comparing GNR to a solo project

[Flayer]

You guys can trade 5,000 word essays all you want. The end game is that GNR's credibility, and respect since the early 90s has tanked like the economy.

Now maybe you don't see it that way.

Maybe you think Chinese is a good record.

Maybe you would buy DJ Ashba a red bull+vodka.

Maybe your cousin in Ohio played "Better" on the radio.

99% of the world says this band hasn't reflected the spirit of Guns N Roses since 1993.

The 99% can go get a fucking job.

[SoulMonster]

You guys can trade 5,000 word essays all you want. The end game is that GNR's credibility, and respect since the early 90s has tanked like the economy.

Now maybe you don't see it that way.

No, I see it that way, too.

Maybe you think Chinese is a good record.

Not really.

Maybe you would buy DJ Ashba a red bull+vodka.

Sure, if I had the opportunity.

Maybe your cousin in Ohio played "Better" on the radio.

Nope.

99% of the world says this band hasn't reflected the spirit of Guns N Roses since 1993.

Okay.

BUT IT IS STILL A BAND.

[Apollo]

My best friend fronts a local band. A group of 30-40 year old guys. They play 95% covers. They play small clubs and parties. They are a band. It IS a band because it is a group of musicians that perform together.

GnR is the same. It is a band. It is Axl's band, make no mistake about that. He is the king, the leader and the boss. And with a that.....it is a band. Even if it was called The Axl Rose Project, the musicians playing would still be a band. This is a legitimate band.

It sucks that the band only gets to shine right now by mainly playing other people's music. And that's my fear. Eventually band members might get tired of just being a touring member and want to create and play their own music. GnR would be a huge stepping stone for a lot of these guys. They will make a lot of money, get a lot of exposure and really give their careers a boost....but most musicians want to be able to stand on their own work, and the longer Axl waits to do that, the more likely somebody will leave. And you can't blame them.

With that said, this is a great band and they sound amazing live. And I can't wait to hopefully get to hear and see what type of music they can create. As a band.

Your BFF is in a cover band and that's exactly what GnR is, a cover/tribute band

Sure, right now GnR is a cover/touring band. Imo, they are one of the best touring bands out there right now. I saw this band in 2011 and it was one of the best shows I've ever attended.

You can call them whatever you want. Stick any label on them you want. But at the end of the day, they are getting paid, traveling the world, and getting to play GnR songs every show.....not a bad life at all. How's your life going?

[WhazUp]

I wouldn't call this current lineup an Axl solo band, although Axl is clearly the dude pulling the strings - more so than he ever did with the old lineup

The fact that there are other band members getting song writing credits shows that it isn't 100 percent Axl's music with backing musicians playing it, it is a bit more collaborative than that

But are they truly "GNR" in the sense that they are the band that the public and past legacies have defined as Guns N' Roses? I suppose that is a totally different debate

Edited March 7, 2012 by WhazUp

[saber_]

You guys can trade 5,000 word essays all you want. The end game is that GNR's credibility, and respect since the early 90s has tanked like the economy.

Now maybe you don't see it that way.

Maybe you think Chinese is a good record.

Maybe you would buy DJ Ashba a red bull+vodka.

Maybe your cousin in Ohio played "Better" on the radio.

99% of the world says this band hasn't reflected the spirit of Guns N Roses since 1993.

If you were a true Guns n Roses fan, you would've said 1991... when Izzy left.

[Georgy Zhukov]

Yeah Izzy left the band after they completed the Illusions and they haven't written any new GN'R songs. They just dragged it out until they realize they couldn't write any new music to agree on. Izzy was always the guys who came up with the cool stuff they can agree on and when he was out a split is inevitable.

[trqster]

Yeah Izzy left the band after they completed the Illusions and they haven't written any new GN'R songs. They just dragged it out until they realize they couldn't write any new music to agree on. Izzy was always the guys who came up with the cool stuff they can agree on and when he was out a split is inevitable.

This.

[Georgy Zhukov]

Axl hoped Paul Huge would be the new Izzy but Slash could not work with him and his contribution to further GN'R material is up in the air.

[Nosaj Thing]

Axl hoped Paul Huge would be the new Izzy but Slash could not work with him and his contribution to further GN'R material is up in the air.

What happened with Paul Huge anyway? I'm not really fond of nuGn'R history. He was like the guy Axl protected for years and all of the sudden he was gone.

[Flayer]

Axl hoped Paul Huge would be the new Izzy but Slash could not work with him and his contribution to further GN'R material is up in the air.

What happened with Paul Huge anyway? I'm not really fond of nuGn'R history. He was like the guy Axl protected for years and all of the sudden he was gone.

From what I've read it's the Izzy story all over again. He didn't really like being in the spotlight and living his life on tours. But as far as I know he's still on good terms with Axl and (my opinions start here) might make further studio contributions or even be a backup in case one of the live guitarists can't perform (say, if Bumble needed a night off, Paul could fill in on rhythms to free Richard up for the lead parts).

[rabia]

Anyway, i think we all know this New Band is a solo project now.

But i don't care this as long as the band contains Axl.

No, "we all" dont know that at all. Speak for yourself instead of trying to think for others.

[BS11290]

*Erm...it is? Again, many solo artists use other musicians to try and accomplish to set out what they're trying to do, right?

There's a difference between that and having band members bring in song ideas and help write songs from the bottoms-up. Hence Guns N' Roses is a band.

You do realize that the "band" is made up of Axl and what are officially, and legally considered to be hired hands right?

Nope, I am not aware they are "officially and legally" "hired hands". If it is true it should be easy for you to prove that statement. I guess you have copies of some contracts, right? Looking forward to seeing them And why haven't you brought these out earlier? If they really are "officially" nothing bit hired hands it sort of ends the discussion immediately.

Totally disposable to Axl at a drop of a hat, and he's not obligated to explain himself to anybody in the "band", exact same way solo artist operate.

...and the way a band leader with broad control may operate. Again, a band can have any possible power structure. You are confused about what a "band" is. You seem to insist there can't be a band leader with absolute control within a band. Get rid of that notion.

*Nobody is arguing that, but I think we're focusing more on the essence aspect more than the legality of it. That to me is more essential to this discussion than what's written on legal documents.

Of course it is more essential to you. When you can't argue something that is inconvenient for your argument it is better to not go into it, right? And the "essence" is that you hold some idealized idea of what a band is supposed to be, and Guns N' Roses obviously doesn't meet that ideal, and this "idea" of yours weighs more to you than normal definitions, what the actual band members themselves say, and, I have to admit, common sense.

*Again, and this may seem rather blunt, but what the "members" say don't mean dick really. They are legally employees to the person who really runs ship, Axl, and that's it. Most of the time they don't even know what's going on in their own "band" than the fans do. It's all there in black and white.

Again, I am looking forward to seeing these "official" documents that prove they are nothing but hired hands and not band members.

And of course it matters what they say themselves . Who am I gonna trust, guys on a discussion board who feel Guns N' Roses doesn't live up to their idealized idea of egalitarian band power structures or the members themselves who -- one would think -- know what they are? The answer is obvious...

http://www.khpblaw.com/pdf/pdf%20Cross%20Complaint,%20filed%205_17_2010.PDF. Section 5. I'll fully admit that I thought I saw a statement that said outright that they were his employees, but I guess I must have misread it all those months ago. Still that is clearly more among the lines of an employer and employee relationship, than a unit of musicians. You look at that as "having a band leader with total control", but that's also no different than how a solo artist operates.

Again, many, many solo artists have outside musicians venture in and help arrange songs. That's what the nu band does. Writes parts to songs that try to compliment Axl's vision alone. Then Axl, and Axl alone, writes lyrics to them, as he did for every song off Chinese Democracy. No different than how a solo artist operates.

What I mean by "essence" is that the musical outfit of Guns N Roses became a different musical beast when Axl left the band and took the name with him. That's when the band dynamic died. All former members say this was the point where GNR became the Axl Rose show, and as Slash said "Axl thinks Guns IS his solo project". With the nu guys, the way Axl ran shit was different, the sound was drastically different, the way it looked was drastically different, the way they vibed was drastically different. It's nearly impossible to look at this as the same outfit that gave us Appetite, Lies, the UYIs, and even TSI. Not necessarily bad, but not the same thing in spirit.

You can say what they think matters, each to their own. But let's be real. These guys are grateful for the job. None of them would have a job of this magnitude if it weren't for Axl. They're not gonna add fuel to the negative fire that surrounds Axl, and enforce the criticism and risk losing it. Actions speak louder than words, and from the outside looking in, it still walks, talks, and looks like a solo venture. And that's why the majority of the public thinks the way they do when it comes to this.

[Damn_Smooth]

http://www.khpblaw.c...05_17_2010.PDF. Section 5. I'll fully admit that I thought I saw a statement that said outright that they were his employees, but I guess I must have misread it all those months ago. Still that is clearly more among the lines of an employer and employee relationship, than a unit of musicians. You look at that as "having a band leader with total control", but that's also no different than how a solo artist operates.

Again, many, many solo artists have outside musicians venture in and help arrange songs. That's what the nu band does. Writes parts to songs that try to compliment Axl's vision alone. Then Axl, and Axl alone, writes lyrics to them, as he did for every song off Chinese Democracy. No different than how a solo artist operates.

What I mean by "essence" is that the musical outfit of Guns N Roses became a different musical beast when Axl left the band and took the name with him. That's when the band dynamic died. All former members say this was the point where GNR became the Axl Rose show, and as Slash said "Axl thinks Guns IS his solo project". With the nu guys, the way Axl ran shit was different, the sound was drastically different, the way it looked was drastically different, the way they vibed was drastically different. It's nearly impossible to look at this as the same outfit that gave us Appetite, Lies, the UYIs, and even TSI. Not necessarily bad, but not the same thing in spirit.

You can say what they think matters, each to their own. But let's be real. These guys are grateful for the job. None of them would have a job of this magnitude if it weren't for Axl. They're not gonna add fuel to the negative fire that surrounds Axl, and enforce the criticism and risk losing it. Actions speak louder than words, and from the outside looking in, it still walks, talks, and looks like a solo venture. And that's why the majority of the public thinks the way they do when it comes to this.

You had me right up until there.

Throwing nonsense in with your facts ruins your whole argument.

Now you know, and knowing is half the battle. G.I. Joe is there. Blahblahblahblah.....

[BS11290]

http://www.khpblaw.c...05_17_2010.PDF. Section 5. I'll fully admit that I thought I saw a statement that said outright that they were his employees, but I guess I must have misread it all those months ago. Still that is clearly more among the lines of an employer and employee relationship, than a unit of musicians. You look at that as "having a band leader with total control", but that's also no different than how a solo artist operates.

Again, many, many solo artists have outside musicians venture in and help arrange songs. That's what the nu band does. Writes parts to songs that try to compliment Axl's vision alone. Then Axl, and Axl alone, writes lyrics to them, as he did for every song off Chinese Democracy. No different than how a solo artist operates.

What I mean by "essence" is that the musical outfit of Guns N Roses became a different musical beast when Axl left the band and took the name with him. That's when the band dynamic died. All former members say this was the point where GNR became the Axl Rose show, and as Slash said "Axl thinks Guns IS his solo project". With the nu guys, the way Axl ran shit was different, the sound was drastically different, the way it looked was drastically different, the way they vibed was drastically different. It's nearly impossible to look at this as the same outfit that gave us Appetite, Lies, the UYIs, and even TSI. Not necessarily bad, but not the same thing in spirit.

You can say what they think matters, each to their own. But let's be real. These guys are grateful for the job. None of them would have a job of this magnitude if it weren't for Axl. They're not gonna add fuel to the negative fire that surrounds Axl, and enforce the criticism and risk losing it. Actions speak louder than words, and from the outside looking in, it still walks, talks, and looks like a solo venture. And that's why the majority of the public thinks the way they do when it comes to this.

You had me right up until there.

Throwing nonsense in with your facts ruins your whole argument.

Now you know, and knowing is half the battle. G.I. Joe is there. Blahblahblahblah.....

"I didn't really know what else to do after Axl sent a letter on August 31, 1995, saying that he was leaving the band and taking the name with him under the terms of the new contract. After that we tried to put it back together." (Slash, Autobiography)

"This will serve as notice [that] effective [...] Decemeber 30th 1995, I will withdraw from the partnership. [...] I intend to use the name 'Guns N' Roses' in connection with a new group which I will form." (Slash & Duff v. Axl lawsuit document, 2004)

http://www.gnrevolution.com/viewtopic.php?pid=54633#p54633

So why was that considered nonsense?

[Damn_Smooth]

So why was that considered nonsense?

Keep reading the thread that you linked to and you'll see.

I know it's long, but it's interesting so go ahead and give the whole thing a read.

[BS11290]

So why was that considered nonsense?

Keep reading the thread that you linked to and you'll see.

I know it's long, but it's interesting so go ahead and give the whole thing a read.

Wanna point out specifically what it is....

[Damn_Smooth]

So why was that considered nonsense?

Keep reading the thread that you linked to and you'll see.

I know it's long, but it's interesting so go ahead and give the whole thing a read.

Wanna point out specifically what it is....

You really want to make me read the whole thing over again after all of this time? Fine, I guess, but you should really read it yourself. Be back in however long it takes.

[Damn_Smooth]

So why was that considered nonsense?

Keep reading the thread that you linked to and you'll see.

I know it's long, but it's interesting so go ahead and give the whole thing a read.

Wanna point out specifically what it is....

http://www.gnrevolut...id=54778#p54778

One of these amendments [...] confirmed Slash's and Duff's departure from the band and their status as "Leaving Members" under the 1992 Recording Agreement, thereby relieving them of charges against their royalty accounts for the enormous recording costs and other expenses being incurred by Axl Rose in connection with the recording of the new Guns N' Roses studio album. Slash and Duff, like Stradlin and Adler before them, retained a royalty interest in masters created under the Recording Agreement prior to their departure from the band.

There are plenty more, I was just skimming as fast as I could.

[BS11290]

So why was that considered nonsense?

Keep reading the thread that you linked to and you'll see.

I know it's long, but it's interesting so go ahead and give the whole thing a read.

Wanna point out specifically what it is....

http://www.gnrevolut...id=54778#p54778

One of these amendments [...] confirmed Slash's and Duff's departure from the band and their status as "Leaving Members" under the 1992 Recording Agreement, thereby relieving them of charges against their royalty accounts for the enormous recording costs and other expenses being incurred by Axl Rose in connection with the recording of the new Guns N' Roses studio album. Slash and Duff, like Stradlin and Adler before them, retained a royalty interest in masters created under the Recording Agreement prior to their departure from the band.

There are plenty more, I was just skimming as fast as I could.

Doesn't change the fact there are legal documents stating Axl was leaving the band and taking the name with him. But to be honest with you, I'm kinda confused about what you quoted is about...

Edited March 8, 2012 by BS11290

[SoulMonster]

http://www.khpblaw.com/pdf/pdf%20Cross%20Complaint,%20filed%205_17_2010.PDF. Section 5. I'll fully admit that I thought I saw a statement that said outright that they were his employees, but I guess I must have misread it all those months ago.

I guess you must have.

Still that is clearly more among the lines of an employer and employee relationship, than a unit of musicians.

The document refer to the other guys as "band members", the exact opposite of what you have been claiming.

Again, yes, this is not a band with a flat power structure, this is a band with a head honcho in total control. But that doesn't take away from the fact that it is still a band. What you need to do is to ex-tangle the concept of what a band is and what you want a band to be. That is two concepts that only partially overlap. The conclusion, if you succeed, is that, yes, GN'R is a band, but a band that is not operating the way you want it. And that is the conclusion most of us have arrived at a long time ago.

You look at that as "having a band leader with total control", but that's also no different than how a solo artist operates.

*sigh* The difference between a band with a bandleader in total control and a solo artist, is not the power structure, which is almost identical, but the fact that when writing songs the dynamics in a band is vastly different than between a solo artist and whatever session musicians are brought in. With Guns N' Roses the level of contribution was typical for a functioning band in the writing process, everybody chipped in, and not only with their own parts, but also with whole song structures and riff from which songs were orchestrated around.

This in addition to legal documents, like the one you linked to, and the fact that the band members themselves say they are band members, makes this a band. You basically have no arguments except for a strong desire to make others embrace your idea that Guns N' Roses is a solo artist project.

Again, many, many solo artists have outside musicians venture in and help arrange songs. That's what the nu band does. Writes parts to songs that try to compliment Axl's vision alone. Then Axl, and Axl alone, writes lyrics to them, as he did for every song off Chinese Democracy. No different than how a solo artist operates.

It is not only about writing parts to Axl's songs, it is also bringing in own song ideas. Like Shackler's, and Better, and what Dj is claiming to be doing now. It is obvious that Axl wants help with creating the music. Of course he has the vision and will veto anything that goes against that, but it is still a band.

What I mean by "essence" is that the musical outfit of Guns N Roses became a different musical beast when Axl left the band and took the name with him. That's when the band dynamic died. All former members say this was the point where GNR became the Axl Rose show, and as Slash said "Axl thinks Guns IS his solo project". With the nu guys, the way Axl ran shit was different, the sound was drastically different, the way it looked was drastically different, the way they vibed was drastically different. It's nearly impossible to look at this as the same outfit that gave us Appetite, Lies, the UYIs, and even TSI. Not necessarily bad, but not the same thing in spirit.

Rubbish. GN'R was always about evolution and pushing the envelope. There's a linear progression from AFD all the way to CD. Of course each album is marked by the particular band members who add their own skills and ideas, like Steven's drumming on AFD and Bucket's kill switch on CD.

And yes, the band seized to operate as an egalitarian project. But that did not happen post-1994, it happened way before that, probably around when Axl insisted on Steven only getting 15 % of the return, rather than the 20 % he expected, from AFD. Guns N' Roses stopped being a band of brothers where everybody had a say in the late 80's, early 90's.

You can say what they think matters, each to their own. But let's be real. These guys are grateful for the job. None of them would have a job of this magnitude if it weren't for Axl. They're not gonna add fuel to the negative fire that surrounds Axl, and enforce the criticism and risk losing it. Actions speak louder than words, and from the outside looking in, it still walks, talks, and looks like a solo venture. And that's why the majority of the public thinks the way they do when it comes to this.

No, it looks like a band with a bandleader in total control. The disparate and in-cohesive songs on CD is a telltale sign that this was a collaborative musical effort created not by one single mind, but by a collective of musicians all brining in their own ideas and skills.

Edited March 8, 2012 by SoulMonster

[Damn_Smooth]

Doesn't change the fact there are legal documents stating Axl was leaving the band and taking the name with him. But to be honest with you, I'm kinda confused about what you quoted is about...

It's about Slash and Duff leaving the band years after your documents saying that Axl left.

[RockerRoller]

yes it is a band.....but not really a real band

[Flayer]

Are we tired of the Newspeak yet? This has just been circle after circle for a dozen pages. Believe whatever you want, it don't really matter. Guns or "Guns" or whatever you see it as will keep on rolling regardless.

[shotgunblues1978]

I don't understand why people are so hellbent on insisting that it is a "solo act"

It is true that Axl has final say in terms of business decisions, track listings, etc. but most aspects are collaborative (this has been verified by many people). The problem is that some people here have this false, idealized concept of a band where everyone has equal say. The reality is that few if any bands function that way. Most bands have one or two members that have decision making power far beyond the rest of the band.