Izzy Stradlin' Leaves GnR: A Retrospective (Vintage Quotes 1991-2017)

[ludurigan]

3 hours ago, Tori72 said:

There is no big three in GnR, however you put it. They were five and they wrote songs together. I wouldn’t wanna miss Duff’s bass, neither Steven’s drumming. It is those 5 or it’s not Guns n Roses. 

i agree

 

[Swedish]

3 hours ago, Tori72 said:

There is no big three in GnR, however you put it. They were five and they wrote songs together. I wouldn’t wanna miss Duff’s bass, neither Steven’s drumming. It is those 5 or it’s not Guns n Roses. 

Isn't "the big 3" only used when talking about the NITL line-up though? 

No one uses it to try and minimize Adler and/or Izzy's roles during the 80s, not that I've seen at least.

[ludurigan]

2 hours ago, EvanG said:

They could do it for the fans for like 5 minutes, but I guess egos don't work that way.

the steven 2-songs apparitions were very disturbing if you ask me. specially if you consider he could play the entire set -- or at least all the GNR songs

i mean... it is hard enough to watch GNA with franky and ricky destroying all the songs... now how can you keep watching GNA after having five (or ten) minutes of GNR? how can you keep watching franky speedy fills ferrador after watching steven?

i guess i would walk as far away from the stage and turn my back to the stage and wait with my back turned to the stage -- until they bring GNR back!

 

[ludurigan]

2 minutes ago, youngswedishvinyl said:

Isn't "the big 3" only used when talking about the NITL line-up though? 

No one uses it to try and minimize Adler and/or Izzy's roles during the 80s, not that I've seen at least.

maybe you dont use it to try and minimize it but when you say there is a "big 3" then you are automatically implying that there is a "small 2" and if THAT is not minimizing then i have no idea what it is!

[DieselDaisy]

I found the Adler guest spot a bit humiliating (on Adler's part), like a guest at his own wedding. As far as I'm concerned it is Adler's band just as much as it is the partnership's.

[Modano09]

2 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

I found the Adler guest spot a bit humiliating (on Adler's part), like a guest at his own wedding. As far as I'm concerned it is Adler's band just as much as it is the partnership's.

Like celebrity rehab humiliating or face planting into his drum set humiliating?

[DieselDaisy]

3 minutes ago, Modano09 said:

Like celebrity rehab humiliating or face planting into his drum set humiliating?

Worse.

On Rose, Slash and Duff's part there was something ''school playground'' and shooray for tolerance!y about it which I didn't like.  

[Alejandro GNR]

Axl, Slash, Izzy, Duff...those are the big 4.

None of them would be the same without the others, except maybe Axl and Slash hahahaa

[EvanG]

1 hour ago, ludurigan said:

the steven 2-songs apparitions were very disturbing if you ask me. specially if you consider he could play the entire set -- or at least all the GNR songs

i mean... it is hard enough to watch GNA with franky and ricky destroying all the songs... now how can you keep watching GNA after having five (or ten) minutes of GNR? how can you keep watching franky speedy fills ferrador after watching steven?

i guess i would walk as far away from the stage and turn my back to the stage and wait with my back turned to the stage -- until they bring GNR back!

 

It sucked. Most fans want Izzy and Steven, or else Matt, on board, but it is what it is. 

I'd rather have seen the AFD lineup on stage together one more time after 28 years, even if it is for one song, than never having seen that at all. It would be so epic in the history of this crazy band, especially because it's nothing short of a miracle that they are all alive. What I was trying to say is, that I don't understand why it hasn't happened yet in the last two years. I can understand, for many reasons, Izzy not wanting to be a part of this tour or this band again, but I don't get why he wouldn't go on stage one more time with the lineup that changed all their lives. Whether it is for the fans or themselves, it would be so epic to have the 5 of them on stage together one more time after all these years.

Edited March 2, 2018 by EvanG

[chandler72]

32 minutes ago, EvanG said:

It sucked. Most fans want Izzy and Steven, or else Matt, on board, but it is what it is. 

I'd rather have seen the AFD lineup on stage together one more time after 28 years, even if it is for one song, than never having seen that at all. It would be so epic in the history of this crazy band, especially because it's nothing short of a miracle that they are all alive. What I was trying to say is, that I don't understand why it hasn't happened yet in the last two years. I can understand, for many reasons, Izzy not wanting to be a part of this tour or this band again, but I don't get why he wouldn't go on stage one more time with the lineup that changed all their lives. Whether it is for the fans or themselves, it would be so epic to have the 5 of them on stage together one more time after all these years.

Oh please....Izzy is a greedy asshole who only cares about the "loot" not the fans. Adler is a blazing idiot. I can't blame for one minute Ax, Slash and Duff, decided not to have that fuck up in their band.

[double talkin jive mfkr]

12 minutes ago, chandler72 said:

Oh please....Izzy is a greedy asshole who only cares about the "loot" not the fans. Adler is a blazing idiot. I can't blame for one minute Ax, Slash and Duff, decided not to have that fuck up in their band.

yeah your right - who the hell calls Axl Ax if he isn't his friend u must be an inner circle guy 

its apparent that the NITL is all about the loot considering the non stop touring and stagnant set lists along with keeping the originals out whilst paying the hired hands session wages 

if it's about loot its not a bad idea to spread it more evenly to the founding members dorky 

[Free Bird]

2 hours ago, ludurigan said:

maybe you dont use it to try and minimize it but when you say there is a "big 3" then you are automatically implying that there is a "small 2" and if THAT is not minimizing then i have no idea what it is!

I disagree. They're called the big 3 in comparison to the other current members. Not in comparison to Izzy and Adler. Let's say Adler and Izzy were part of the reunion, with Fortus as third guitarist, and Dizzy and Melissa as what ever they do... then we'd have the big five and the others.

[ludurigan]

18 minutes ago, Free Bird said:

I disagree. They're called the big 3 in comparison to the other current members. Not in comparison to Izzy and Adler. Let's say Adler and Izzy were part of the reunion, with Fortus as third guitarist, and Dizzy and Melissa as what ever they do... then we'd have the big five and the others.

good point

but i am not sure everyone sees it like you do

oh man and please dont ever mention that "fortus as third guitarist" scenario again that would be too awful

[Gibson87]

2 hours ago, ludurigan said:

i guess i would walk as far away from the stage and turn my back to the stage and wait with my back turned to the stage -- until they bring GNR back!

 

You're gonna be waiting a long time. And you'd miss out on a great show 

Edited March 2, 2018 by Gibson_Guy87

[Eric Cantona]

3 hours ago, ludurigan said:

maybe you dont use it to try and minimize it but when you say there is a "big 3" then you are automatically implying that there is a "small 2" and if THAT is not minimizing then i have no idea what it is!

The Small Two being Richard and Frank

[Gnrcane]

2 hours ago, double talkin jive mfkr said:

its apparent that the NITL is all about the loot considering the non stop touring and stagnant set lists along with keeping the originals out whilst paying the hired hands session wages 

if it's about loot its not a bad idea to spread it more evenly to the founding members dorky 

I don't think the stagnant nature of the set list is evidence that it is all about the loot.  They could play 2 hour shows instead and use the same "song bucket" but vary the set list because they wouldn't be doing as many songs per night.  Would that be a better value if you buy a ticket?

Also, Steven would have cost very little so it could be argued that it would have been more profitable to include him.  It wouldn't have to sell all that many additional tickets per night to cover his pay.

Nobody actually knows what Izzy asked for or what they offered him.  Maybe the offer from them was reasonable but Izzy only wanted to do it if it was REALLY worth it financially.  Nobody knows for sure.  Keep in mind, Izzy does get royalties every time they play songs that he has writing credits on.  It isn't nearly what A, S and D are making but he is earning money from NITL.

[Ratam]

9 hours ago, BOSSY78 said:

One thing that always got me is the back and forth and changing of stories as the teller saw fit.

For example it was never a secret Slash had trouble with Izzy being in the band at different points but later Slash made it all like he never felt that way. Izzy even made claims that from day one Slash didn't want him there. Sure they became close at other points but the fact still remains and crept into interviews over the years. 

I think Izzy leaving was a culmination of many things. I think Slash was just as involved as Axl in running the band and decisions being made where later it was mostly shoved on Axl as being the dictator. Many interviews over the years have shown this.

I do believe Axl was genuinely hurt by Izzy leaving and still cares about Izzy.

I belive Izzy being sober and his juggling being on the road and surrounded by all he was avoiding played a huge role.

I also believe because of his being sober he was avoiding many band functions that Axl Slash and others felt he wasn't putting in the same effort.

I feel it was hard for him and don't blame him at all for the decisions he made. I think at the time he felt it was the best decision for him.

What I also believe is that Axl had a valid point in that he was surrounded by junkies overdosing. He needed to protect the band as a whole. Of course his constant lateness didn't go over well with many. 

There's a very telling part where Izzy says he was on the phone with Axl and how Axl was basically saying he was in charge and he also admits Axl was trying to make it good for him as well. He quit the next day. This was in the conversation about the contract. He never went into detail about what Axl offered him there making it good for him as well.

To me it came down to Izzy being sober and being disillusioned with the rock star life and the drugs. He wanted to maintain his sobriety and distanced himself from his band members. Slash and Axl felt he wasn't putting in the work they were. Izzy showed up as needed and likely not more than that. I imagine Izzy felt a disconnect from some of the band as they were getting high and partying while he was sober.

All sides were valid there. Izzys was just more personal. 

Izzy became worried about lawsuits and that fear pushed him to watch money more. He didn't feel the video's should be that expensive. He wanted bare bones when Axl wanted the total vision played out on certain songs. The trilogy as deemed back then told a story and he likely wanted that to reflect in the videos. 

Again both valid points. One side just cost more.

Personally I wouldn't expect less than what we got for videos like November Rain. Those videos are iconic still today. 

I could never see that songs video any other way. The video magnified the song. Don't Cry is the same way. It also was likely a sort of way for Axl to express himself which he needed to do.

Many fans act like all GnR fans don't like UYI but it's actually quite the opposite. The majority like Appetite and the UYI era.

Just as some of the band members disliked the ballads but they are ranked as their top songs. Even people who don't like or know who GnR really is can sing along to most of those ballads.

Axl's vision paid off. Much like Slash claimed to dislike SCoM but people just couldn't get enough of his guitar in it. Personally I think his dislike was rooted in the fact that he played the part originally frustrated with Axl saying the original version was missing something. Axl however liked it and so it stayed. I could be wrong. My opinion.

As a fan rather I understand Izzy's reasons, he left. He negotiated his buyout from the partnership. 

As far as Niven. I honestly see him as many saw Goldstein.  Only he was an Izzy man where as Goldstein was an Axl man.

 

 

Out of likes😢but great post.

[ludurigan]

3 hours ago, AslatIE said:

The Small Two being Richard and Frank

i though they were the aliens

[dontdamnmeuyi2015]

Not sure who's book it was because I read Slash, Duff and Steven's books, but back in the day, Izzy would just leave for days sometimes weeks and no one would know if/when he would come back?

I think Izzy always has been wanting to do his own thing on Izzy's time. It's funny because he never really got lip for it like Axl when he would disappear or not show up.

Well, I think Izzy is still doing his own thing.

I remember the interview back with Axl and Eddie Trunk. They were in Orlando and Axl said he talked to Izzy and he was supposed to show up but never did. If the dvds are true sometimes, Izzy would fly on a different plane to shows overseas than the rest of the band.

Anyway, what does it matter now? Izzy is his own man and since I don't think he's married or has kids, he can still go his own way and that's cool!

It's a shame though because I would love to see what Izzy and Axl would do now if they wrote new songs together. I would hope the magic would still be there.

Edited March 2, 2018 by dontdamnmeuyi2015
more

[Swedish]

7 hours ago, ludurigan said:

maybe you dont use it to try and minimize it but when you say there is a "big 3" then you are automatically implying that there is a "small 2" and if THAT is not minimizing then i have no idea what it is!

Unlike @Free Bird and @AslatIEyou obviosuly didn't read my comment since I clearly stated that Axl, Slash and Duff are the "big three" in the NITL line-up and not in the AFD5 line-up...

If the NITL tour was with Axl, Slash, Izzy and Adler they would be "the big four" because there would be another bass player in that line-up.

As far as I'm  (and probably most other fans) are concerned "the big three" does not apply to any other line-up that the current one.

[Eric Cantona]

1 hour ago, ludurigan said:

i though they were the aliens

Hilarious

[Powderfinger]

Thanks for posting this, it got me through the commute from work and was well laid out. Lots of new shit in there for me. 

If they had split it 20% each at the start...... 

You really should/could write a book around these quotes. Thanks!

[Powderfinger]

16 hours ago, EvanG said:

It sucked. Most fans want Izzy and Steven, or else Matt, on board, but it is what it is. 

I'd rather have seen the AFD lineup on stage together one more time after 28 years, even if it is for one song, than never having seen that at all. It would be so epic in the history of this crazy band, especially because it's nothing short of a miracle that they are all alive. What I was trying to say is, that I don't understand why it hasn't happened yet in the last two years. I can understand, for many reasons, Izzy not wanting to be a part of this tour or this band again, but I don't get why he wouldn't go on stage one more time with the lineup that changed all their lives. Whether it is for the fans or themselves, it would be so epic to have the 5 of them on stage together one more time after all these years.

The piece posted mentions Izzy, before the rock n roll hall of fame ceremony, asked Axl to meet him in a hotel. He wanted to discuss the original 5 playing on the night. He waited for two hours and Axl didn’t show.

 

 

[Powderfinger]

22 hours ago, BOSSY78 said:

One thing that always got me is the back and forth and changing of stories as the teller saw fit.

As far as Niven. I honestly see him as many saw Goldstein.  Only he was an Izzy man where as Goldstein was an Axl man.

At times they all completely contradict themselves! 😂

Im not so sure that Niven was an Izzy Man... I think the vibe he got from the band was Izzy’s vibe. Other people got Slash's or Axl’s. Niven didn’t stand to make lots more cash by being an Izzy Man... I’m multiple interviews I’ve read with him, he’s mentioned that He saw Izzy as the spirit of Guns. 

But I go back to my first statement, so who fucking knows..... 😂 

[RONIN]

On 3/2/2018 at 12:49 AM, BOSSY78 said:

One thing that always got me is the back and forth and changing of stories as the teller saw fit.

For example it was never a secret Slash had trouble with Izzy being in the band at different points but later Slash made it all like he never felt that way. Izzy even made claims that from day one Slash didn't want him there. Sure they became close at other points but the fact still remains and crept into interviews over the years. 

"Originally I don't think Slash ever wanted to play with another guitarist. But we both really loved Aerosmith and the Stones and we just used that idea to make it all work. My favourite band was always the Ramones - just four guys wailing with power chords. At some point he and I hooked up and we started making it work. It became fun, just working with another guy like him, opposites attrack, I suppose."

https://izzystradlin.wixsite.com/unofficial/copy-of-guns-roses-bad-boys-give-i-30

 

Quote

I think Izzy leaving was a culmination of many things. I think Slash was just as involved as Axl in running the band and decisions being made where later it was mostly shoved on Axl as being the dictator. Many interviews over the years have shown this.

Slash was involved in running the band along with Axl. But Axl had more control over band affairs and Slash's power was significantly reduced with the departure of Alan Niven. Post-Illusions, Axl was running the band. There's many many interview from Matt, Gilby, Izzy, Duff, Slash, and Niven to support this. I don't think poor Axl is unfairly blamed as being the dictator. Nobody is out ta get him. He demoted everyone and legally took control. That's what dictators do - they take control and run things, often times against the wishes of others. 

Quote

I do believe Axl was genuinely hurt by Izzy leaving and still cares about Izzy.

Agreed.

Quote

I also believe because of his being sober he was avoiding many band functions that Axl Slash and others felt he wasn't putting in the same effort.

That and they (Axl) wanted him to be at video shoots - he didn't show up because he felt they weren't listening to his input and doing things against his wishes. He was losing control in the band decision making process and his response was to phase himself out of the band entirely. That along with his sobriety made him less interested in socializing with the band. 

Izzy is not going to jump because Axl and Slash tell him to. They were not functioning as a band at this point, it was the Axl/Slash show and Izzy wanted no part of that. If Axl/Slash want to spin that into "he wasn't putting in the effort" - it hardly makes it reality. He says it himself, people were late to rehearsals while he was there early, Slash/Duff didn't want to learn cover tunes when Axl was having a meltdown offstage, his parts for UYI were completed in '89 - on time. He didn't show up in the studio later on because Axl took forever to record vocals. 

Quote

What I also believe is that Axl had a valid point in that he was surrounded by junkies overdosing. He needed to protect the band as a whole. Of course his constant lateness didn't go over well with many. 

I don't think it was valid at all because Axl very nearly destroyed the band with the continuous controversies, curfew fees, lawsuits, and riots he was causing. Not to mention the deluge of bad PR with the moronic decisions to do OIAM/Charles Manson songs on their albums and expenses he was incurring for the band with unwanted video shoots and lavish parties. Slash overdosing and dying is nowhere near as problematic as the band being driven to bankruptcy by lawsuits and fees. That doesn't give Axl a good enough justification to legally swipe the name. And he did nothing with it in 20 years which makes his "protecting the name" shtick even more ludicrous.

Quote

There's a very telling part where Izzy says he was on the phone with Axl and how Axl was basically saying he was in charge and he also admits Axl was trying to make it good for him as well. He quit the next day. This was in the conversation about the contract. He never went into detail about what Axl offered him there making it good for him as well.

Slash said something similar in his book, that when he was asked to sign the contract to become an employee, Axl was trying to make it good for him too. I wouldn't read too much into it - probably them being diplomatic. I'm not sure how you can make it good for someone when you're demoting the original co-founders of the band legally into employee status (duff/slash) and/or diminishing their royalties/payment (Izzy). 

Quote

To me it came down to Izzy being sober and being disillusioned with the rock star life and the drugs. He wanted to maintain his sobriety and distanced himself from his band members. Slash and Axl felt he wasn't putting in the work they were. Izzy showed up as needed and likely not more than that. I imagine Izzy felt a disconnect from some of the band as they were getting high and partying while he was sober.

Cherry-picking facts here. That's some of the reason, but not most of the reason. The interviews basically spell out that he was frustrated with not having enough say in the direction of the band (the primary reason), Axl constantly screwing the fans over by being late or not showing up and causing riots - lawsuits/curfew fees Axl was incurring that the band was forced to pay (the secondary reason) - and the last straw, his demotion and getting his royalties/payment reduced (the ultimatum that made him resign). He also strongly opposed Alan Niven getting fired and did not like Steven getting fired either - neither of which he had any control over. By his own admission he didn't want to leave the band but felt he had no choice. 

TOM ZUTAUT: The band was paying thousands of dollars in curfew violation fees. Izzy finally had it and went over to Axl's house and told him that if he insisted on going on late, the late feesshould be charged to him. That was it–Izzy was out of the band. [SPIN 1999]

Quote

All sides were valid there. Izzys was just more personal. 

No, all sides weren't valid. Axl and Slash taking over the band and imposing a contract on Izzy is not valid. That's not how bands are supposed to function. 

Quote

 

Izzy became worried about lawsuits and that fear pushed him to watch money more. He didn't feel the video's should be that expensive. He wanted bare bones when Axl wanted the total vision played out on certain songs. The trilogy as deemed back then told a story and he likely wanted that to reflect in the videos. 

Again both valid points. One side just cost more.

 

How does that make both sides valid? One side is doing it as a vanity project to feed his narcissism - blowing the band's money on what he wants without taking into consideration what anyone else thinks. Izzy is a co-founder in GnR. If he doesn't want to do those videos, they shouldn't have done them. That's how a band is supposed to function.

Quote

Personally I wouldn't expect less than what we got for videos like November Rain. Those videos are iconic still today. 

Or those videos are considered corny as Axl himself admitted in 2008.

Quote

I could never see that songs video any other way. The video magnified the song. Don't Cry is the same way. It also was likely a sort of way for Axl to express himself which he needed to do.

Okay. But that doesn't really justify spending millions of the band's cash and imposing his will on his bandmates just because he wanted to express himself in some vanity pieces. The story in the trilogy is laughably trite imho. And just for the record, I do like the videos. 

Quote

Many fans act like all GnR fans don't like UYI but it's actually quite the opposite. The majority like Appetite and the UYI era.

I love UYI but UYI undersold compared to Appetite. It doesn't appear that Axl likes UYI much either.

Quote

Just as some of the band members disliked the ballads but they are ranked as their top songs. Even people who don't like or know who GnR really is can sing along to most of those ballads.

Okay. And if Slash wasn't playing on them, they'd probably be liked a lot less (see Chinese Democracy).

Quote

Axl's vision paid off. Much like Slash claimed to dislike SCoM but people just couldn't get enough of his guitar in it. Personally I think his dislike was rooted in the fact that he played the part originally frustrated with Axl saying the original version was missing something. Axl however liked it and so it stayed. I could be wrong. My opinion.

"Nothing about happiness and love made sense to him. That was the reason why he hated "Sweet Child O' Mine". He only wanted to write songs about drugs and sadness." - W. Axl Rose, 2001

http://www.a-4-d.com/t1683-2001-01-15-interview-with-axl

Quote

As a fan rather I understand Izzy's reasons, he left. He negotiated his buyout from the partnership. 

He left when given no other choice but to. Just as Slash left when faced with a contract that he was being pressured to sign. 

Quote

As far as Niven. I honestly see him as many saw Goldstein.  Only he was an Izzy man where as Goldstein was an Axl man.

Okay but.....

Was Niven letting Izzy run the band's decision making process entirely and helping him take legal control of the band? If he was then he's the worst manager ever because Izzy lost all his negotiating power in the band between 89-91 and faced a legal demotion in the band. If Alan Niven was as bad as Doug Goldstein, Slash wouldn't have thanked him at the Rock Hall of Fame or given him kudos in his book. If Niven was as bad as Goldstein, where is the evidence? Does Duff talk about it in his book? All you have is Axl lashing out at Niven. No one else supports his assertions.

As far as Niven being an Izzy man, they were close in the band because they saw rock n roll in a similar way. I don't see how them being close translates into a valid comparison w/ the Doug Goldstein/Axl relationship. Niven and Izzy were friends. Doug Goldstein helped Axl legally take control of the band from his bandmates. Doug Goldstein helped destroy the band in the words of Slash. That seems a lot worse than anything Niven has been accused of. What favoritism was Izzy shown at the expense of Axl, Duff, and Slash in GnR during the Niven years? 

The band was at the pinnacle of success with Niven. They crashed and burned with Goldstein. History speaks for itself.

Edited March 3, 2018 by RONIN