Considering everything that's happened, do you think Slash was right about the need to go back to their roots and to being a classic hard rock band?

[jmapelian]

If you seperate the illusions their's an afd like album worth of material on there

[EvH]

I prefer UYI II to AFD myself.

[TotonnoDuff]

@TotonnoDuff Why would anyone hate you for stating your opinion about what you like?

@TombRider I'm new to the forum and I didnt want to sound like I was trolling or flaming...moreover, in the past in lots of forums ive seen many fights and friendships end because of this topic ehehehe

[TombRaider]

I see. Well, I see what you mean. AFD is great, but UYI is on a whole different level.

[Nosaj Thing]

Not trying to be hated by everyone in the board, but in my opinion, and I underline it twice, it's JUST MY OPINION, i prefer the Illusions over AFD.

I mean, AFD is great, and I think it is great because in that period they both (Slash and Axl) wanted to show the same thing: that they were the only wild, true street hard rock band left in post-hair-metal era. And, jeez, they were.

But I really feel like their "artistic" (sorry for the curse word) peak is actually on the Illusions...it's in those records that you can really hear the sound of the TITANIC CLASH between the two different approaches...the exploding critical mass created by the hard-rock-coherence roots of Slash and the pop-psicho-visions of Axl.

Today, for me, they both miss the other one's part. They both sound somewhat weird and incomplete to me. But I do still love them both inconditionally.

Welcome to the forum! This is a great post!

[Crash Diet]

I wonder what would've happened in the world of GnR if Axl had listened to Slash and if they'd gone back to a normal raw rock n' roll level, to put it in Slash's own words. You know, a bass player, two guitars, a drummer and a singer, playing badass rock n' roll songs. Maybe a ballad here and there, but with the focus on being what they'd been or rather what they once were. Would that have backfired on them, considering the changes in the music biz at the time and grunge and all that or do you think it'd have paid off in the long run?

And I don't even think Slash was voicing his desire to go back to being a rock n' roll band just to spite Axl. I'd like to think he wanted to do that for the good of the band. Call me naive. I don't know.

My answer is yes, although they do not need to make another AFD (this is a stupid common Axl defender argument...)

[Crash Diet]

That was not possible. Axl was fascinated with grunge and industrial rock on the moment he heard it. When you have that kind of ambition, it's not something that you can pull out of your head.

I don't wanna go into the discussion of who was right, who is more talented etc... But Axl was the only one on the band who managed to notice that the industry was changing, and that if they wanted to stay relevant, they would have to evolve. There was no space for hard rock music anymore. Obviously they would have released incredible hard rock albums if they wanted to, but their relevance was not going to go up.

And I'm not saying Axl only wanted to change the band's style to stay relevant, he really seems fascinated with that new kind of rock that appeared on the 90s. On the Illusions you can feel the evolution from Appetite, and that's coming from Axl. The epic vibe of that double album is his touch.

In my opinion, it was great for both Axl and Slash that they went on separate ways. They wanted different things.

There was a moment in their lives in which they both wanted to play hard rock, and that's when they released the best hard rock album ever, Appetite For Destruction. Then, Axl slowly started to distant himself from that genre, while Slash was still truly passionate about it.

That's why I consider Axl a genius... He manages to do brilliant music in any genre he has ever tried. This is the kind of people who move music forward: the people who are not affraid to try new stuff. Too bad he's a fucked up lazy psycho. Well, I guess there's really this thin line between being a genius and being a mentally ill person.

Oh please...

relevant?

see how it works for him

great that they went separate ways?

maybe yes, but if they found a way to work out their differences we still got GNR...

but who knows at this point, it doesn't really matter anymore

but one thing is a fact: None of the former members wanted GNR as a nostalgia act, despite they would like to move back to their hard rock roots...

GNR was a great band because of the hard rock (and some blues rock) style, yes, it would be cool if some "evolution" haoppened again and again, but the so called "relevant" factor is pretty irrelevant...

Just see how the masses still want the same old GH tour over and over again

Edited July 25, 2013 by Crash Diet

[TotonnoDuff]

Welcome to the forum! This is a great post!

Thank you so much! Happy to be here!

[rocker rockstar]

Yes they would have done better to go back to their roots of being a hard rock band. GNR was one of the few hard rock bands that did well in the grunge era. They could have continued to be great. I believe losing Izzy was really the start of the falling apart of GNR. Axl firing of Gilby the replacement for Izzy that Slash hand picked also did not help. Slash picked Gilby because he could write with him. Then Axl goes and hires his buddy without consulting Slash.

Anyways, That is what I see as the begining of the fall of GNR.

We can only imagine what GNR could have been if things went different. GNR at the time had more gas in the tank they just needed to get the pieces that worked back. Mainly losing Izzy was a big disaster that caused the domino effect of the self destruction of GNR.

An example of a band that did not change much was AC DC they are still successful. GNR could have stayed doing the same style stuff and probably been popular because people just loved GNR.