What went wrong with NUGNR?

[PappyTron]

Just now, AlexC said:

Ah okay, but you do know what purple Acki is notorious for, right?

I most certainly do. How much can you squat, anyway?

[AlexC]

4 minutes ago, PappyTron said:

I most certainly do. How much can you squat, anyway?

Hahahaha! He's like an urban legend around here, whenever he's out of prison I start seeing people I know posting pics of sightings of him all over Facebook

[proud10]

Any press or chance to promote themselves was negative. Any live streams or TV performances, save for a few on 2006, were Axl not at the top of his game vocally.  A Grammy or Billboard award performance from 2006 or even 2010 could've shocked a lot of people. Plus prolonging CD just made them a joke even though it was phenomenal. If Axl had the album ready to go by the time of his first show post-Slash the band might've had more success 

Edited May 23, 2016 by KiernanProud

[PappyTron]

Just now, AlexC said:

Hahahaha! He's like an urban legend around here, whenever he's out of prison I start seeing people I know posting pics of sightings of him all over Facebook

A couple of people here have seen him and taken pictures on the train!

Probably got a right gripping from him too.

[IncitingChaos]

2002 VMA's sunk the band and Axl's rep forever. 

However if you ask anyone who saw the band in 2002 they will tell you it was the best gnr show they have ever seen...all lineups included. 

[Apollo]

Rock fans would have accepted the band if they would have released music. You can't start a new band and NOT release music for almost a decade. 

That's the only way you can replace original members as iconic as Slash, Duff and Izzy. By showing that the new band can stand on their own merits. 

But you can't "replace" Slash by having a new guitar player just playing Slash songs. 

If GnR had released albums in 2001, 2004, 2008 and 2012 then fans would have accepted it. Of course a few diehards still wouldn't have liked that Axl kept the name. But at least they could have respected that Axl at least tried to make a new "band" instead of just putting together hired hands to profit off the old catalog. 

Edited May 23, 2016 by Apollo

[PsychoKiss344]

Buckethead & Robin Finck left the band, thats what went wrong.

[moreblack]

Quite glad it's over.

[Billsfan]

Guns n roses has always been an evolving machine. It's just a tougher sell without slash there, regardless of how better or worse a different lead guitarist would be

[Billsfan]

The biggest letdown I think since 1999 on has really been the lack of new material more than anything.. Chinese was hyped up to be the first installment of a series of records and we got one that was barely promoted or worked on to the level it would have needed to be worked on.

[gooner14]

Axl Rose happened to GN'R. First destroyed GN'R then realized were irrelevant and couldn't fuel his weird lifestyle any longer until the liebeses and del James made him reconcile with slash and Duff so they wouldn't lose their pay checks and we now have a reunion playing the same songs they released 25+ years ago

[DieselDaisy]

''What went wrong with NUGNR?'' Well there are two answers for two different sets of fans. Firstly, If you accepted it as legitimately Guns N' Roses, then this is the answer,

2 hours ago, Oldest Goat said:

-The lack of new music.
-Most of all, CD taking waaay too long to come out.

If however you saw it as a solo act then that is your answer in itself - you hated it from the word go basically.

Whether you saw it as bona fide GN'R or otherwise, Axl himself, the man who supposedly was at the centre of this whole operation, and whose power grab was meant to have 'protected his interests', never allowed the thing to flourish, seemed to knock the thing down when it gained any momentum. Crazy!

 

[ChineseIRS]

I think u mean what didn't go wrong with NuGNR?

[uncivil war]

1 hour ago, Apollo said:

Rock fans would have accepted the band if they would have released music. You can't start a new band and NOT release music for almost a decade. 

That's the only way you can replace original members as iconic as Slash, Duff and Izzy. By showing that the new band can stand on their own merits. 

But you can't "replace" Slash by having a new guitar player just playing Slash songs. 

If GnR had released albums in 2001, 2004, 2008 and 2012 then fans would have accepted it. Of course a few diehards still wouldn't have liked that Axl kept the name. But at least they could have respected that Axl at least tried to make a new "band" instead of just putting together hired hands to profit off the old catalog. 

Pretty much this. Lack of a steady stream of new songs failed to give the new lineups legitimacy. 

People would have gotten  used to the "freak show" as some have described it. Most people would eventually have accepted new members and gotten over the loss of old ones. 

3 to 4 albums of semi decent music would have given credibility to the band. 

Many other bands have dealt with members coming and going  and still maintained some level of legitimacy with the wider public.

Of course there will always be hardcore fans who moan and complain that the perfect lineup for them is no longer together, but that is just the nature of humanity I guess. 

[Juventino]

Getting the album out in 2001, or at the latest 2002 in time for the tour, would have helped. I want to know what the hell Axl was doing in 2003-2005? The lack of activity is a killer. More than a decade to release a bloody album - nobody to blame on that but Axl.

[maxpax]

i lost count, but i feels like new gnr had 15-20 band members...members that couldn't say too much, because they could be fired after that. the band itself was interesting, but axl should have release it under a completly other name than guns n' roses. it failed from the start and hurt the brand of gnr.

Edited May 23, 2016 by maxpax

[wasted]

I think the reality was that the label were more than happy to put out Live era in 99 and Greatest Hits in 2004. 

Basically the label were looking to sell 20 million copies in 99. The intial 4 mil advance to make it was a drop in the ocean the band made for the rec company. But I think both the label and Axl wanted to be successful in 99. But the label wanted to make it more GNR sounding than the Beavan record so they spent 10 million more to make it better. But in 2000, Axl believed Bob Ezrin when he said it wasn't ready. They brought Constanzo in. 

I'm not sure what happened in 2004 because the record was basically done, maybe the label didn't have a good way to promote or offer any video money. 

After 2004 the label cut Axl off for studio money so any additions like Ron, Frank, This I Love, Baz on Sorry was paid for by Axl. 

So I at first rec company wants to make millions but as time went by it was more about recouping. 

It's just mismanagement or nobody being able to convince Axl. It's true though there was no support for the record or video budget. If in 2000 after the re-record Jimmy or whoever said it's great, here's the video budget etc. even Ezrin should have said it's fine. But it was only 2000. But that misstep really had knock on effects. 

Personally I think it's the nature of that material being a cross of classic rock and 90s alt. classic rock guys like Ezrin are like eeww this isn't rock. And nu metal people think Axl is jumping on Trent Reznor, Axl was the enemy. 

CD isn't a thoroughbreed, it's mongrel dog. It has a glitzy ugliness that is hard to see the beauty in at first. It isn't the easy sell that Geffen wanted. You know 6 ballads about love and six rock n roll songs about drugs and strippers. They probably heard Oh My God, Silkworms and Chi dem in the office and were like we can't sell this, get down to the studio and see what Axl is doing. 

I think the label were scared to waste 3 records on CD era type material. GNR was their cash cow. Milk the back catalog, don't let Axl run away with it. 

They could potentially of had 3 records that sold 10 mil each, but say it wasn't that success and sold 4-5 in 2000, then 3-4 in 2002. By then the name has lost it's value. Axl puts out 3 studio cds by 2006. When the original guys only put out 2 in the 90s. 

When all is said and done, Axl putting out 1 cd in 00s is about right for the demand. 

CD is a story of Expectations, greed and egos. 

Axl keeping the name is more like a safety net so he didn't end up like Diamond Dave. 

[Italian girl]

jesus!!!! don't talk about nugnr anymore, pls 

[RONIN]

The band lost all credibility and marketability after Buckethead left. When they did the House of Blues shows in Vegas in 2000, there was some real buzz -- if Axl had just built on the momentum and kept Bucket in the band, they would have had a chance. By 2006, the replacements were replaced by inferior session musicians and the last shred of interest in the band evaporated. 

And...needless to say, Axl should have just gone solo. The guy ruined his reputation with this nu guns crap. And for what? He released 1 album in 23 years. Instead of ensuring the survival of Guns N Roses, he destroyed the band for 2 decades.

[DieselDaisy]

4 hours ago, uncivil war said:

Pretty much this. Lack of a steady stream of new songs failed to give the new lineups legitimacy. 

People would have gotten  used to the "freak show" as some have described it. Most people would eventually have accepted new members and gotten over the loss of old ones. 

3 to 4 albums of semi decent music would have given credibility to the band. 

Many other bands have dealt with members coming and going  and still maintained some level of legitimacy with the wider public.

Of course there will always be hardcore fans who moan and complain that the perfect lineup for them is no longer together, but that is just the nature of humanity I guess. 

Some fans would have, some wouldn't have, but it is academic as Rose never allowed any of these guys to release music as a band and establish a new identity. We are left with 'what ifs?'.

[Swedish]

I was generally not a fan of NuGN'R but this show is amazing! The band is great and Axl sounds unbelievably good!
If they'd sound like this all the way through and released music at least every 4 years then this iteration would've succeeded big time! 

 

[BOSSY78]

I really don't know how to put in words what I want to say but here goes.

I happen to think CD was great. I of course am a fan that appreciates Axl's musical genius. Songs like November Rain and Til are a good example of that. 

I think many are forgetting what Axl himself said which is it was rough time with the ending of Stephenie and his relationship to the breakup and then smear campaign from ex members and etc.

Axl knew fans were divided. We as fans didn't know the real story and some were quick to buy into what others said even when they contradicted their selves or admitted they were so strung out. I'm not here to say who's story is right or wrong. But the few times over the years Axl spoke on it fans still spread what other members said most not giving any thought to what he said. But many preached others stories as gospel.

We all like to think of Axl as some big meanie who was complicated and hard to work with but I also know we have heard some of the same about Slash.

Many fans felt like NuGnR wasn't GNR because Slash wasn't there yet Slash was never an original member of GnR. He was a classic member. Axl was GnR before the majority of the others. Just as he brought songs into the band that has since been proven to be written before Classic GnR.

 

So in short I think it was a lack of some fans giving the new band a chance and feeling they must chose sides and compare everything Axl did then to the past.

I also think bad management and promotions. The long wait for CD.

Most perfectionists thrive on things being perfect which always takes longer but imagine striving for it when half your fan base was against you?

Let's be realistic here. I listen to music for many reasons but the actual singer is always first followed by the rest. As a fan of is singing and song writing I found CD a great album. 

I'm glad Slash is back and Duff but I never went around putting members down based off internal issues I didn't know about. I don't care who said what's what. 

This isn't a stab at anyone just a few of my opinions on it.

At the end of the day I see CD as a successful album and the concerts I seen with NuGnR were packed and fans had fun. Of course I have only seen a few.

I think Axl was a tad more successful after the breakup then some other members. Again note I said some.

 

 

Edited May 23, 2016 by BOSSY78
smart phones suck

[Rovim]

My trying to be objective opinion is that it did not totally fail if I look at it as a fan. It could have been so much more probably, but I feel like Axl was very limited not as a musician, but more as a person perhaps.

He did not pull the trigger when he probably should have, it took too long to gain momentum and it was not consistent enough to grow naturally. He wasn't there a lot of the time according to past new Guns members and he couldn't let the album go.

I think artistically he did it, against all odds, an album no one has really created before in such a way, and the outcome was something that I feel does justice to the legacy of Axl. The quality is there.

I suspect it wasn't all on Axl, that people tried to make a reunion happen, Ezrin, RTB, and Iovine probably made matters worse, and the label didn't think it was good enough, maybe more than once.

And all this shit is going down while Axl is as insecure as ever, trying to prove he can do it with a different band. He said it's a miracle it got released.

To be brutally honest, I don't think Guns was meant to exist without Slash and Duff. I'm not saying Izzy cause he doesn't like drama and huge epic albums and tours. Steven is not as crucial but I recognize his significance of course.

[Bumblefeet]

50 minutes ago, RONIN said:

The band lost all credibility and marketability after Buckethead left. When they did the House of Blues shows in Vegas in 2000, there was some real buzz -- if Axl had just built on the momentum and kept Bucket in the band, they would have had a chance. By 2006, the replacements were replaced by inferior session musicians and the last shred of interest in the band evaporated. 

I would argue otherwise. The 2000 buckethead/Finck lineup was disappointing live. It wasn't until 2006 that Axl's voice got a lot better and Bumblefoot/Finck were the lead guitarists. It got even better when Finck left IMO. After CD was released, NuGuns had a lot of great years live especially in the 2010-2013 period even with DJ Ashba who love-but-mostly-hate-him did work for the fans. After 2013 Axl's voice dragged. Not even the Duff gigs did much to improve that. Which is why it is amazing how great Axl sounds this year.

And yeah, NuGuns deserved a CD followup given the strong tours that followed it, but it never came.

Edited May 23, 2016 by Bumblefeet

[BOSSY78]

1 minute ago, Rovim said:

My trying to be objective opinion is that it did not totally fail if I look at it as a fan. It could have been so much more probably, but I feel like Axl was very limited not as a musician, but more as a person perhaps.

He did not pull the trigger when he probably should have, it took too long to gain momentum and it was not consistent enough to grow naturally. He wasn't there a lot of the time according to past new Guns members and he couldn't let the album go.

I think artistically he did it, against all odds, an album no one has really created before in such a way, and the outcome was something that I feel does justice to the legacy of Axl. The quality is there.

I suspect it wasn't all on Axl, that people tried to make a reunion happen, Ezrin, RTB, and Iovine probably made matters worse, and the label didn't think it was good enough, maybe more than once.

And all this shit is going down while Axl is as insecure as ever, trying to prove he can do it with a different band. He said it's a miracle it got released.

To be brutally honest, I don't think Guns was meant to exist without Slash and Duff. I'm not saying Izzy cause he doesn't like drama and huge epic albums and tours. Steven is not as crucial but I recognize his significance of course.

A lot of great points that I didn't touch on. I agree there was much going on.

I remember when he said they tried to push a reunion on him and they weren't the only ones. You had Axl basically saying that people wanted it for their own reasons with disregard for how it would affect him.

Emotionally I think he was done at the timewith ex members. It wasn't good for his health so to speak but it never stopped millions of fans from blaming him for not doing what they wanted again with complete disregard to how it would affect him.

 

Like I said to many it was all Axl's fault. I was trying to think of a way to be objective yet present more then one side and you nailed a lot of it.