Dee Snider takes aim at GnR...

[Teroz]

Well Dee has a point to an extent. I do not fully agree, some member changes are beyond control and it would be a shame if bands would stop there.

And bitch and moan whatever you want about Twisted Sister, one thing about Dee could give Axl a few pointers is fitness. There he is pictured at 59yrs old, he still brings a fantastic and energetic live performance everytime.

Edited March 31, 2015 by Teroz

[dalsh327]

[Bumblefeet]

worth a listen if you're anti-snider. Clears some things up. Put like this, it's easy to see his point.

Thanks for sharing. It still doesn't change my opinion on Dee being hypocritical; the point he is trying to make doesn't hold up and reeks of elitism amongst rockers. The notion that a band member who joined after a band broke big can supposedly never be an integral part of said band and just a session player replacing an original member, is BS. Countless of bands have changed drummers, guitarists, singers, ... and still survived and sold records. You could even argue that some members of bands who were there from the start do little to nothing to deserve any recognition yet get it because of more talented writers in that band. Dee says "but what about the original members, they'll be forgotten". Yeah, I guess people forgot all about Duff and Slash. The reason he talks shit about Guns is obviously because he knows Axl wont comment and Asha ignores bullies.

I generally like Dee from when he was a frequent guest on Stern (waaaaay back) but he just comes across as a whiny jealous bitch here and if he's upset about rockers using band names on flyers or billboards, his band is basically a nostalgia act and couldn't be more dead in the water over in the states (he still gets some scraps in Europe), he has to walk any music event's red carpet and kiss ass of all the people he badmouths and the guy is now doing motivational speaking sessions on his book... He's become the court jester of rock.

[Apollo]

worth a listen if you're anti-snider. Clears some things up. Put like this, it's easy to see his point.

Thanks for sharing. It still doesn't change my opinion on Dee being hypocritical; the point he is trying to make doesn't hold up and reeks of elitism amongst rockers. The notion that a band member who joined after a band broke big can supposedly never be an integral part of said band and just a session player replacing an original member, is BS. Countless of bands have changed drummers, guitarists, singers, ... and still survived and sold records. You could even argue that some members of bands who were there from the start do little to nothing to deserve any recognition yet get it because of more talented writers in that band. Dee says "but what about the original members, they'll be forgotten". Yeah, I guess people forgot all about Duff and Slash. The reason he talks shit about Guns is obviously because he knows Axl wont comment and Asha ignores bullies.

I generally like Dee from when he was a frequent guest on Stern (waaaaay back) but he just comes across as a whiny jealous bitch here and if he's upset about rockers using band names on flyers or billboards, his band is basically a nostalgia act and couldn't be more dead in the water over in the states (he still gets some scraps in Europe), he has to walk any music event's red carpet and kiss ass of all the people he badmouths and the guy is now doing motivational speaking sessions on his book... He's become the court jester of rock.

Except that most people - from what I've seen on NON-GnR sites at least 90% of people - agree with what Dee said.

***********

It's odd to me how some people on this forum represent what other people are thinking or what their motives are.

If a musician says something bad about Axl - then that musician is a whiny jealous little bitch.

If Axl came out and said something bad about a musician - it's because Axl is edgy, speaks the truth, doesn't give a f*ck, and is the last true rock star who isn't afraid to speak his mind.

And then instead of just talking about the actual "event" or what was said......it always turns into bashing that guy's career.

Technically, Dee is wrong. This current band is GnR. DJ Ashba is GnR.

And if Axl sold or gave the name "Guns n Roses" To DJ, and DJ fired the rest of the band and hired a couple high school buddies to replace them (including Nickleback's Chad Kroger to sing) - then TECHNICALLY that band would be Guns n Roses.

But music isn't just about contracts and technicalities. Hell, that's one of the reasons people love Axl so much.

But deep down all of us know that Dee's point is correct in the hearts of 99.99% of rock fans out there. And it will stay that way until DJ Ashba and Chris Pittman help create their OWN LEGACY in the band.

DJ is "in" Guns n Roses.

But until he actually creates some music with GnR - then he isn't really "GnR' - he's just a paid band member.

**********

With all due respect the wife comparison holds no water at all.

Here is a better example.

Russian baker Ivan Kolzoff moves to Denver.

Kolzoff, his wife and children open up a restaurant whose main dish are Pelmenis, made with his secret family recipe. They call it Kolzoff's.

Because they are delicious, and nobody else in Denver serves them, the restaurant explodes and is soon one of the 2-3 most popular eateries in all of Denver.

Eventually Kolzoff and his wife divorce, his kids go off to live their own lives and they all disappear from the restaurant business for a decade.

But then the wife comes back, she's won the "name" of the restaurant in the divorce. She re-opens a Pelmeni shop. She still serves the exact same menu as when she ran the shop with her husband.

It doesn't work without her ex-husband and family there, so the mom sells it to some American family.

A decade later you go into the restaurant and see some 18-year-old kid making the food. Using the same recipe that Ivan Kolzoff brought to America.

Do you look at little Frankie Jones and say "Yea, that dude is Kolzoff's." Or do you say "That kid might work for Kolzoff's, but he isn't really a Kolzoff."

tl/dr version. Until DJ creates GnR music - then it's hard to stomach him promoting himself as being Guns n Roses. Right now these guys are ALL making a living by playing music that other people created.

HOPEFULLY some day Axl will give this current band a chance to imprint their own legacy onto the name Guns n Roses. BBF got tired of waiting and left. Robin left. Bucket left. Slash left. Duff left. Izzy left. Before anybody else leaves, I hope Axl gives them a chance to help carry on the legacy of GnR.

[tinyrobot]

***********

It's odd to me how some people on this forum represent what other people are thinking or what their motives are.

If a musician says something bad about Axl - then that musician is a whiny jealous little bitch.

If Axl came out and said something bad about a musician - it's because Axl is edgy, speaks the truth, doesn't give a f*ck, and is the last true rock star who isn't afraid to speak his mind.

And then instead of just talking about the actual "event" or what was said......it always turns into bashing that guy's career.

Technically, Dee is wrong. This current band is GnR. DJ Ashba is GnR.

And if Axl sold or gave the name "Guns n Roses" To DJ, and DJ fired the rest of the band and hired a couple high school buddies to replace them (including Nickleback's Chad Kroger to sing) - then TECHNICALLY that band would be Guns n Roses.

But music isn't just about contracts and technicalities. Hell, that's one of the reasons people love Axl so much.

But deep down all of us know that Dee's point is correct in the hearts of 99.99% of rock fans out there. And it will stay that way until DJ Ashba and Chris Pittman help create their OWN LEGACY in the band.

DJ is "in" Guns n Roses.

But until he actually creates some music with GnR - then he isn't really "GnR' - he's just a paid band member.

**********

1) Dee Snider did not attack Axl directly. He attacked the players who are hired to play with him under the name "Guns N' Roses". It's really important to point out this because there's a lot of confusion and trouble started because of this.

2) The way I see it and it's just my opinion, of course: it doesn't matter if Dee Snider is right or wrong. I guess he's technically right but what's the need in stating the obvious? Why hurt colleagues that way? That is what bothers me the most, because Fortus, Ashba, Tommy, etc... should not be crucified, bullied and singled out just because they joined a band that broke up. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that. It's a job! and I find it pretty shitty when a person attacks the job of someone else, unless that "job" would be something shady, illegal or in some way detrimental of others.

3) Guns N' Roses is brand at this point, just like Coca Cola or Apple and any other company out there. Should have Apple stopped all its production when Steve Jobs died? Ridiculous!

There have always been change of members in Gn'R. Should we say Matt Sorum was not in GN'R just because he didnt start with the rest of the guys in 1985?. I know this line-up still needs some sort of legitimization with an album, but that's a mere formality.

4) All in all, I think it's distasteful to attack people out of the blue, specially when they are colleagues and they don't mess around with you. And this goes for Dee Snider, Axl Rose, Taylor Swift, Kanye West and whoever the heck thinks they have a right to mess with the jobs of others. Respect your colleagues and mind your own business. Unless you are trying to gain some free press at the expense of someone else's fame..... which is the cheapest way to go for it.

[Bono]

DEFENCE! DEFENCE! DEFENCE!

[Strange Broue]

all rockstars are cocks

[Free Bird]

3) Guns N' Roses is brand at this point, just like Coca Cola or Apple and any other company out there. Should have Apple stopped all its production when Steve Jobs died? Ridiculous!

There have always been change of members in Gn'R. Should we say Matt Sorum was not in GN'R just because he didnt start with the rest of the guys in 1985?. I know this line-up still needs some sort of legitimization with an album, but that's a mere formality.

So if Axl dies someday, will GNR still exists, just because there's somebody in the band who can sing? C'mon...

[majormayhem]

3) Guns N' Roses is brand at this point, just like Coca Cola or Apple and any other company out there. Should have Apple stopped all its production when Steve Jobs died? Ridiculous!

There have always been change of members in Gn'R. Should we say Matt Sorum was not in GN'R just because he didnt start with the rest of the guys in 1985?. I know this line-up still needs some sort of legitimization with an album, but that's a mere formality.

So if Axl dies someday, will GNR still exists, just because there's somebody in the band who can sing? C'mon...

Yes, Stewart will take his place.

[tinyrobot]

3) Guns N' Roses is brand at this point, just like Coca Cola or Apple and any other company out there. Should have Apple stopped all its production when Steve Jobs died? Ridiculous!

There have always been change of members in Gn'R. Should we say Matt Sorum was not in GN'R just because he didnt start with the rest of the guys in 1985?. I know this line-up still needs some sort of legitimization with an album, but that's a mere formality.

So if Axl dies someday, will GNR still exists, just because there's somebody in the band who can sing? C'mon...

When Axl dies the GNR brand can still be exploited by releasing all of the unheard recorded material. Just like it has happened with plenty of deceased artists.

Do you really believe Guns N Roses is the first and the last band in the world that has been dismembered and will suffer the physical loss of its original members? There are plenty of examples in the music industry of bands changing line-up, breaking up, reforming, coming back after decades of hiatus and lots of other nuisances, yet always finding a way to continue working under the same name.

[Free Bird]

3) Guns N' Roses is brand at this point, just like Coca Cola or Apple and any other company out there. Should have Apple stopped all its production when Steve Jobs died? Ridiculous!

There have always been change of members in Gn'R. Should we say Matt Sorum was not in GN'R just because he didnt start with the rest of the guys in 1985?. I know this line-up still needs some sort of legitimization with an album, but that's a mere formality.

So if Axl dies someday, will GNR still exists, just because there's somebody in the band who can sing? C'mon...

When Axl dies the GNR brand can still be exploited by releasing all of the unheard recorded material. Just like it has happened with plenty of deceased artists.

Do you really believe Guns N Roses is the first and the last band in the world that has been dismembered and will suffer the physical loss of its original members? There are plenty of examples in the music industry of bands changing line-up, breaking up, reforming, coming back after decades of hiatus and lots of other nuisances, yet always finding a way to continue working under the same name.

You didn't answer my question with this post. I ask again:

If Axl dies someday and lets say Fernando jumps in as the new lead singer, fronting Ashba, Stinson, Pitman and so on, would you still consider it GNR?

[tinyrobot]

You didn't answer my question with this post. I ask again:

If Axl dies someday and lets say Fernando jumps in as the new lead singer, fronting Ashba, Stinson, Pitman and so on, would you still consider it GNR?

The scenario you are laying out will never occur because Axl is the solely owner of the brand Guns N' Roses and there isn't a natural successor to occupy his place.

If Fernando was a talented singer and musician and he was Axl's son, then maybe under Axl's authorization he could take the spot and continue the story. But it's useless to think of it because it's pretty obvious the kid has got nothing to do with music and singing.

[Free Bird]

Bullshit. There would be a bunch of guys, playing cover songs and pretend to be GNR. Nothing more or less.

You can't compare a Rock n Roll band with a brand, cause it isn't. It's a band and the more original members disappear, the lesser it is the same band.

[tinyrobot]

Bullshit. There would be a bunch of guys, playing cover songs and pretend to be GNR. Nothing more or less.

You can't compare a Rock n Roll band with a brand, cause it isn't. It's a band and the more original members disappear, the lesser it is the same band.

?

Yes, you can. And when Axl dies, the most likely scenario will be TB releasing post-mortem records.

[Tom2112]

Bullshit. There would be a bunch of guys, playing cover songs and pretend to be GNR. Nothing more or less.

You can't compare a Rock n Roll band with a brand, cause it isn't. It's a band and the more original members disappear, the lesser it is the same band.

It's a brand, but it's also a band. 50/50 in my opinion. We wear gnr t-shirts (advertisement) they sell music, concert tickets, they liase with promoters and other big business and at the end of the chain we buy the product they're selling. Band / brand / business, whatever you want to call it... Gnr are in the $$$ business like every other working band in the world.

[Apollo]

I miss the days when GnR wasn't a brand and the focus was on the music the band created and shared with their fans.

[GNRfan2008]

He's 100% right.

[dalsh327]

Most bands that reach iconic status are brands, whether it's Black Flag or Black Sabbath.

If Axl didn't care about the brand and the money it was going to make, he wouldn't have fought for the name. The brand is why he got the money to make Chinese Democracy.

[Free Bird]

Bullshit. There would be a bunch of guys, playing cover songs and pretend to be GNR. Nothing more or less.

You can't compare a Rock n Roll band with a brand, cause it isn't. It's a band and the more original members disappear, the lesser it is the same band.

It's a brand, but it's also a band. 50/50 in my opinion. We wear gnr t-shirts (advertisement) they sell music, concert tickets, they liase with promoters and other big business and at the end of the chain we buy the product they're selling. Band / brand / business, whatever you want to call it... Gnr are in the $$$ business like every other working band in the world.

Of course those bands are making money with music, touring and merchandise, thats not what I'm talking about. It just isn't anymore the real band when most the original members leave.