Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

When the other guys quit in the '90s, there were a lot of advantages to holding on to and using the GN'R name. He'd have a blank check from Geffen to do what he pleased money wise, the name had the clout to attract any employees he'd want (Who wouldn't want to say they're GN'R's lead guitarist in 1997?), and the name allowed him access to big time producers like Moby and others. Not only that but from a pride perspective, he could prove to himself and the world that he was more important to GN'R than Slash or Izzy or Duff or anyone else. He could show 'em! Both from a pride perspective and a financial one it was a boon.

But now, in 2012, what incentive is there to keep the name? Musically, it's a noose around his neck. If he makes a new album, he has to juggle now making an album that he wants to make musically, while also dealing with the expectations of the level of quality and general sound that is expected of a record with the GN'R name. He can't go out and make the kind of music he really wants, because working under the GN'R name sort of puts boundaries on that. It always has to be a compromise musically and I imagine given Axl's stubbornness, that must be very frustrating. How do you make a "GN'R record" when the music you hear in your head sounds probably not much like what a "GN'R record" is supposed to sound like? How can that be creatively pleasing or satisfying?

And think of the hype and whatnot. When Slash makes a record, there's not really any hype or pressure to make like, the best record ever, because Slash is just doing it as Slash. It's not really held up next to his work in GN'R for comparison; If it was, he (along with all the other ex-Gunners' work) would probably get a lot more flak. If Axl released CD under his own name, while there would be some comparison made in reviews and in the audiences' reception to the GN'R work, it wouldn't be as intense because any Axl Rose solo work isn't supposed to be the next GN'R album (with all the hype and expectations and baggage that carries), so there's no real expectations as to what it should sound like or what the level of quality should be. He could make any record he want and have it judged on it's own merits, not judged in comparison to AFD and the UYIs.

Also, since he appears under the GN'R name, when he plays live, there's a lot more pressure and expectations for both his performance and the band's. If he fucks up, or a guitarist or drummer messses up "GN'R" messes up; He basically carries the name on his shoulders like a weight. Also narrows down his selection of players to who he feels would fit in GN'R. He can't just go make a bunch of songs like My World and say this is the next GN'R album.

Even now, financially, he probably will never again get the blank check or as much funding or as much studio time and as wide a choice of producers as he did with Chinese Democracy. Geffen/Interscope I'm sure probably will have him on a tight leash with whatever future album he makes, if he makes it as a GN'R album, and that's not really conducive to Axl getting things done as Axl is a big time perfectionist, doesn't like to work on other people's schedules or demands and does things only his way. While at one time the GN'R name even without Slash, Izzy and Duff could see Axl in big arenas around the country, he can barely sell tickets now out of the big cities and Europe and South America are the only markets the GN'R name is big anymore and those will eventually dwindle too if he keeps going back to the same places every year.

And even then, the name hamstrings him. Every performance of the new band is put against the performances of the old. Which really wouldn't be the case if it was just an Axl Rose solo act. You don't really see reviewers ripping into Slash or Duff or Izzy for their performances not being as awesome as they were in GN'R or ripping into them for looking and sounding older than they did in their GN'R days.

And holding on to the GN'R name hamstrings him even more because a large segment of reviewers and fans go into it with a certain preset attitude, some hating Axl for keeping the name after Slash left and having their reviews or sentiments coloured by that bitterness, others reacting negatively if it isn't as good as the AFD or UYI era live or sounds different

I just don't see any reason, outside of short term cash, that Axl would want to hold on to the GN'R name now, in 2012.

Posted

Dude, why write this giant journal about your problems with current GNR? Nobody cares, only reason i'm writing this is because it's very sad you don't realize GNR has moved on. Marc Canter, probably doesn't want to talk here anymore because of people like you keep digging shit up.... Just except the way things are or move on.

There isn't even a question here for petes sake.

Posted

He can't go out and make the kind of music he really wants, because working under the GN'R name sort of puts boundaries on that.

So CD isn't the album Axl wanted to make? Then why does he play 5 to 7 songs off of it every show? And he spent $13 million dollars and 13 years making an album while he was under boundaries?

You have some of the most unusual logic on this forum.

Posted (edited)

It was a long-winded question, but I agree with its premise, why does Axl continue with GNR? He's not stupid, surely he can see the benefits of going solo. Also, in light of what MSL's alleged email leaks revealed - that Axl tried to dissolve GNR in 2010 - it's a good question.

Marc, do you know anything about Axl trying to disband GNR?

Has he ever made plans to go solo or expressed a serious interest?

Can you ever see him going solo/doing other projects, or do you think he'll only creative music from within GNR?

Edited by Babooshka
Posted

Axl didn't build up any sort of a solo career under his name, or going to other artists to work on their projects, except Sebastian. I think for each of them, doing their own thing was for the best at that time. Slash being called on to take part in sessions had to have put him in a good mood, because he didn't have to think about the band, just that he was getting respect for his playing.

Posted

It's really that far-fetched? Not even for a project and then he can go back to GNR? Well, I guess after spending over a decade trying to keep GNR on the tracks, he isn't going to step outside of the band, but it's a shame imo, especially from a creative point of view.

Posted

Why would Axl now go solo? Maybe in 1996 for a year but not now.

Creatvely he'd have a lot more freedom to make the EXACT kind of music he wanted. The GN'R name comes with a lot of expectations which could create pressure on Axl. Just him putting out a record as himself wouldn't have to meet the expectations or standards as a "GN'R" record would.

Posted

t

I view the current incarnation of Guns N' Roses as a solo act. Some people get insulted by that but I can't view it any other way. If Axl gave the other band members a piece of ownership in the name, I may think differently. For me the only thing that is the same is Axl and the name of the band. There is nothing wrong with a solo act, artist do it all the time. Hell, I just traveled accross the country to see it live. But the situation with the current band fits every characteristic of a solo act, except the band name which undoubtably increases ticket sales. My opinion anyways.

Posted

If you consider GN'R to consist of the partnership which was formed when they signed with Geffen, it was not the same band. Axl dissolved this band and formed a new one under the same name - 'Guns N' Roses' - as per the terms of the partnership agreement of 1992.

Posted

GN'R as a "band" legally speaking does not exist anymore. Axl's solo act with hired musicians on contracts using a brand name that Axl legally acquired the rights to is what NuGuns has always been and that's why you have had so many people in and out, contracts expire, it's not "their" band, just a paying gig.

Not bashing Axl, just that's the truth. It's funny to me that Matt Sorum was an "additional musician" on GNR Live Era, even though he recorded over 40 songs with GNR and yet guys like BBF and Ashba are "members". It's all however it's perceived and/or communicated. Axl Rose is the only person with vested interest in GNR now, thus it's Axl solo under another name, then again so is NIN. What make it different is there was no "band " called NIN before that people so strongly identified with.

Just an aside, but I believe this is also the reason the current guys are always said to play the material so well. They should, because they are paid to do exactly that. That may be great from a performance standpoint, but it hardly oozes of passion and love, more like professionalism, which again, there's nothing wrong with.

Posted (edited)

Axl wont dare to go solo because of less $$$, as simple as that.

very sad what he did do to the GN'R name!

You can't really blame Axl for anything, If Slash ended up with the name you would be saying the same thing about Slash. They wanted different things and there was no way that they were going to stay together. You can just as easy blame Slash and Duff for signing over the name. It they hadn't, right now there would be no GNR unless they somehow worked it out. The new GNR is not a bad band, they are different then you might want because they are different than the old GNR. This in not Axl's fault just because he is the only one left from the old band. The New GNR put out a great record and they tour. No matter what , it is a different band. You have to look at it as 2 bands, the old and the New. If anything Kiss is a band that sells it self as the old band but really is a new band. GNR does not. Yes they play old and new songs but thats because Axl was apart of both bands. If Slash was in control of GNR he would still play old songs with whatever new ones the band had recorded. So there is no one to blame if you are not happy with the way things turned out.

Edited by recklessroad
Posted

Axl wont dare to go solo because of less $$$, as simple as that.

very sad what he did do to the GN'R name!

You can't really blame Axl for anything, If Slash ended up with the name you would be saying the same thing about Slash. They wanted different things and there was no way that they were going to stay together. You can just as easy blame Slash and Duff for signing over the name. It they hadn't, right now there would be no GNR unless they somehow worked it out. The new GNR is not a bad band, they are different then you might want because they are different than the old GNR. This in not Axl's fault just because he is the only one left from the old band. The New GNR put out a great record and they tour. No matter what , it is a different band. You have to look at it as 2 bands, the old and the New. If anything Kiss is a band that sells it self as the old band but really is a new band. GNR does not. Yes they play old and new songs but thats because Axl was apart of both bands. If Slash was in control of GNR he would still play old songs with whatever new ones the band had recorded. So there is no one to blame if you are not happy with the way things turned out.

Can't blame Axl for anything? With all due gratitude for spending your time doing this, that's quite simply ridiculous.

We can blame Axl for a lot of things, especially 1996-now and trying to do the moral equivalence thing by saying saying Slash or Duff would've kept using the GNR name is purely hypothetical and unlikely imo. Hell, the main reason Slash didn't see signing the name over as a HUGE deal at the time was because he didn't think Axl would have the audacity/stupidity to go on using the name all by himself.

If you want to equally assign blame you could say all the guys were responsible for the original band falling apart in the 1990s. You CAN'T equally assign blame for then proceeding to put the GNR name through the mud and turning it into a decade long joke while associating the famous name with a hyped up album that landed with a dud and will be a punchline for years to come...That's all on Axl and because he personally chose to keep using the name.

Posted

GN'R as a "band" legally speaking does not exist anymore. Axl's solo act with hired musicians on contracts using a brand name that Axl legally acquired the rights to is what NuGuns has always been and that's why you have had so many people in and out, contracts expire, it's not "their" band, just a paying gig.

Not bashing Axl, just that's the truth. It's funny to me that Matt Sorum was an "additional musician" on GNR Live Era, even though he recorded over 40 songs with GNR and yet guys like BBF and Ashba are "members". It's all however it's perceived and/or communicated. Axl Rose is the only person with vested interest in GNR now, thus it's Axl solo under another name, then again so is NIN. What make it different is there was no "band " called NIN before that people so strongly identified with.

Just an aside, but I believe this is also the reason the current guys are always said to play the material so well. They should, because they are paid to do exactly that. That may be great from a performance standpoint, but it hardly oozes of passion and love, more like professionalism, which again, there's nothing wrong with.

Yes, they are all on contracts. Starting with Sorum every member has been contracted. It is funny because Ron Wood was a contracted member of The STones until 1989!! Here you have a guy who had been a member for nearly twenty years and he picks up a pay cheque every week. In real terms, it doesn't seem to affect the democratic nature of the songwriting (the real money earner). Look at the credits on CD. It isn't all, ''Rose'', ''Rose'', ''Rose''. Axl gave his band mates a large piece of the pie.

Posted

GN'R as a "band" legally speaking does not exist anymore. Axl's solo act with hired musicians on contracts using a brand name that Axl legally acquired the rights to is what NuGuns has always been and that's why you have had so many people in and out, contracts expire, it's not "their" band, just a paying gig.

Not bashing Axl, just that's the truth. It's funny to me that Matt Sorum was an "additional musician" on GNR Live Era, even though he recorded over 40 songs with GNR and yet guys like BBF and Ashba are "members". It's all however it's perceived and/or communicated. Axl Rose is the only person with vested interest in GNR now, thus it's Axl solo under another name, then again so is NIN. What make it different is there was no "band " called NIN before that people so strongly identified with.

Just an aside, but I believe this is also the reason the current guys are always said to play the material so well. They should, because they are paid to do exactly that. That may be great from a performance standpoint, but it hardly oozes of passion and love, more like professionalism, which again, there's nothing wrong with.

Yes, they are all on contracts. Starting with Sorum every member has been contracted. It is funny because Ron Wood was a contracted member of The STones until 1989!! Here you have a guy who had been a member for nearly twenty years and he picks up a pay cheque every week. In real terms, it doesn't seem to affect the democratic nature of the songwriting (the real money earner). Look at the credits on CD. It isn't all, ''Rose'', ''Rose'', ''Rose''. Axl gave his band mates a large piece of the pie.

By Axl's own admissions on several occasions, he just kept trying to re-create the AFD process, he said as far back as 99 with Kurt Loder and recently as 1 month ago with USA today. He obviously feels that the sort of collaboration that came out of those sessions was the secret to that albums' greatness. So yeah CD was "joint "effort, but again where are all those guys now? Huge, Bucket, Finck, Freese all gone and I would bet it was lot easier for those guys to walk away than it was Slash n Duff. Contract over, no album on sight, Bye, bye! He kept bring in people to re-create what he had with guys he essentially alienated to the point of departure, this can't be overlooked.

Izzy, Slash and then Duff all said the same. Are they all lying or conspiring against Axl? If so , why?

Also by his own admission, CD was written in peace meal, so not all like AFD. I like CD, the problem is simply that this new band depends on the old name for relevancy.

I can't believe ANYONE thinks that this band would sell half as many tickets, or have has half the interest in CD if it wasn't for the GNR name that those other guys collectively built.

As a business decision, maybe it was the only choice for Axl as there's no way he would have 14 million to spend as a solo act. As an ethical decision however, using the name, releasing only 1 album in as long as he took basically de-valued the legacy of the name. Slash n Duff are to blame for giving up the rights as well, but Axl IMO is responsible for the way it's been handled since, and again anyone who thinks 94-2012 is in any way better than 87-94 is kidding themselves IMO.

Posted

"dropping the name became suicide" (Axl 12/2008)

so unfortunately money IS the main motivation and pressure for Axl keep goin with the name. its the only way for him living on his life-style without goin for much higher cash (= re-union) or goin for much lower cash as "The Axl Rose Band".

on a sidenote:

i do think CD is full of Stephanie Seymour related stuff. so Stephanie S. leaving Axl.....how much was this of a factor for Axl's inability to forgive/forget and move on?

Posted

I have never understood the, 'wanting to re-create Appetite'' line by Axl. Chinese Democracy sounds nothing like Appetite. Snakepit, which certainly would have made a poor Guns album without some serious changes, sounds a lot more like Appetite than Chinese Democracy! The key to Appetite is, five guys, in the studio together, recording live, raw and quickly. This is virtually the opposite to how Chinese Democracy was made (a revolving cast of ten guys, recording at seperate periods, with protools and tape loops, over a seven-eight year period). Axl's line doesn't make sense.

By the way, I love Democracy. I merely pointing out that it sounds zilch like Appetite.

Posted

I don't think Axl wanted CD to sound like AFD, just for it to be as coherent and well put together.

Ironically AFD is what it is partially because of constraints (financially/time) and the need for collaboration between the band. Both Axl and Duff mentioned how the stayed and worked together partly out of a NEED for each other. By UYI times, most of the financial pressure is gone and with CD clearly money and tile were NO object.

It explains why AFD sounds lean. It is. UYI is great, but more bloated and CD continues that trend. Sometimes less is more.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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