinese songs and I give them a +1 for entertainment value for sure. 3 hour setlist is pretty sweet. I like the new members as well especially BBF. We can only speculate on what happened to the classic lineup and why they can't get along...

While it's not the original recipe, I'll take this over nothing. We saw them a few years ago and again last december, recent show was way better. If they could put differences aside and reform someday it would be EPIC and everyone knows it, even the haters. Would it work? Who knows? Axl is the only one who could pull it together and until he wants it, it is what it is.

[saber_]

Overall I just can't see how people consider this a real band, in the traditional sense.

So what do you want us to do? Refer to it as the "Axl Rose Band"? Like it or not, Axl owns the name and he's the sole founding member left in the band. He runs the show. He calls the shots. It's like that for a lotta bands.

Also, I think you are heavily discounting Buckethead's impact. I'm not sure how you can call Chinese Democracy an "Axl Rose record" when Buckethead's stamp is all over that album.

Furthermore, you've also created this false notion of a "real band." I'm fairly confident you made a freudian slip there, as I saw in another thread you refered to an old lineup of GnR as the "real Gnr." That right there proves your bias of perception. Because I'm going to tell you right now- I don't think you know what a "real band, in the traditional sense" really is if GnR isn't a "real band, in the traditional sense." But really- what are you actually trying to tell us? Well, you're trying to tell us that Axl has too much control of the band now, and therefore it ceased being Guns n Roses and for all practical purposes became his solo project. Is that about it? Careful, you may not like what you find when you seek out the answer to who willingly ceded the name of the band to Axl way back when.

Oh also, I'd brush up on recent quotes from band members. DJ said he's written 10 or 12 songs specifically for GnR. That certainly doesn't sound like an "Axl Rose solo project" to me. Just a thought.

In the end, this whole discussion is just semantics and frivolous hair splitting. Oh and Axl actually answered a question about Gnr vs solo project in the chats. Just fyi.

[rabia]

There is having dominant band members, and then there is dominance al la Axl in Guns N Roses post-1994. That kind of dominance over every aspect of the "band" is pretty much identical to how a solo artist operates with his touring band, creative collaborators etc etc.

That's just a generalized statement which cant be proven without an exhaustive analysis of how all sorts of bands and solo artists throughout history have functioned. What level of dominance takes one to solo artist territory cant be determined by some external observer. You have band members saying repeatedly that Axl looked towards them to help shape songs and not just play a guest appearance role.

When you look at the way the songs on CD are constructed, its hard not to see what a balancing act is going on to give all three guitarists (BBF, Finck and Buckethead) ample space for their own distinctive voices. In many places, Axl steps back to let them be the stars of the show with long and powerful solos taking centre-stage (There was a Time being a great example). Would Axl's own pre-existing style have lead directly to Shackler's Revenge or Riad and the Bedouins or even If the World or Sorry? He was able to go to these places because of the band members he worked with.

[DrBrownstone]

Overall I just can't see how people consider this a real band, in the traditional sense.

So what do you want us to do? Refer to it as the "Axl Rose Band"? Like it or not, Axl owns the name and he's the sole founding member left in the band. He runs the show. He calls the shots. It's like that for a lotta bands.

Also, I think you are heavily discounting Buckethead's impact. I'm not sure how you can call Chinese Democracy an "Axl Rose record" when Buckethead's stamp is all over that album.

Furthermore, you've also created this false notion of a "real band." I'm fairly confident you made a freudian slip there, as I saw in another thread you refered to an old lineup of GnR as the "real Gnr." That right there proves your bias of perception. Because I'm going to tell you right now- I don't think you know what a "real band, in the traditional sense" really is if GnR isn't a "real band, in the traditional sense." But really- what are you actually trying to tell us? Well, you're trying to tell us that Axl has too much control of the band now, and therefore it ceased being Guns n Roses and for all practical purposes became his solo project. Is that about it? Careful, you may not like what you find when you seek out the answer to who willingly ceded the name of the band to Axl way back when.

Oh also, I'd brush up on recent quotes from band members. DJ said he's written 10 or 12 songs specifically for GnR. That certainly doesn't sound like an "Axl Rose solo project" to me. Just a thought.

In the end, this whole discussion is just semantics and frivolous hair splitting. Oh and Axl actually answered a question about Gnr vs solo project in the chats. Just fyi.

I don't care what people do...lol. I still say I'm going to see "Guns N' Roses" ..I don't call it Axls solo band...because it is still called GNR..but in my mind, that's what it is. I do consider the original line up the real band...but you can consider what ever you want. I'm not trying to tell people what to think. I think I said that in my first post...I just was curious to see how other people felt about it, because I know this board has a lot of different opinions, and I'm interested in hearing them.

I hope those songs DJ wrote will have an impact on a future gnr record. I can't say that I think that will happen, but if it does, it will definitely make it seem a lot less like a solo project. Many people have made good points on the subject of why it's hard for me (and them) to perceive it as a band. The main reason being Axl's ultimate say in everything.

I know who "willingly ceded the name way back when". I know my GNR history. I don' happent see it like that...but that's another discussion for another board.

[rabia]

With the old band, it was not like that. Duff's vibe and style of playing was a signature sound of GNR...same with Slash, Steven, Izzy, even gilby and matt...Axl never told Matt to copy Steven's drumming verbatim. There was still a sense of freedom in that they could put what they wanted towards the song. Now, it has to suit Axl's vision. I think that is the main difference. Also you have the financial side of things, which is another big factor, but we don't need to get into that. Overall I just can't see how people consider this a real band, in the traditional sense...but I respect everyones opinions.

Gilby's playing was a signature sound of the band? He just filled in for what had been done before. By that logic, DJ is now the signature sound of SCOM because he plays it close to the original.

Axl didnt tell Matt to copy Steven's drumming because the grander sound that Axl seemed to envision for UYI fit with Matt's style and according to Slash and Alan Niven, Steven didnt have the capability to play the UYI material properly in the first place. Even with Brain, Axl asked him to play with his own feel. On songs like NR, he did indeed tell Matt the exact kind of sound he wanted from him. Live, Brain and Frank Ferrar have had quite different styles but Axl has not forced Frank to become a pale imitation of Brain. He plays the songs his own way.

From what the current members have said, CD was based on "sketches and ideas" that people brought in, so the process seems exploratory rather than Axl starting with a specifically detailed picture and then manufacturing everyone's parts to fill in that picture. Tommy has talked about the challenge of working with people from so many different styles because the songs emerged from the give and take between them all. Its a band dynamic just being played out with a band with an uncommonly large number of players.

[DrBrownstone]

With the old band, it was not like that. Duff's vibe and style of playing was a signature sound of GNR...same with Slash, Steven, Izzy, even gilby and matt...Axl never told Matt to copy Steven's drumming verbatim. There was still a sense of freedom in that they could put what they wanted towards the song. Now, it has to suit Axl's vision. I think that is the main difference. Also you have the financial side of things, which is another big factor, but we don't need to get into that. Overall I just can't see how people consider this a real band, in the traditional sense...but I respect everyones opinions.

Gilby's playing was a signature sound of the band? He just filled in for what had been done before. By that logic, DJ is now the signature sound of SCOM because he plays it close to the original.

Axl didnt tell Matt to copy Steven's drumming because the grander sound that Axl seemed to envision for UYI fit with Matt's style and according to Slash and Alan Niven, Steven didnt have the capability to play the UYI material properly in the first place. Even with Brain, Axl asked him to play with his own feel. On songs like NR, he did indeed tell Matt the exact kind of sound he wanted from him. Live, Brain and Frank Ferrar have had quite different styles but Axl has not forced Frank to become a pale imitation of Brain. He plays the songs his own way.

From what the current members have said, CD was based on "sketches and ideas" that people brought in, so the process seems exploratory rather than Axl starting with a specifically detailed picture and then manufacturing everyone's parts to fill in that picture. Tommy has talked about the challenge of working with people from so many different styles because the songs emerged from the give and take between them all. Its a band dynamic just being played out with a band with an uncommonly large number of players.

Didn't Gilby play on TSI? I was more referring to that than his live performances, covering Izzy's stuff. And Axl said "play exactly what Josh played, but with your feel."

[rabia]

Didn't Gilby play on TSI? I was more referring to that than his live performances, covering Izzy's stuff. And Axl said "play exactly what Josh played, but with your feel."

Yes, but is TSI the signature sound of GN'R itself? An album of covers wouldn't strike most people as falling into that category.