Would anybody else like to see Slash, Duff, Stevie and whoever else tour playing GNR songs this Summer?

[Chewbacca]

Going independent looks the best to me too.

[cliffburton]

Define band. Many people see a new lineup as a new band. One member change, yeah mostly the same band. When all but one remains, it ceases to be that band.

What about Motörhead?

Don't know anything about them.

Lemmy

Promoters want a reunion for a money. Axl will turn down millions if they keep pressuring him but all it takes is the former members to swallow their pride and admit they were wrong. All the money in the world is not going to get them back together. Their best bet to profit off the GN'R is to promote another album with the current band.

The millions are there because of the demand of a reunion over what we have now. That was my point.

A reunion will never happen. They might as well focus on what money they could make now. I think Axl should go independent. He has capable producers in the band that should have no problem releasing the unreleased tracks and new material.

I agree on all accounts, just thought axl and Izzy should showed and played 3 songs for the fans is all.

[Georgy Zhukov]

They will be free of the labels hold on the next album if they go independent.

Axl and Slash were never a duo. Izzy was always the third person, many times a duo with Axl or Slash. Izzy leaving the band end all creative output Axl, Slash and Duff could agree on.

No Izzy, no reunion. The band was over before the Illusions were even released.

Edited April 16, 2012 by BirdCatcher

[cliffburton]

You don't get it. You probably never will. Ax and Slash were the Jimmy Page and Robert Plant,, Steven Tyler and Joe Perry. In the eyes of the public, slaxl will always be gnr. For me GnR, is axl, slash, duff, and Izzy. Nothing less. Don't care who drums.

In the public's eye, this will always be GNR

Edited April 16, 2012 by cliffburton

[Chewbacca]

Define band. Many people see a new lineup as a new band. One member change, yeah mostly the same band. When all but one remains, it ceases to be that band.

What about Motörhead?

Don't know anything about them.

Lemmy is the only one from the original lineup left and people still consider it to be the same band. What makes Axl's case so special?

Like I said I know nothing about them or who wrote what. Axl case is what it is because the song writers, personalities, and the overall sound of the band is gone in this current lineup. They saw slash as axl's equal. They were a duo. I don't know motorhead, but id bet no one gave two shits about their former members to being with. If they do care, then I'd view their situation he same.

Slash was very important to Gn'R legacy, he cowrote songs like SCOM, CW, Estranged and, my favorite, Coma, but the main duo on the songwritting was Axl/ Izzy. Why does everybody forgets to give him credit? Always the underdog... not surprised he didn't show up

[cliffburton]

Define band. Many people see a new lineup as a new band. One member change, yeah mostly the same band. When all but one remains, it ceases to be that band.

What about Motörhead?

Don't know anything about them.

Lemmy is the only one from the original lineup left and people still consider it to be the same band. What makes Axl's case so special?

Like I said I know nothing about them or who wrote what. Axl case is what it is because the song writers, personalities, and the overall sound of the band is gone in this current lineup. They saw slash as axl's equal. They were a duo. I don't know motorhead, but id bet no one gave two shits about their former members to being with. If they do care, then I'd view their situation he same.

Slash was very important to Gn'R legacy, he cowrote songs like SCOM, CW, Estranged and, my favorite, Coma, but the main duo on the songwritting was Axl/ Izzy. Why does everybody forgets to give him credit? Always the underdog... not surprised he didn't show up

You guys aren't understanding, I'm talking about the publics perception. I know full well how important Izzy was. Soon as he quit, gnr was fatally wounded and died.

[Georgy Zhukov]

And many people will never get that the firing of Adler and the departure of Stradlin is what doomed the band. If you werent alive, too young or was unfortunate not to see GN'R between 1986 and 1993, then you are unlucky because those were the only times you will ever see Axl and Slash on stage together. From '94 on the wiring process was so dead that Axl had to find new people to write with.

They have tracks recorded, they want to write new songs and seem willing to meet his demands, they just need a way to release it without the assholes trying to push for a reunion.

Axl and Izzy don't give a fuck about the public opinion since neither of them are being recognized for their contributions, especially Izzy.

No Izzy. no GN'R

Edited April 16, 2012 by BirdCatcher

[cliffburton]

Only one preventing a release is axl.

[Zint]

I don't need the HOF line up to tour.

Although it would be fun as hell and I'd definitely go. B)

Slash is banging out some amazing versions of "classic" GnR songs right now.

I already saw him once this year,and I have 2 more shows (at least) coming up,so I've heard the blistering versions he has cooked up right now,and can't wait to hear them again.

So I'm cool with individual GnR members (past or present) tipping the hat to the songs that ruled the planet once upon a time.

Besides...Slash has a stack of new tunes lined up and I can't wait to hear that stuff live.

It's always great to have new songs.

[Georgy Zhukov]

Only one preventing a release is axl.

Yes he always gets blamed on. It is easy to blame it on him, but you forget the people who distribute the records are out to make money too.

For example, in the 80's Coca Cola discontinued Coke in favor of New Coke, this cost them millions because people were pissed off at how awful it tasted and started buying Pespi, they released the original formula as Classic Coke and it has been strong ever since.

They've done it again recently with white cans, pulled them off the shelves and went back to red. Marketing genius at it's finest.

Geffen and later Interscope wanted to release the album so it can fail so Axl can be forced to reunite. Obviously he has no intentions of reuniting. He went as far to making it impossible by saying he won't unless they agree to all his terms and none of theirs.

Well played.

[Original GNR]

Yeah, I guess you will never agree with what I am saying "Original GNR", despite my best efforts . So let's turn it around: what if you now argue for why you prefer to use the band name when you are talkning about a specific incarnation of Guns N' Roses, about a specific lineup, about a specific era/year of Guns N' Roses, all of which are linguistically more correct and infinitely more precise leaving less room for misunderstanding? Because in communication we all want to be understood right? Saying "the 1998 version of Guns N' Roses" or "AFD version" or even "classic GNR" rather than the fuzzy "real Guns N' Roses" is certainly much more precise and less confusing, right?

With a band such as GnR when everything about their sound, image, style and legacy is embodied in a particular time and a particular group of people, it becomes more than just the technicalities of a particular lineup.

But this is not right at all. You are talking about the lineups from '85 to '93, as you say later, and these lineups consisted of lots of people (Axl, Izzy, Rob, Tracii, Ole, Slash, Duff, Steven, Matt, Gilby and Teddy), playing music with very different sounds (listen to early GN'R, like on the G side of Lies, and compare with the most complex songs off UYI GN'R), with extremely different styles (from glam metal and punk rock to generic rock outfits later and whatever Axl decided to wear). You see, what you are talking about is NOT a homogenic thing at all. It is silly to label all of this under one moniker, whether that be a band name, a specific lineup or short time frame. The only way you can precisely refer to this is be referring to a broad time period, like "I prefer Guns N' Roses in the period 1985 to 1993".

In music, a band to a lot of people is about the people in it who defined the sound, wrote the songs, created the music.

So to you West Arkeen and Del James are part of Guns N' Roses, too? Or at least you are saying they are more a part of GN'R than Gilby ever where? Or are we going to discuss the individual merits of co-penning a few songs to adding rhythm guitar to a few tracks?

Those guys back from '85 to '93 LIVED it. They started out as a bunch of street urchins, formed a band, played gig after gig in dirty dives and small clubs, lived together in a 10x12 storage unit, they built up the fan base piece by piece, wrote the songs together, got their record contract together. They started off playing to 10 people together and then ended up playing to 100,000 people together.

Surely you are not thinking about Matt, Gilby, Rob, Tracii and Ole now? Do you see how imprecise your definition is?

Yes, the current guys who tour with Axl are all gifted musicians, but they can't ever reflect the same attitude, intensity and passion for those songs because they aren't the ones who lived it. They don't have any personal or emotional connection to those songs.

And that is an excellent reason to say that today's lineup is inferior to previous lineups. No need to confuse things by mixing up "band " and "lineup".

Axl has every right to tour with whoever he wants and to play old Guns songs, just as Slash does. But to most people, neither Slash playing old Guns songs with his band or Axl playing old Guns songs with his band will ever be Guns N Roses for the very reasons I have mentioned.

And that is because there is a collective misunderstanding about the difference between "a lineup" and "a band", but just because many people do it we should propogate this error.

I'm not even going to attempt to read all of that. You are getting far too technical. I'ts not hard to understand the point I made. If you can't understand what I'm getting at then this conversation is pointless.

[Original GNR]

And many people will never get that the firing of Adler and the departure of Stradlin is what doomed the band. If you werent alive, too young or was unfortunate not to see GN'R between 1986 and 1993, then you are unlucky because those were the only times you will ever see Axl and Slash on stage together. From '94 on the wiring process was so dead that Axl had to find new people to write with.

They have tracks recorded, they want to write new songs and seem willing to meet his demands, they just need a way to release it without the assholes trying to push for a reunion.

Axl and Izzy don't give a fuck about the public opinion since neither of them are being recognized for their contributions, especially Izzy.

No Izzy. no GN'R

Totally agree. As a massive fan of the classic era GnR lineup, I know full well that Izzy's departure was the death knell for the old band. If there was ever to be a GnR reunion it would have to include Axl, Slash, Izzy and Duff. If any of those 4 are missing it wouldn't be right. If I was to choose a drummer it would be Adler because he was there from the beginning and was part of the rise of GnR from nothing to global domination. Ideally I'd take Adler and Sorum on a (fantasy) reunion tour and have Sorum play the Illusions songs and Adler the Appetite stuff. Will never happen obviously.

[KBear]

I would also point out that although many agree with you that today's lineup is inferior to old lineups, everybody of those won't agree with you that the AFD lineup was more influential and important than, say, the UYI lineup. It might easily be argued that it was with the UYI lineup Guns N' Roses really became one of the biggest bands in the world. And if you are going to argue that the AFD lineup was more important because they laid the groundwork for that success, then as a devil's advocate I might point out that then the original lineup (the one with the founding fathers) must be even more important since it laid the groundwork for the AFD lineup.

Jeez man, you're trying to think too hard. Who wrote the music for AFD, Lies, and UYI? One group of guys: Axl, Slash, Duff, Izzy. And the material was killer. That's the group of guys who define GN'R. Period, end of sentence.

Keep reaching with guys like Tracii Guns, Ole Beich, and Rob Gardner. They are more important? Really? With your logic Aerosmith is more important than Axl, Slash, Duff, and Izzy to GN'R, because Aerosmith laid the groundwork. Without Tyler and Perry, there'd be no GN'R. FFS, give credit where it's due...to the guys who came up with those great riffs, melodies, and lyrics. It sure as fuck wasn't Tracii Guns, Beich, and Gardner, or DJ Ashba or BBF or anyone else like that. It was the guys who were just inducted into the HOF. The HOF inducted them for reasons that anyone should be able to see clear as day. Sorry if I sound pissed, but bringing up the 1985 version of the band is just a tactic to derail the conversation as far as I'm concerned. They accomplished nothing, other than Tracii's role in coming up with a cool name for a band.

A band is more than just the name they throw on marquee. My GNR wrote afd, gnr lies, uyi 1&2....whereas half of your band is missing from its only record....a mediocre one at that.

My band? I don't play in a band. Are you perhaps confused about the difference between "a lineup" and "a band", and are hence trying to say that "your" lineups wrote AFD and UYI whereas "my" lineup only wrote CD? If so, nah-nah! And no, I don't have my own lineup, I don't get that emotionally attached to lineups (anymore) to call them mine; besides, if you'd paid attention you'd know that I prefer the AFD lineup to today's lineup. But this preference doesn't make me blind for linguistics and logics.

That says it all really. You try to break this down like some kind of legal proceeding where facts are all that matter. It's not that at all, it's a rock band. Emotion is supposed to be part of it. If you don't get attached at all then there is something wrong.

Edited April 17, 2012 by KBear

[bran]

Define band. Many people see a new lineup as a new band. One member change, yeah mostly the same band. When all but one remains, it ceases to be that band.

motorhead

megadeath

death

bathory

candlemass

black sabbath

venom

immortal

iced earth

and many more, have or have had only 1 original member and kept making music and touring as the bands namesake. it is really not that uncommon what makes gnr different is people who hold on to 1991 and wont let it go.

[ITW 2012]

what makes gnr different is people who hold on to 1991 and wont let it go.

What makes GNR different is that they were way more popular than any of those other bands that you mentioned.

[bran]

what makes gnr different is people who hold on to 1991 and wont let it go.

What makes GNR different is that they were way more popular than any of those other bands that you mentioned.

popularity has nothing to do with any of that. ( i wouldnt say gnr was way more popular than sabbath but anyway) bands go through lineups, people come and go all the time, but if there is 1 strong prominent member stays and has been in the band from the beginning the band can continue. motorhead fans dont sit around bitching pissing and moaning about lemmy and how lemmy should go solo or how lemmy should bring back eddie clarke and phil taylor etc.

granted the problem axl has is that he is only released 1 album since the breakup if their were 3 or 4 by now i think the bitching would be less, but people need to change their calendar from 1991 its 11 years outdated

[ITW 2012]

( i wouldnt say gnr was way more popular than sabbath but anyway)

GNR were Led Zeppelin big. Sabbath isn't even close.

[bran]

( i wouldnt say gnr was way more popular than sabbath but anyway)

GNR were Led Zeppelin big. Sabbath isn't even close.

no matter who the bigger bands were is irrelevant IMO. my point still stands that everyone of those bands i listed their fanbase has moved on from lineup changes, no one bitches about lemmy telling lemmy to go solo or he is wrecking the motorhead name, no one is saying leif edling needs to go solo he is ruining the candlemass name etc. iam a huge fan of the old gnr like everyone else, but i have moved on, i have accepted they will never reunite. i am able to enjoy the current lineup, but some people will hold onto this forever it seems. these reunion clingers will hold on even if axl hits 90 wanting a reunion. its time to move on, i thought for sure people would have moved on when velvet revolver came to be i mean you have slash,duff,sorum in a band you think people would then give up, but nope still clinging on, i thought after the hall of fame shit they would move on but nope still clinging, just let go all ready it will never happen.

[SoulMonster]

I'm not even going to attempt to read all of that. You are getting far too technical. I'ts not hard to understand the point I made. If you can't understand what I'm getting at then this conversation is pointless.

I am sorry I exceeded your reading capacity. I understand your point, and I made an effort to argue for why your insistence on referring to a specific time era of a band that included lots of band members, change in musical direction, and different styles, just by the name of the band when the band still exists, is flawed and leads to unnecessary confusion, especially when there are other more precise expression, like "the AFD lineup", "Guns N' Roses in 1988", and so on.

I would also point out that although many agree with you that today's lineup is inferior to old lineups, everybody of those won't agree with you that the AFD lineup was more influential and important than, say, the UYI lineup. It might easily be argued that it was with the UYI lineup Guns N' Roses really became one of the biggest bands in the world. And if you are going to argue that the AFD lineup was more important because they laid the groundwork for that success, then as a devil's advocate I might point out that then the original lineup (the one with the founding fathers) must be even more important since it laid the groundwork for the AFD lineup.

Jeez man, you're trying to think too hard. Who wrote the music for AFD, Lies, and UYI? One group of guys: Axl, Slash, Duff, Izzy. And the material was killer. That's the group of guys who define GN'R. Period, end of sentence.

That's a silly sentence since if you insist on defining Guns N' Roses by the song writers from AFD, UYI and Lies, then many more names should be added to your list...

Keep reaching with guys like Tracii Guns, Ole Beich, and Rob Gardner. They are more important? Really?

No, you misunderstand me. I am NOT saying that the guys laying the groundwork are more important than those who came after, that was an argument from earlier in the thread which I am actually trying to argue against.

Sorry if I sound pissed, but bringing up the 1985 version of the band is just a tactic to derail the conversation as far as I'm concerned. They accomplished nothing, other than Tracii's role in coming up with a cool name for a band.

I don't disagree at all, this is a misunderstanding .

You try to break this down like some kind of legal proceeding where facts are all that matter. It's not that at all, it's a rock band.

But we are not talking about the band -- of which I have lots of feelings and opinions, too -- but about the name of the band. These are two different things.

[Nosaj Thing]

( i wouldnt say gnr was way more popular than sabbath but anyway)

GNR were Led Zeppelin big. Sabbath isn't even close.

no matter who the bigger bands were is irrelevant IMO. my point still stands that everyone of those bands i listed their fanbase has moved on from lineup changes, no one bitches about lemmy telling lemmy to go solo or he is wrecking the motorhead name, no one is saying leif edling needs to go solo he is ruining the candlemass name etc. iam a huge fan of the old gnr like everyone else, but i have moved on, i have accepted they will never reunite. i am able to enjoy the current lineup, but some people will hold onto this forever it seems. these reunion clingers will hold on even if axl hits 90 wanting a reunion. its time to move on, i thought for sure people would have moved on when velvet revolver came to be i mean you have slash,duff,sorum in a band you think people would then give up, but nope still clinging on, i thought after the hall of fame shit they would move on but nope still clinging, just let go all ready it will never happen.

Can you name any other band that has the same kind of divided fanbase?

Edited April 17, 2012 by pi2loc

[saulhudson88]

I would go; the are better and more GN'R than Axl' coverband...

[bran]

( i wouldnt say gnr was way more popular than sabbath but anyway)

GNR were Led Zeppelin big. Sabbath isn't even close.

no matter who the bigger bands were is irrelevant IMO. my point still stands that everyone of those bands i listed their fanbase has moved on from lineup changes, no one bitches about lemmy telling lemmy to go solo or he is wrecking the motorhead name, no one is saying leif edling needs to go solo he is ruining the candlemass name etc. iam a huge fan of the old gnr like everyone else, but i have moved on, i have accepted they will never reunite. i am able to enjoy the current lineup, but some people will hold onto this forever it seems. these reunion clingers will hold on even if axl hits 90 wanting a reunion. its time to move on, i thought for sure people would have moved on when velvet revolver came to be i mean you have slash,duff,sorum in a band you think people would then give up, but nope still clinging on, i thought after the hall of fame shit they would move on but nope still clinging, just let go all ready it will never happen.

Can you name any other band that has the same kind of divided fanbase?

as gnr? not even close this fanbase is as divided as i have ever seen it. especially with the kind of venom you see on here sometimes like the other night. with sabbath their is always a group of the ozzy only crowd but even they will still respect someone elses favorite singer or lineup of the band even if they dont care for it.

[hudsonsaul]

Nope, definitely not.

TBH I wouldn't see any band Steven is in even for free. Regardless if they playing Gnr songs or not.

Whilst I wouldn't go and watch Duff and Slash and other randoms play old Gnr songs. Would catch them if they were in town doing anything else mind you and would be a good night no doubt.

[Guest RonMexico82]

Would love to see them tour. Would pay what Axl is charging to see Slash and the boys but there isn't a hope in hell that I'd ever do the same to be insulted by another shambolic disrespectful train wreck of a show from Axl.

[Damn_Smooth]

Would love to see them tour. Would pay what Axl is charging to see Slash and the boys but there isn't a hope in hell that I'd ever do the same to be insulted by another shambolic disrespectful train wreck of a show from Axl.

Everybody gets it, you don't like Axl. You've made your point so quit whining about it.