Anyone else cringe at the way rock press and guitar magazines suck up to Slash?

[Nosaj Thing]

Music teachers tend to dislike guitarists like Slash. I guess it has to do with envy. Slash barely studied music theory and still managed to become a great player (besides rich and famous). I could name at least 100 guitar players who are technically better than Slash. Naming one who wrote something better than the Estranged guitar parts would be a lot harder though.

Great music has been written throughout history. To say no one has ever written anything better than the Estranged guitar parts is absurd.

I don't know where you are reading that "no one" has written anything better than Estranged.

[jamesrandolph]

Music teachers tend to dislike guitarists like Slash. I guess it has to do with envy. Slash barely studied music theory and still managed to become a great player (besides rich and famous). I could name at least 100 guitar players who are technically better than Slash. Naming one who wrote something better than the Estranged guitar parts would be a lot harder though.

Great music has been written throughout history. To say no one has ever written anything better than the Estranged guitar parts is absurd.

I don't know where you are reading that "no one" has written anything better than Estranged.

"Naming one who wrote something better than the Estranged guitar parts would be a lot harder though." -- actually it would be quite easy because a lot of great music has been written throughout the course of history. Saying that it would be hard to name someone who wrote something better than the guitar parts of estranged is absurd.

[Nosaj Thing]

Music teachers tend to dislike guitarists like Slash. I guess it has to do with envy. Slash barely studied music theory and still managed to become a great player (besides rich and famous). I could name at least 100 guitar players who are technically better than Slash. Naming one who wrote something better than the Estranged guitar parts would be a lot harder though.

Great music has been written throughout history. To say no one has ever written anything better than the Estranged guitar parts is absurd.

I don't know where you are reading that "no one" has written anything better than Estranged.

"Naming one who wrote something better than the Estranged guitar parts would be a lot harder though." -- actually it would be quite easy because a lot of great music has been written throughout the course of history. Saying that it would be hard to name someone who wrote something better than the guitar parts of estranged is absurd.

Is English your first language? Because I'm reading that it would be a lot harder in comparison to naming 100 guitarists that are technically better than Slash. Not that it's hard to name one guitarist who not only is technically better than Slash but also that has written better guitar parts than Slash's Estranged.

[jamesrandolph]

"I could name at least 100 guitar players who are technically better than Slash. Naming one who wrote something better than the Estranged guitar parts would be a lot harder though."

the original quote is saying that there are many guitarists technically better than slash, but not many who can write better parts than him (i am paraphrasing, not quoting word for word).

I am saying that there are many that can write better parts than him, it is easy to name them. To say that it is hard to name them is absurd.

Whatever you're saying isn't really making sense.

[maynard]

"I could name at least 100 guitar players who are technically better than Slash. Naming one who wrote something better than the Estranged guitar parts would be a lot harder though."

the original quote is saying that there are many guitarists technically better than slash, but not many who can write better parts than him (i am paraphrasing, not quoting word for word).

I am saying that there are many that can write better parts than him, it is easy to name them. To say that it is hard to name them is absurd.

Whatever you're saying isn't really making sense.

It's a matter of opinion isnt't it? What if, in my opinion, Estragend has the best guitar parts in music history?

Notice how I said: "I could name" in the start of my sentence.

Edited December 22, 2014 by maynard

[Patience 4 Axl]

Whether you like him or not, you have to admit Slash works hard. Is there a harder working musician in the industry right now? If he's not in the studio recording new music, he's out touring. or collaborating on some project. There's always something going on with him. People want to make that out as a bad thing, wtf? The guy doesn't sit back and take breaks for years on end. Thankfully. He's out there, doing what he loves and lives to do. And he gets the recognition he deserves for it. I have no idea why that would bother anyone.

[Apollo]

I agree with most of what the original poster is saying. I studied music at the college level, and I remember my guitar instructor commenting how Slash was the most famous top-hat in the industry.

As far as musical knowledge and musicianship goes, my teacher, and many others, can play circles around Slash. He has a marketable image to rock fans.

Congrats to all those nobodies. I look forward to their new albums and seeing them on tour...oh wait. The notion that Slash is just marketable and that's what he owes his success to is fucking asinine.

Sounds like the 40 year old dude who is still claiming be was the best basketball player in high school.....but he didn't make the team because the coach didn't like him and picked his (the coaches) best friends son instead.

All this crazy crap to praise Axl and bash Slash is embarrassing to me as a die-hard Axl Rose fan.

[SoulMonster]

Maybe he'd release better music if he's spend more time on it?

[Patience 4 Axl]

That theory didn't work for Axl unfortunately. Besides, Slash fans like his music, no need to make them wait for it.

[SoulMonster]

Yes, an argument could be made that Axl procratinates and spends too much time on creating and releasing music. Whereas Slash spends too little and that the quality suffers as a result. In that regard, they are like polar opposites. Sure, whoever likes the music he currently churns out will be happy and won't see any reason to make any changes, it goes without saying, but perhaps he would actually be able to produce something that MANY people would enjoy if he would just spend a little more time when writing the songs?

[DieselDaisy]

If procrastination equated, quality, all of the Beatles and Stones albums from the 1960s would be terrible, and Chinese Democracy would be a masterpiece. As we know, the reverse is true.

I like Slash's work ethic.

[Tom-Ass]

What a stupid thread

[star]

..as soon as I heard this on the radio back in the day, I knew it was Slash.. so cool!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjbyzO9RK5w

Edited December 22, 2014 by star

[Apollo]

Yes, an argument could be made that Axl procratinates and spends too much time on creating and releasing music. Whereas Slash spends too little and that the quality suffers as a result. In that regard, they are like polar opposites. Sure, whoever likes the music he currently churns out will be happy and won't see any reason to make any changes, it goes without saying, but perhaps he would actually be able to produce something that MANY people would enjoy if he would just spend a little more time when writing the songs?

Or perhaps Slash works better when he is working with fresh ideas. Perhaps the longer he works on and tinkers with an idea, the worse it becomes. Kind of like how many people liked the original gnr leaked songs instead of the album versions, which many people thought were over-worked.

Or maybe you have some real life examples you can share. It would be great to compare ideas that Slash came up with and compare them during their initial creative period to what they ended up sounding like a year or two later.

Because of your post you surely have several songs or riffs that we can compare. Thanks.

Oh, also, can you share with us the time frame from initial idea to final product for some of his more memorable riffs like scom, coma, estranged, nightrain, anastasia. Thanks.

[tomfriend]

I guess he's just a liked and respected guy in the industry. Slash managed to retain some of his relevance, his albums are all as modern sounding as possible and he's far from being a nostalgia act. His music is not exactly my cup of tea but I can understand why he's so praised.

If you disagree with magazine reviews and lists and it makes you mad, I recommend you to stop reading them.

It doesn't "make me mad", it just makes me cringe, as I don't believe a lot of these magazines are sincere in their praise of Slash's solo work. They clearly have a vested interest in keeping Slash in their favour and suck up to him as he is one of the more accessible rock legends and they are probably holding out for future exclusives and interviews etc.

Well, there you go, you've spelled it out for yourself. Don't need anyone else to explain it out for you. Slash looks more or less the same as he did in his heyday, he plays more or less the same and he was the last real guitar hero. None of the other classic axe-men are going to be around in 20 years. Slash probably will. His solo work doesn't do shit for me but the fact is with his iconic style and - not unimportantly - his look, he entered the public consciousness in a way that no guitarist has since and unless there's some big rock and roll revival around the corner (spoiler alert: there isn't), so it and he shall remain.

[tomfriend]

Yes, an argument could be made that Axl procratinates and spends too much time on creating and releasing music. Whereas Slash spends too little and that the quality suffers as a result. In that regard, they are like polar opposites. Sure, whoever likes the music he currently churns out will be happy and won't see any reason to make any changes, it goes without saying, but perhaps he would actually be able to produce something that MANY people would enjoy if he would just spend a little more time when writing the songs?

Slash works with an ethic where sloppy and spontaneous = good. That's a big part of rn'r, it always has been. Axl wants to take years to craft grand statements. (How dreck like 'Scraped' then winds up on his album...well, that's one of life's great mysteries)

It reminds me of that story about Leonard Cohen and Bob Dylan meeting. I'm going from memory, but it goes something like this. Bob says he loves 'Suzanne' and ask Leonard how long it took to write it. Leonard says 'about 5 years'. Leonard says he loves 'Blowin' In The Wind' and asks how long it took Bob to write that. He says 'about 5 minutes'.

This is likely a big part of why Slash and Axl couldn't get along. Who will win out? Well, Slash churns out mediocre rock by the bucketload, Axl has his bright spots and a lot of inactivity. I favour Axl because I feel a connection to his work and to him personally for the reason of having similar backgrounds and upbringing, his music speaks to me, to coin a corny phrase. That said, generally as a rock fan I favour Slash's approach, however he hasn't done anything in many years that interested me. But to get back to the original point, Slash's songs wouldn't be improved by taking more time over them because that's not who Slash is. He's wham bam thank you ma'am. Cut and print. The pair of them are hugely talented guys who have shown themselves capable of intermittent brilliance over the years and I guess as a fan the only choice is to wait around and hope they get another flash of inspiration. Either of them. But working together again? Never mind the personal bullshit and grievances, their aesthetics now are just too far apart. Yeah, Axl needs a major kick up the ass and to put out some of this 'amazing' material he's supposedly sitting on. Slash needs to find a better singer and write some better songs. Will either happen? Who the fuck knows, but this is why I roll my eyes at those holding out for a reunion. Some people don't get that these guys changed, grew and got set in their own ways. 'Well I like sirloin steak and I like ice cream, so sirloin steak ice cream is the answer to all my prayers!' No. No it is not.

Edited December 23, 2014 by tomfriend

[SoulMonster]

Yes, an argument could be made that Axl procratinates and spends too much time on creating and releasing music. Whereas Slash spends too little and that the quality suffers as a result. In that regard, they are like polar opposites. Sure, whoever likes the music he currently churns out will be happy and won't see any reason to make any changes, it goes without saying, but perhaps he would actually be able to produce something that MANY people would enjoy if he would just spend a little more time when writing the songs?

Or perhaps Slash works better when he is working with fresh ideas. Perhaps the longer he works on and tinkers with an idea, the worse it becomes.

Wow, just think how crappy his music would have been then if he had actually spent some time on it rather than just churn out a record "per year". Nah, much more plausible the songs would be better if he had spent some more time on them.

[SoulMonster]

Yes, an argument could be made that Axl procratinates and spends too much time on creating and releasing music. Whereas Slash spends too little and that the quality suffers as a result. In that regard, they are like polar opposites. Sure, whoever likes the music he currently churns out will be happy and won't see any reason to make any changes, it goes without saying, but perhaps he would actually be able to produce something that MANY people would enjoy if he would just spend a little more time when writing the songs?

Slash works with an ethic where sloppy and spontaneous = good. That's a big part of rn'r, it always has been.

Yes, his playing style is sloppy and spontanenous, and that tends to work out really well for him because it lends a raw edge to his performances (and studio recordings) while not resulting in many glaring mistakes (which would be the result from a lesser guitar player who tried it). Basically, he is so good he can pull that off. His song-writing may also be sloppy and spontaneous, and I think it would be better if he had tried a little harder in that department. It has to do with writing more songs and then picking the best of them before releasing anything, like maybe he would have been better off by just releasing one album these last years? as well as spending some more time when actually writing the music to come up with better song structures, hooks and choruses. Basically, I think he should be a little bit more critical about his own output

[DieselDaisy]

Your argument presupposes that the original genesis of a song can be improved over time. This is not always the case. Often, sitting fine-tuning the same idea(s) leads to poor decision making and eventual, creative stagnation - case in point, W. Axl Rose. You could also make a cinematic analogy here with George Lucas.

[jmapelian]

I love when people say he's better now than he was in GNR.

Maybe better at badly attempting to push his boundaries and sounding like an idiot half the time.

He's 10x's better live than when he played with Guns. Anyone who says otherwise is just being a hater.

[maynard]

I agree with SM on this one. I'm not saying Slash should take 3 or 4 years to release an album, that would feel just unnatural. But yes, he should take some 3-6 extra months to polish some choruses, riffs, structures, etc. It wouldn't hurt, IMO.

And Axl should do the opposite, time didn't help CD. The more simple and straight-forward versions of 2001 are way better than the final versions.

[jmapelian]

I've noticed this for a long time now, despite Slash's solo output becoming steadily more bland and derivative with every passing release, he seems to get a free pass from the likes of Classic Rock and pretty much any and every guitar magazine. Every album always receives glowing reviews (and yet they always seem to talk about how much stronger the new record is compared to its predecessor, despite having talked about how great that album was at the time).

Granted, Slash being a media-darling is hardly a new thing.... and I guess Slash has a lot of guitar endorsements so it just makes good business sense to keep someone who has literally become the walking embodiment of the term "guitar God" in your good graces. But it's just so read-through when you see these magazines including his latest turgid, cookie-cutter, cock-rock in their annual best-of lists....

Or they just like different music than you do? They don't hold grudges against musicians?

If they like something - they praise it.

If they don't like something - they don't.

Music is all about personal preference. No need to imply or look for some deep controversy just because somebody likes an album/musician than you.

They make their judgments on the music, and not on whether or not Axl likes that musician.

*********

Mods - this is obviously a cupcake thread. Lock it?

Utter bullshit.

I have nothing against Slash and actually own all of his post-GNR albums. My opinion on how lacklustre his recent albums are has nothing to do with Axl's low opinion of Slash. I just have a working set of ears and am not a Slash fanboy who sits and masturbates over the guy wanking all over Rocket Queen for fifteen minutes.

And if you truly believe that there are no politics involved in the music press then you really are very naïve.

Hard to believe not everyone has the same opinion as yours? Maybe that's why your writing on a fan forum and their writing for music publications.

[Amir]

Your argument presupposes that the original genesis of a song can be improved over time. This is not always the case. Often, sitting fine-tuning the same idea(s) leads to poor decision making and eventual, creative stagnation - case in point, W. Axl Rose. You could also make a cinematic analogy here with George Lucas.

Even great ideas need work, though. There's some stuff in Slash's solo output where I think, if he spent a bit more time refining this and honing that, this track could be a classic.

As it is, I'm impressed he came up with 17 good to great tracks for World on Fire in such a short period of time.

[dalsh327]

The band worked at its best when they could take everyone's half baked ideas and build them into something more. They were also able to work the AFD songs in front of a crowd for a few years.

[Amir]

Tracks like The Unholy and Anastasia to me could have been indisputable classics if they'd just had a bit more time spent on them: both songs could lose a repetitive verse or two, Anastasia could do with much better lyrics to suit the amazing music, etc. They still both have great elements in my opinion (the outros especially).