Jump to content

Anyone Prefers GNR's "Symapthy for the Devil" Than Stones'?


Recommended Posts

Posted

I love Stones' version, but prefer GNR's more, cuz its more "hard rock".

Anyway Slash said its the sound of the band breaking up or something, whats wrong with the song? Is it that much of a mess?

Posted (edited)

I do... :nervous:

I...actually really like TSI.

The guitar tones and Axl's voice on that album are really super raw and I love it.

Edited by The Glow Inc.
Posted

Anyway Slash said its the sound of the band breaking up or something, whats wrong with the song? Is it that much of a mess?

According to slash the song was recorded with Gilby doing rhythm, and Axl replaced his parts w/ Paul Tobias, behind his back

I've always thought the "Tell me baby, are you happy now?" part was some kind of dig at Slash (IMO only, I have absolutely nothing to back that up with)

Posted

To be honest, I was only 14 when this song was released so I was unfamiliar with the Stones version. So I'm a little impartial since I heard GNR's version first. To me, it sounds like what the song is suppose to sound like. There's a lot more oomph in GNR's version than what I get from the Stones. I love how Axl dials it back in the last verse and then tears it up for the last third of the song. Plus, I've always thought Axl's vocals were far better suited for the outro. Jagger's vocals really come off as weak in that outro when you compare them to Axl's ("Tell me baby, what's my name, Tell me sweet child, what's my game."). Also much prefer Slash's guitar work over Keith's. Keith's just sounds a little too bare-bones for me.

It's all relative, but yeah, never really understood how a Stones fan and a GNR fan could prefer the Stones version. I can understand why someone might not like GNR's version of KOHD since it's a dramatically different song in execution and spirit, but with Sympathy, both are pretty similar in style. I just think GNR's is better executed.

Posted

I used to prefer GnR's. But that was when I was like... 17/18. By now I appreciate the Stones' version MUCH more. I think Slash meant that it was getting a bit messy production-wise and maybe that it was never really recorded as a band effort. Just....parts put together. Despite all that it still sounds good.

Posted

I prefer the GNR version by far. So much more heavier and aggressive. Axls vocals are top notch. I also like the over dubbed guitar solo that Slash and Paul Tobias do for some reason

Posted

I like the Stone's version more but I still quite like GNR's version - it has a great groove to it. I always thought that it would have made for an awesome show opener

Posted

i prefer the GNR version. i can't think of a song GNR has covered where i haven't liked GNR's version more. i still have my sympathy for the devil CD single and i listen to it all the time.

What other songs are with the single?

Oh and thanks to those who clarified Slash's statements.

Posted

i prefer the GNR version. i can't think of a song GNR has covered where i haven't liked GNR's version more. i still have my sympathy for the devil CD single and i listen to it all the time.

What other songs are with the single?

Oh and thanks to those who clarified Slash's statements.

Something classical

Posted

I like them both. In Guns' version I love the double guitar thing, though I understand why Slash was so pissed about it.

I concur. Guns' version is awesome and I love listening to it. It doesn't sound like a mess at all despite what was going on with the band. I get why Slash was pissed, but it does sound pretty damn cool.

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...