Apollo Show - Izzy & Steven Not Playing - Argue About It HERE

[magnumpi]

14 hours ago, WhazUp said:

Yeah Zeppelin were in there with Cream, Deep Purple, Black Sabbath... all rock n' roll bands lol.  You don't need to be punk in order to be rock n' roll, that is why punk is not called rock n' roll

I never thought anyone in the entire world would dispute Zeppelin being called a rock n' roll band lol

Astounding 

Can you believe this guy saying led zepellin isn't rock n roll!!!!!

 

Every rock band since zrppelin has been influenced by them.

[magnumpi]

 

[DieselDaisy]

The problem is, terms like 'rock n' roll', 'hard rock', 'punk' - and in fact 'pop' and 'metal' even - are rather nebulous and somewhat conflating terms. I can perceive why somebody possesses problems lumping Zeppelin into the 'rock n' roll' bracket as they rarely swing and were heavier and more folksy/progressive than the 1950s acts or the Stones (or Appetite era Guns), but I also cannot rationally form a defense on why 'rock n' roll' is inappropriate - particularly for Zeppelin's early work which is based on similar ingredients as the Stones.

It is confusing.

[AncientEvil80]

18 hours ago, Euchre said:

 

The whole reliability think with members makes we wonder if people are actually looking at facts or living in an alternate reality. Axl has failed to show up at more shows, caused more tours to be cancelled, walked off stage more and pulled more damaging-to-the-band stunts than all the other members combined. If anyone is a risk it is him, so if he is questioning others reliability it is laughable. And I'm not saying that to say he shouldn't be there he's part of the 5 so should be, but let's at least deal in the real world with factually accurate evaluations.

 

This. Yes. But it will fly over the head of most peeps in here... somehow...

[Ace Nova]

17 hours ago, magnumpi said:

Nothing to argue about from point of view.

Without izzy and Steven the band's current activities do not interest me.

Posts like this I don't really get.  I would love to see Izzy and Steven play with the band again, as much as anyone else.....but do people with this opinion really know the history of the band?

Adler was no longer part of the band when Illusions was released and Izzy left the band in the beginning of the Illusions tour....meaning that neither were part of the band during their peak years in the early 90's.  Neither were part of the band during the vast majority of the mega Illusion's tour that cemented this band in rock n' roll history.  This band wouldn't be anywhere near as popular (and good chance this forum wouldn't even exist) if what happened after BOTH Adler and Izzy left the band wouldn't of happened. That's the reality of the situation.  So not having any interest in the band without Adler or Izzy is basically ignoring the fact that the band's most successful years came after both were already out of the band.

[default_]

9 minutes ago, Kasanova King said:

Posts like this I don't really get.  I would love to see Izzy and Steven play with the band again, as much as anyone else.....but do people with this opinion really know the history of the band?

Adler was no longer part of the band when Illusions was released and Izzy left the band in the beginning of the Illusions tour....meaning that neither were part of the band during their peak years in the early 90's.  Neither were part of the band during the vast majority of the mega Illusion's tour that cemented this band in rock n' roll history.  This band wouldn't be anywhere near as popular (and good chance this forum wouldn't even exist) if what happened after BOTH Adler and Izzy left the band wouldn't of happened. That's the reality of the situation.  So not having any interest in the band without Adler or Izzy is basically ignoring the fact that the band's most successful years came after both were already out of the band.

I understand your point but I can also relate to people who have no interest in a GNR without Izzy/Steven cause, you know, GNR havent released anything since Izzy left, and Steven in a certain degree, cause like it or not, most of the drum lines on the Illusions were done by him, Matt just put some ideias here and there and recorded 'em.

Maybe if we get a new album now things will change, but for now, Guns N' Roses have not released a single song without them.

(Chinese Democracy may be good but thats not GNR)

[xBrownstonex]

On 23.7.2017 at 7:21 AM, Sydney Fan said:

' And it was not just the music. All the great things about that band were not there. I saw those guys in 1992 twice, they were 10 feet away from me, and there wasnt much left from the band i spent years watching and listening and adoring. What was left of it? Maybe Slash! Even fucked up he still played like an animal. But Axl... What the fuck happened to that guy? I am stilll baffled and I dont understand what happened. By 1992 (he actually showed signs of that in mid-1991) he started moving, sounding and looking like a fucking robot. Like a fucking malfunctioning clone of himself. Complete autopilot. Predictable. Boring. The exact opposite of who he was, who he used to be onstage. That guy, onstage, during GNR days, he seemed to have music going through him during the shows in the GNR days. It was all over by 1992. By then he became a performer or an entertainer or whatever you wanna call it. Very rarely he let loose like he used to do on GNR days. Very rarely he seemed to be "into" the songs. It was only on special occasions that he was "on", like when he played with members of Queen, Aerosmith etc.

I often wondered if it was his depression potentially being an issue. It was also during this stage when axl hired his sister and stepbrother to manage the backstage themed parties, so i just think axl went just plain nuts. Maybe management was in axls ear telling him one thing and maybe wanting axl to break away and do his own thing. Slash talks bout it in his book that all advice had to go through doug goldstein first and then 'massaged' before asking axl. He complained about going on the illusions tour because his head wasn't upto it, i think it could have been just mental issues axl was experiencing and the band/management probably didn't want to raise it and keep the band going and the money rolling in......except the band were pissing the money down the drain with their late appearances.

Wait, didnt @ludurigan post the exact same thing a cpl days ago?

[DieselDaisy]

4 hours ago, Kasanova King said:

Posts like this I don't really get.  I would love to see Izzy and Steven play with the band again, as much as anyone else.....but do people with this opinion really know the history of the band?

Adler was no longer part of the band when Illusions was released and Izzy left the band in the beginning of the Illusions tour....meaning that neither were part of the band during their peak years in the early 90's.  Neither were part of the band during the vast majority of the mega Illusion's tour that cemented this band in rock n' roll history.  This band wouldn't be anywhere near as popular (and good chance this forum wouldn't even exist) if what happened after BOTH Adler and Izzy left the band wouldn't of happened. That's the reality of the situation.  So not having any interest in the band without Adler or Izzy is basically ignoring the fact that the band's most successful years came after both were already out of the band.

Appetite For Destruction ''cemented this band in rock n' roll history''. The Illusion tour, although not without its merits, was rather embarrassing.

[Ace Nova]

12 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

Appetite For Destruction ''cemented this band in rock n' roll history''. The Illusion tour, although not without its merits, was rather embarrassing.

Errr...maybe as a whole, AFD is their most iconic album and the album that catapulted them into rock n' roll history but had they not released Illusions and done that tour, they would be nowhere near the "rock legends" they are now.  Basically, AFD got them there....Illusions and the tour cemented it.

Edited July 24, 2017 by Kasanova King

[xBrownstonex]

7 minutes ago, Kasanova King said:

Errr...maybe as a whole, AFD is their most iconic album and the album that catapulted them into rock n' roll history but had they not released Illusions and done that tour, they would be nowhere near the "rock legends" they are now.  Basically, AFD got them there....Illusions and the tour cemented it.

Yep. But to some people only an embarrassing tour can break all records and set standards. ??‍♂️

[DieselDaisy]

6 minutes ago, Kasanova King said:

Errr...maybe as a whole, AFD is their most iconic album and the album that catapulted them into rock n' roll history but had they not released Illusions and done that tour, they would be nowhere near the "rock legends" they are now.  Basically, AFD got them there....Illusions and the tour cemented it.

I'd go as far to agree on some of the Illusion albums but the tour was a complete embarrassment at exactly the time when Nirvana were 'cool'; it made the band look pompous and ridiculous.

If Guns had retired after Appetite I suspect their reputation in rock history would be the same - if anything better as people would see them as this like punky rock band who put out a gnarly little album before folding.

[Ace Nova]

1 minute ago, DieselDaisy said:

I'd go as far to agree on some of the Illusion albums but the tour was a complete embarrassment at exactly the time when Nirvana were 'cool'; it made the band look pompous and ridiculous.

If Guns had retired after Appetite I suspect their reputation in rock history would be the same - if anything better as people would see them as this like punky rock band who put out a gnarly little album before folding.

The thing is, history now regards the grunge era as a trend..as a fad that quickly faded away...so the fact that Nirvana was "cool" and GN'R went the other direction, speaks more highly of GN' R in my opinion and history seems to agree with me.  Even David Grohl got away from the whole Nirvana/grunge thing with the Foo Fighters....which actually sound closer to GN'R than Nirvana.  It's funny because it's Nirvana that is now regarded as that cool "band" that released a few albums during that "grunge" era where as GN'R are now regarded among the best bands in rock n' roll history. (Although some will argue both are, but album and tour sales would state otherwise).

 

 

 

 

[DieselDaisy]

1 minute ago, Kasanova King said:

The thing is, history now regards the grunge era as a trend..as a fad that quickly faded away...so the fact that Nirvana was "cool" and GN'R went the other direction, speaks more highly of GN' R in my opinion and history seems to agree with me.  Even David Grohl got away from the whole Nirvana/grunge thing with the Foo Fighters....which actually sound closer to GN'R than Nirvana.  It's funny because it's Nirvana that is now regarded as that cool "band" that released a few albums during that "grunge" era where as GN'R are now regarded among the best bands in rock n' roll history. (Although some will argue both are, but album and tour sales would state otherwise).

 

 

 

 

I think if you are going for ''cool'' Nirvana trounces Guns. If corporate sales, Guns win. Yet Guns were once immensely cool also, in the '80s.  Guns were this punky rock n' roll band and made themselves look stupid on that Illusion tour with the costume changes (underpants) and inflatables. Let's not forget the riots and silliness. There were some good nights but most of them in 1991 when Stradlin was still there and they were doing stuff like 14 Years.

[Fourteenbeers]

I'd say the UYI albums are much more important than the tour (for starters - you can't have a tour in the first place unless you have songs to perform) Some of the songs on those albums were written years before they were released. 

But I guess I have to give props to the band that they were all still alive after that tour, despite what a mess they were at the time.

Edited July 24, 2017 by Fourteenbeers

[AncientEvil80]

7 hours ago, Kasanova King said:

So not having any interest in the band without Adler or Izzy is basically ignoring the fact that the band's most successful years came after both were already out of the band.

Hmmm, considering that back then the industry was still about selling records, how much did the UYI albums sold, compared to Appetite??? Eh... exactly.

The video for November Rain and your mom saying: "hey, THIS one is a nice song, I like it." when you're a teenager, shouldn't be considered the peak of GNR's success. It's not.

[EvanG]

2 hours ago, Kasanova King said:

Even David Grohl got away from the whole Nirvana/grunge thing with the Foo Fighters....which actually sound closer to GN'R than Nirvana. 

No way that the Foo Fighters sound closer to GnR than Nirvana. Grohl spent the first years of his career with the FF getting nothing but criticism for sounding too much like Nirvana. 

I wouldn't agree that grunge was a fad that faded away quickly, we got so many grunge wannabe bands after 1994. I guess it's hard to pinpoint what grunge was anyway because even in 1992 all the bands that were labeled grunge didn't sound anything alike, they just looked the same more or less. But how many Cobain lookalikes didn't we see after 1994 getting popular? It wasn't until that terrible nu-metal became popular that it faded away a bit more.

[AncientEvil80]

2 minutes ago, EvanG said:

No way that the Foo Fighters sound closer to GnR than Nirvana. Grohl spent the first years of his career with the FF getting nothing but criticism for sounding too much like Nirvana. 

I wouldn't agree that grunge was a fad that faded away quickly, we got so many grunge wannabe bands after 1994. I guess it's hard to pinpoint what grunge was anyway because even in 1992 all the bands that were labeled grunge didn't sound anything alike, they just looked the same more or less. But how many Cobain lookalikes didn't we see after 1994 getting popular? It wasn't until that terrible nu-metal became popular that it faded away a bit more.

Agree 100%. "Grunge" has never been a fad and those bands that are considered the "originators of the trend" eventually inspired myriads of other artists, all the way up to these days. Big time.

[Tucknroll]

Anyone else think Richard is too good of a player to be in izzys rhythm spot? He's basically as good as slash and too good to be a rhythm player

[AncientEvil80]

5 minutes ago, Tucknroll said:

Anyone else think Richard is too good of a player to be in izzys rhythm spot? He's basically as good as slash and too good to be a rhythm player

No.

He shouldn't be in Izzy's spot, but that's another matter.

As for being as good as Slash - Technically and in terms of phrasing, he's miles above Slash. But he ain't Slash.

[Tucknroll]

I saw them in Nashville and Richard was awesome and had his moments to shine but I'm just saying I can play izzys parts. I also think slash liled to drown izzy out and maybe he feels like Richard is stepping on his lead guitar toes. I just don't see how Richard doesn't get bored

[Darkenchantress]

59 minutes ago, Tucknroll said:

Anyone else think Richard is too good of a player to be in izzys rhythm spot? He's basically as good as slash and too good to be a rhythm player

Is not about how good he is. He is obviously a technically better player than both, Izzy and Slash, you just have to attend any NITL show to see that. Is about the way he plays, or the parts he plays. The problem is that he's much of a lead guitarist to be playing with Slash. They don't compliment each other the way Izzy and Slash did, the guitar interplay is lost. He is a good guitarist but that's it, he does nothing for me. 

Edited July 24, 2017 by Darkenchantress

[Izzymacbeth]

1 hour ago, Tucknroll said:

Anyone else think Richard is too good of a player to be in izzys rhythm spot? He's basically as good as slash and too good to be a rhythm player

Completely stupid statement. Being a good rhythm guitarist is a HARD job. A guitarist is a guitarist, you either play the lead or the rhythm. To be a great rhythm player takes a shit load of talent. I say this as both a professional musician and as a guitar teacher. 

Fortus and Stradlin are VERY talented rhythm players who use a lot of the fret board for licks and flourishes and play in the pocket.  

Clarke and Tobias/Huge on the otherhand were just powerchord, root note hitters and nothing special. 

[Ace Nova]

1 hour ago, AncientEvil80 said:

Hmmm, considering that back then the industry was still about selling records, how much did the UYI albums sold, compared to Appetite??? Eh... exactly.

The video for November Rain and your mom saying: "hey, THIS one is a nice song, I like it." when you're a teenager, shouldn't be considered the peak of GNR's success. It's not.

Not sure how much you know or understand about the music business but yes, AFD outsold Illusions overall as a single record but Illusions have sold about 15 million copies each....combined over 30 million....give or take...and that's about what AFD has sold.  Plus, Illusions also bolstered AFD sales....pretty sure AFD had nowhere near 30 million sales when Illusions came out.  And your opinion doesn't really count here.  Guns N' Roses sold more combined records after Illusions was released, than before....that includes AFD, Lies and both Illusions albums....so yes, absolutely, not even debatable....they were a much bigger and more popular band AFTER Illusions was released.  Not sure how old you are but I lived through it as a teenager.  I was there. 

[Tom2112]

8 minutes ago, Izzymacbeth said:

Completely stupid statement. Being a good rhythm guitarist is a HARD job. A guitarist is a guitarist, you either play the lead or the rhythm. To be a great rhythm player takes a shit load of talent. I say this as both a professional musician and as a guitar teacher. 

Fortus and Stradlin are VERY talented rhythm players who use a lot of the fret board for licks and flourishes and play in the pocket.  

Clarke and Tobias/Huge on the otherhand were just powerchord, root note hitters and nothing special. 

THIS! 

I mean if we're gonna complain about anything, let's say Richard is way too damn good to be mixed so low in a live setting, maybe it was just the two gigs I went to but Slash's guitar dwarfed him during the rhythm and the solos. 

Anyway, most people think rhythm guitar or bass is a lesser role in a band... well go and listen to your favourite band without either and it's not gonna sound all that great. Richard is a great, great rhythm player, I especially love his version of You're crazy. He just nails the feel, and even when he strays from the records he still lays down a strong groove that stylistically appropriate. I consider him to be a top tier player. 

I'd also point out that Richard would likely say "It's Slash, and we're playing in GNR, of course he's the lead guitar player" that's not him saying I can't hang with Slash, that's him reading the situation and knowing what the majority pay to hear. Having  said all I'd like to see Richard getting a lead or two on a new record, he's a great counter to Slash (who's ear are clearly pricked for Richard, never heard him playing augmented/diminished runs before the NITL tour).

[Ace Nova]

1 hour ago, EvanG said:

No way that the Foo Fighters sound closer to GnR than Nirvana. Grohl spent the first years of his career with the FF getting nothing but criticism for sounding too much like Nirvana. 

I wouldn't agree that grunge was a fad that faded away quickly, we got so many grunge wannabe bands after 1994. I guess it's hard to pinpoint what grunge was anyway because even in 1992 all the bands that were labeled grunge didn't sound anything alike, they just looked the same more or less. But how many Cobain lookalikes didn't we see after 1994 getting popular? It wasn't until that terrible nu-metal became popular that it faded away a bit more.

Of course grunge was a fad.  It was just about dead and done by 1996ish...by then, rock either was on the lighter side (Dave Mathews Band, Sublime, Barenaked Ladies,etc) or the heavier side (Rage Against the Machine, NIN, Tool, etc)  Pearl Jam was still somewhat popular but they were about the only band from the Grunge era that still was.