OK Axl can fuck things up sometimes but...

[D..]

OK Rio IV was a disaster. Axl was late, unprepared, unfit. It was a big let down.

OK Axl snubbing those fucking idiots at Rolling Stones magazine and the establishment was not his best move, him letting ex-members like Slash and Duff playing under the Guns N' Roses name was REALLY STUPID.

OK Axl wasn't in his best vocal shape on this 2011/2012 tour.

BUT, let's be honest here. Would you seriously enjoy it if Slash, Duff, Steven, Gilby, Matt and hey, say even Izzy, toured together covering only GNR songs without Axl?

Personally, I wouldn't. What made Guns N' Roses is the alchemy and sum of all those guys talents, but what really made GNR an outstanding band was the vocals, the lyrics, the attitude, the sleaze, and the rants.

To me, Axl alone is GNR in that he never prostituted himself. Of course, he can make dumb moves. The Rock n Roll HOF was a dumb move because it wasn't about being a prostitute, it was about being able to put differences aside, do it for the fans, and most of all, take the award for yourself. You deserved it Axl, more than anyone else.

I don't really know what's happening to Axl these days, maybe he feels a bit off, he's been touring CD again for two years now, maybe he's bored, don't know what's in his mind, but I know that if we want this guy to be able to sing, we've got to show more support.

Enough with the bashing (and that also includes Slash and the others), let's be positive. I still listen to all GNR albums, especially Chinese, and I will continue supporting Axl, who is still imo, the greatest frontman in rock n' roll.

Bring on CD II Axl, give us some punches in the face, show us what you got.

[Nosaj Thing]

Do we need to see threads like this until the Euro tour? Damn...

[Chewbacca]

I think he's crazy, but I really like what the previous lineup made and I'm looking forward to a new album.

[maynard]

hey, i actually agree with some things. specially the fans needing some positivity.

i don't know, current gnr is boring and predictable and that's not what gnr is about right?

so i guess the only way to get more positive and to be excited again would be having a new record.

same set list, same lateness, same everything. i could be wrong but even the band members must be kinda bothered.

so yeah. it's obvious. we need a new record.

we don't need classic vs. new threads. we don't need a thread about who is axl dating. we need NEW MUSIC.

gnr and axl are boring.

[axlsalinger]

What made Guns N' Roses is the alchemy and sum of all those guys talents, but what really made GNR an outstanding band was the vocals, the lyrics, the attitude, the sleaze, and the rants.

I'll agree with this part.

I hate the bashing of the old guys. They were ABSOLUTELY part of the alchemy. But nobody here can deny that Axl is, with the possible exception of Freddie Mercury, the greatest frontman ever.

I am very disappointed in the way Axl handled the Hall of Fame, but the best and really only way to move this thing forward remains the same.

New music.

[Nosaj Thing]

What made Guns N' Roses is the alchemy and sum of all those guys talents, but what really made GNR an outstanding band was the vocals, the lyrics, the attitude, the sleaze, and the rants.

I'll agree with this part.

I hate the bashing of the old guys. They were ABSOLUTELY part of the alchemy. But nobody here can deny that Axl is, with the possible exception of Freddie Mercury, the greatest frontman ever.

I am very disappointed in the way Axl handled the Hall of Fame, but the best and really only way to move this thing forward remains the same.

New music.

Tell that to the idiots, they don't listen.

[saber_]

gnr and axl are boring.

And yet... and yet...

You keep coming back for more. Axl owns you.

[cyanide3]

It isn't Guns N Roses without Axl, HOWEVER Its not Guns N Roses without some key players as well.

Guns N Roses happened with the collaboration between 5 individuals and something clicked and made magic together. People then hear a certain sound, tone, style within the music besides the singer. Axl is a main component in Guns N Roses, but he is not Guns N Roses.

Now I have wondered How Gilby would have been If there was an album after UYI tour. He seemed a decent replacement for Izzy, but how would he be with collaborating with new stuff. It could have maybe worked, but when Slash and Duff left. Ahhhh, no. The voice is there, not the music. I have heard CD. I went to a new/used record store two weeks after it came out. I was surprised that there was more used than new in just two weeks. It's ok. Axl's singing, but its not Guns N Roses. I'm not at all putting down the musicians who are on it. Not at all. It was a comment on Facebook that someone said old fans just wants a 2nd Appetite. No, UYI's was different from Appetite, BUT you can hear without a doubt that it was Guns besides Axl singing.

If you look in Rock history. Granted there isn't any set base "well if you don't have this person, it won't work, blah, blah, blah.." It all depends really. Van Halen. David Lee was a good frontman, they were able to stay on top with Sammy, but then again the other main key players were still in the band. On the same point other bands have changed singers and didn't go nowhere really. If James Hetfield did what Axl has done if Kirk, and Lars decides they done with the BS, and James kept the name and went on with a new band with that name, would that be welcomed with open arms? Or so on and so forth with many other huge bands in the past. Led Zeppelin, Beatles, etc.. when its just the one original member ( not happened by death. Death then is a different scenario all together) it will be hard for people to accept that is tHE band. Unless the band was called Axl Rose. Guns N Roses from the history I remember, the name came from two bands that into one. LA Guns and Hollywood Rose. Axl got more of the upper hand and claiming name legally. But I would still make this argument if by chance Slash had claim to the name, and He was the only member. Its not Guns N Roses without Axl.

Axl will still get bombarded with questions etc., with the original Guns till the day he dies. That is how special that band was.

sorry with this long winded post, I still haven't actually voted. I was debating what to vote when this was running through my mind...

Edited April 17, 2012 by cyanide3

[RocketQueenGNR]

No Axl = No Guns N' Roses

[SoulMonster]

Guns N Roses happened with the collaboration between 5 individuals and something clicked and made magic together.

Guns N' Roses hasn't "happened", it is a band that continue to exist and evolve and hence "happens" all the time. I'd say there is nothing less "magical" about the dynamics between Robin and Bucket's guitars on There Was A Time than between the bass and drums on Rocket Queen. To reduce Guns N' Roses to just the contributions of five guys in 1986/7, is silly. Magics took place on UYI, too, like the dynamics between Slash's lead guitar and Matt's drums on You Could Be Mine.

If you don't like anything post-AFD, that's fine, but be open for other opinions.

[Guest Len B'stard]

Quite frankly, if you ask me, without Izzy, the lot of em are sunk. Slash is a great riffer and groovy as fuck but he just over metalizes shit? Axl is great for ballads and all that but his rockin' stuff, again, just comes across as...grooveless. And Duff is like a punk, very three chord chug-chuggy but Izzy has got serious bare bones groove, Izzy has that quality that Keith Richards has, that louche quality, that ramshackle rhythmic thing that no other member of Guns has, this is why 87 Guns, THE Guns, the Guns that made it so Guns is a name on your lips were such a beautiful thing and the same reason why every great band are a really really really delicate balance that you just shouldn't fuck with...each member when taken out of the equation takes away a certain quality that makes it a lesser product. I say this SOOOO much in discussions about bands that i'm almost sick of it but...it's that right chemical imbalance between musicians that is just SOOOO fucking precious and if, as a musician, you are very out of the very very few that find themselves as a part of that balance you should do everything in your power humanly possible to preserve it and bring it into the future and nuture it because it is SOOO important and such a one off thing and bands through history, The Ramones, The Clash, GnR have proven this time and time and time again.

When you listen to a record, nothing thats on it is there by accident and you just can't be fucking messing with it. That quality of Americana, that rock n roll thing that songs like Dust n Bones, 14 Years, Patience, Used to Love Her was all gone from Guns once Izzy left and...i dunno, i mean, thats basically what the difference between Guns and every other shitbag 80s band out there, they were like...they had elements that would've been considered anathema to aspects of the 80s LA Scene, the sort of hick country touch they had and the tender ballads and the most good time rock n roll qualities, all these things left with Izzy and the band was fuckin finished after that, if you ask my opinion. I mean, i think NuGuns are OK, don't get me wrong but they're not a great band, they're not an amazing band, there are some complex guitar elements in there but there's nothing about them in relation to where they are in history that really makes them stand out.

Conclusion: Izzy...that is all. Without Izzy they managed angry, self righteous, loud, rauccous, emotional, heartfelt....but they never quite managed cool ever again after Izzy...cool as in sunglasses and toe-tapping cool.

Edited April 17, 2012 by sugaraylen

[Guest RonMexico82]

I'd take the RRHOF line up over Axl's band anyday. He might have the name but the others do it a better service than he ever has post original GNR.

[The_Universal_Sigh]

The options are f'ing retarded in this poll. Not mutually exclusive, don't make sense, don't show all possible options... etc.

Bin this, baby.

[SoulMonster]

I'd take the RRHOF line up over Axl's band anyday. He might have the name but the others do it a better service than he ever has post original GNR.

How do Slash, Duff and Steven do "Guns N' Roses" a better service than what Axl is doing?

Edited April 17, 2012 by SoulMonster

[Ktex]

I'd take the RRHOF line up over Axl's band anyday. He might have the name but the others do it a better service than he ever has post original GNR.

How do Slash, Duff and Steven do "Guns N' Roses" a better service than what Axl is doing?

He's a genius. The man is amazing but he's also a world class prick. Of course there is no GNR without him but really there is no GNR without the other guys as well.

[SoulMonster]

I'd take the RRHOF line up over Axl's band anyday. He might have the name but the others do it a better service than he ever has post original GNR.

How do Slash, Duff and Steven do "Guns N' Roses" a better service than what Axl is doing?

He's a genius. The man is amazing but he's also a world class prick. Of course there is no GNR without him but really there is no GNR without the other guys as well.

That's funny, 'coz I am holding this cd in my hands, titled Chinese Democracy, and it also says "Guns N' Roses" on it. Someone obviously are out there thinking they are Guns N' Roses, and former members apparently allow them to release music and get away with it! How can that be?? And when listening to this cd it is Guns N' Roses music! Guitar driven rock with complex arrangements and Axl's iconic wail and lyrics. How odd! And there's no Slash, or Duff, or Izzy, or Steven on it, but Axl and Dizzy and some other guys. So what we have is a band that obviously is allowed to call themselves Guns N' Roses, releasing music under that name, music that fits in with the GN'R discography, with two members from the early 90s. How can anyone disagree that this is actually Guns N' Roses, unless they believe that GN'R songs should contain pentatonic solos or at least one heroin addict?

Btw, you never answered my question.

[The Macaroni Incident?]

There is no Guns N' Roses without Axl, but there isn't one without Slash, Izzy, Duff, and Steven either.

[SoulMonster]

There is no Guns N' Roses without Axl, but there isn't one without Slash, Izzy, Duff, and Steven either.

That's funny, 'coz I am holding this cd in my hands, titled Chinese Democracy, and it also says "Guns N' Roses" on it. Someone obviously are out there thinking they are Guns N' Roses, and former members apparently allow them to release music and get away with it! How can that be?? And when listening to this cd it is Guns N' Roses music! Guitar driven rock with complex arrangements and Axl's iconic wail and lyrics. How odd! And there's no Slash, or Duff, or Izzy, or Steven on it, but Axl and Dizzy and some other guys. So what we have is a band that obviously is allowed to call themselves Guns N' Roses, releasing music under that name, music that fits in with the GN'R discography, with two members from the early 90s. How can anyone disagree that this is actually Guns N' Roses, unless they believe that GN'R songs should contain pentatonic solos or at least one heroin addict?

[Duda]

Personally, I wouldn't. What made Guns N' Roses is the alchemy and sum of all those guys talents, but what really made GNR an outstanding band was the vocals, the lyrics, the attitude, the sleaze, and the rants

Enough with the bashing (and that also includes Slash and the others), let's be positive. I still listen to all GNR albums, especially Chinese, and I will continue supporting Axl, who is still imo, the greatest frontman in rock n' roll.

ITA

Axl and the other guys were amazing together

But IMO Axl is the factor that makes the difference , you can love or hate him, but you just cannot be indifferent to Axl!

[Val22]

I'd take the RRHOF line up over Axl's band anyday. He might have the name but the others do it a better service than he ever has post original GNR.

How do Slash, Duff and Steven do "Guns N' Roses" a better service than what Axl is doing?

The short and correct answer is "They don't and never will".

[Lirosee]

Nothing he does with his life can affect my view of him, as a great entertainer, great singer, great charisma and musical genius. Who cares if he's a SOB? When he's that talented, that's all that matters! And with all due respect to former and current gunners most of them with huge talent. But Axl's voice is Guns N' Roses trademark.

[stumbleine]

Axl stepped over a boundary with not showing for HOF.

Slash,Duff and Steven are more GNFNR than the twat will ever be.

the attitude in the real Guns playing at HOF was amazing,Slash outdid himself on sweet child.

Axl can shove the new"band",the Scabs.bye,bye.

[cyanide3]

Guns N Roses happened with the collaboration between 5 individuals and something clicked and made magic together.

Guns N' Roses hasn't "happened", it is a band that continue to exist and evolve and hence "happens" all the time. I'd say there is nothing less "magical" about the dynamics between Robin and Bucket's guitars on There Was A Time than between the bass and drums on Rocket Queen. To reduce Guns N' Roses to just the contributions of five guys in 1986/7, is silly. Magics took place on UYI, too, like the dynamics between Slash's lead guitar and Matt's drums on You Could Be Mine.

If you don't like anything post-AFD, that's fine, but be open for other opinions.

Maybe you missed but I did talk about UYI. That was Guns N Roses. Different from Appetite, but still Guns N Roses. When you heard a song you can tell, besides Axl singing. Matt is a solid drummer. I agree about the firing of Steven at that time. Also said don't know how Gilby would be making new music, but heseemed a good sub for Izzy during UYI tour. sugaraylen said alot that I was trying to say,but more talking about Izzy's collaboration. I am open to other opinions. I have CD. Are you open to my opinion? Its ok. Not great. Not saying that the musicians on the album are bad, or Axl sounded horrible. Not at all. And I totally understand about evolving. (unless you are a band like The Rolling Stones, they don't have to, they can still play how they always do) But it still needs to sound at the core of the band itself. Its not just the singer at times that makes that distinct character for the band. Axl is a main part of Guns N Roses distinct sound, but he himself alone, is not Guns N Roses

Edited April 18, 2012 by cyanide3

[sailaway]

Axl stepped over a boundary with not showing for HOF.

Slash,Duff and Steven are more GNFNR than the twat will ever be.

the attitude in the real Guns playing at HOF was amazing,Slash outdid himself on sweet child.

Axl can shove the new"band",the Scabs.bye,bye.

Envelopes are meant to be pushed.

And who are you to be labelling anyone "scabs" since more than likely you are a returning member under another screen name.

[Apollo]

I'm here for the music. All the other drama is fun to talk about, but at the end of the day, the name if the band only really matters to Axl.

I hope we get to hear new music from Axl and his current band this year.

I can't wait to hear the next Slash solo album.

It would be cool to see VR get a cool singer and put out an album.

The names of these groups don't really matter. The songs they create matter.

None of these guys, in whatever band they are playing with, will ever be as big or significant as they were between 1988 and 1995. But they can put out quality rock music that we all can enjoy. Regardless of the name of the band, who is GnR, who calls themselves what, who hates who, etc.

Edited April 18, 2012 by Groghan