Jump to content

New Josh Freese interview: talks about GNR, Buckethead, CD


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, ToonGuns said:

Do we know how Axl had heard of Bucket?

In the late 90s Axl somehow got his hands on a buckethead album and played it for Marc Canter, who then told him “if anybody is good enough to replace Slash, it’s that guy.”

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 106
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

That last point is definitely not for sure. It's not your idea of what a Guns N Roses record is, for me it is the exact thing I consider GNR to be at least in attitude.  Also, it's murky waters w

Well, I posted the UG transcript before I watched the video. I just watched the part where he talks about CD (it's after 22:00 minute mark) and UG misheard it and transcribed it wrong.  Josh

I assume those five guys would be Axl, Slash, Izzy, Steven and Duff? Then I suppose UYI wasn't a GN'R record, either, since Matt had replaced Steven by then.  And although Chinese Democracy wasn'

He wasn't wrong about advising Buckethead not to take the gig lol that is exactly why Bucket ended up leaving the band in '04 right?  The lack of any forward momentum from the band and Chinese Democracy seeming like a fantasy rather than an album that would come out anytime soon

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ToonGuns said:

Do we know how Axl had heard of Bucket?

Bucket and Axl are both musicians from the west coast. Also, Axl always recognized new musicians and bands. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 2020_Intensions said:

It'd definitely be interesting if Freese had stuck around and the album came out & a tour followed. Would he have been the permanent drummer? He contributed a lot to popular rock albums in the 2000s.

Nobody stuck around except Tommy and Dizzy. Of course Dizzy has nowhere to go. No slight to Dizzy, but Axl saved his fucking life.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, 2020_Intensions said:

It'd definitely be interesting if Freese had stuck around and the album came out & a tour followed. Would he have been the permanent drummer? He contributed a lot to popular rock albums in the 2000s.

Yep especially with Queens of the stone age.

Even in the early to mid 90s with kyuss. 

Edited by Sydney Fan
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, rocknroll41 said:

In the late 90s Axl somehow got his hands on a buckethead album and played it for Marc Canter, who then told him “if anybody is good enough to replace Slash, it’s that guy.”

Wonder which album that could have been then. Monsters and Robots possibly?

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, rocknroll41 said:

In the late 90s Axl somehow got his hands on a buckethead album and played it for Marc Canter, who then told him “if anybody is good enough to replace Slash, it’s that guy.”

That's actually a silly statement from Marc. What Slash does really well (melodic solos with impeccable note selection and churning out that great 1970s sleazy rock riffs) can not be copied by Buckethead, or anyone really, and what Buckethead does well (intense buildup and ridiculously fast yet melodic noodling) can not be copied by Slash, or anyone really. They are just very different guitarists and it is a bit bizarre that one should repøace the other.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Tom2112 said:

Yeah that is crazy. But it also kinda makes me double down on the record being a collaborative record rather than a 'solo' album like a lot of people here love to say. 

Well. Axl himself said it's no solo album and that it would sound different if it were a solo album. But still. Alice and Ozzy also work with other people and the muscians they are playing with and still it's a "solo album". The main point is, it's no GNR Album. That's for sure.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Tom2112 said:

That last point is definitely not for sure. It's not your idea of what a Guns N Roses record is, for me it is the exact thing I consider GNR to be at least in attitude.

Yes. It is. Axl alone is not GNR. GNR was a collaborative effort of 5 guys. None of these other people he's working with on CD have anything to do with GNR. I don't care what is written on the sleeve.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Here we go again 😂 - too many opinions/viewpoints. Legally etc it absolutely is....it has the name in the cover. Stylistically - it’s not THAT far removed from UYI. But then if you have a picture of what GNR was and it had to have certain members then in that opinion it’s not GNR in spirit. Me? Yep it’s a GNR album - many bands in history go through massive upheavals and still release stuff which is ‘canon’....Deep Purple being a good example.

This is what happens when there’s nothing to talk about.....we need a release/leak or something to talk about instead!!!

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Here we go again 😂 - too many opinions/viewpoints. Legally etc it absolutely is....it has the name in the cover. Stylistically - it’s not THAT far removed from UYI. But then if you have a picture of what GNR was and it had to have certain members then in that opinion it’s not GNR in spirit. Me? Yep it’s a GNR album - many bands in history go through massive upheavals and still release stuff which is ‘canon’....Deep Purple being a good example.

This is what happens when there’s nothing to talk about.....we need a release/leak or something to talk about instead!!!

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, PatrickS77 said:

Yes. It is. Axl alone is not GNR. GNR was a collaborative effort of 5 guys. None of these other people he's working with on CD have anything to do with GNR. I don't care what is written on the sleeve.

Doesn't really answer the question though. Your opinion on what something is and the limitations of what it ever can be are just that... your opinion. 

My opinion is that CD is a Guns N Roses record, and we're both equally correct. Not trying to change your mind! just saying it's not black and white. Also, Axl wasn't alone, he had a huge band... and Dizzy ;) 

I appreciate the history of the band, but I'm fully ok with a band that was intact for a very short period (even if it was their most successful and famous time) having line-up changes and I'm very ok with still calling that band by the same name. You can feel however you want about it though! But My opinion isn't changing so, not much point arguing whether CD is GNR or not, but I am interested in you answering the first question nonetheless.

17 minutes ago, DTJ80 said:

Here we go again 😂 - too many opinions/viewpoints. Legally etc it absolutely is....it has the name in the cover. Stylistically - it’s not THAT far removed from UYI. But then if you have a picture of what GNR was and it had to have certain members then in that opinion it’s not GNR in spirit. Me? Yep it’s a GNR album - many bands in history go through massive upheavals and still release stuff which is ‘canon’....Deep Purple being a good example.

This is what happens when there’s nothing to talk about.....we need a release/leak or something to talk about instead!!!

100% agree!

This subject always rears its head in times of trouble😄

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, DTJ80 said:

Here we go again 😂 - too many opinions/viewpoints. Legally etc it absolutely is....it has the name in the cover. Stylistically - it’s not THAT far removed from UYI. But then if you have a picture of what GNR was and it had to have certain members then in that opinion it’s not GNR in spirit. Me? Yep it’s a GNR album - many bands in history go through massive upheavals and still release stuff which is ‘canon’....Deep Purple being a good example.

But with Deep Purple it happened organically. A member left, a member came. You never had the case where only 1 member was left (Dizzy doesn't count as he never contributed anything to what used to be GNR) and all the other members in the band have never played with any of the original guys. We're not talking about the odd member change. We're talking about a singer hijacking the name and exchanging every member. So that's the difference.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It was always GNR to me.....

......but at the same time, when you're watching the Appetite for Democracy DVD and they're doing 'Objectify' or 'Motivation' I'd understand anyone walking into the room, asking who the band are and being amazed it's GNR. At that point you had no original GNR members onstage doing a song that isn't by GNR. But under the 'GNR' name. 

Edited by allwaystired
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Tom2112 said:

Doesn't really answer the question though. Your opinion on what something is and the limitations of what it ever can be are just that... your opinion. 

My opinion is that CD is a Guns N Roses record, and we're both equally correct. Not trying to change your mind! just saying it's not black and white. Also, Axl wasn't alone, he had a huge band... and Dizzy ;) 

I appreciate the history of the band, but I'm fully ok with a band that was intact for a very short period (even if it was their most successful and famous time) having line-up changes and I'm very ok with still calling that band by the same name. You can feel however you want about it though! But My opinion isn't changing so, not much point arguing whether CD is GNR or not, but I am interested in you answering the first question nonetheless.

100% agree!

This subject always rears its head in times of trouble😄

Nah. It's not. If I say blue is green, because I call it green, it also doesn't make it green. But yeah, no point arguing about it. What question? There are several? Hypothesises about other bands are irrelevant, when we talk about this particular band, where there was no clear leader and everyone contributed making up what GNR was. You have to look at what type of band you're dealing with and then go with that. For example Nine Inch Nails is a band in name, but we all know it's not really a band, but Trent Reznor with musicians. So in his case it's much easier to accept every effort as Nine Inch Nails, as it's basically Trent Reznor albums anyway.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, PatrickS77 said:

But with Deep Purple it happened organically. A member left, a member came. You never had the case where only 1 member was left (Dizzy doesn't count as he never contributed anything to what used to be GNR) and all the other members in the band have never played with any of the original guys. We're not talking about the odd member change. We're talking about a singer hijacking the name and exchanging every member. So that's the difference.

True - a better example is Black Sabbath...Iommi was the only original member for about 3 albums! Ozzy fired and the other two left - although the quality of those albums ranges from bad to very good apparently!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PatrickS77 said:

Yes. It is. Axl alone is not GNR. GNR was a collaborative effort of 5 guys. 

I assume those five guys would be Axl, Slash, Izzy, Steven and Duff? Then I suppose UYI wasn't a GN'R record, either, since Matt had replaced Steven by then. 

And although Chinese Democracy wasn't written by the exact 5 guys who wrote and recorded AFD (together with some other writers like West Arkeen), or the 5 guys who wrote and recorded UYI (again, together with other songs writers and performers), or The Spaghetti Incident (hey Gilby!), it certainly was a collaborative effort and not a solo record:

In the words of Tommy, who - with all due respect - I consider more knowledgable on this than you:

 

Axl doesn’t bring in a song and tell everybody how it goes. ... He’ll take one idea, then ask somebody else to finish it. He’s trying to draw the best out of each individual.

[Comparing Axl with Paul Westerberg]: Well, Axl is definitely a better person to work for. He doesn't really act much like a boss, however. He's more of a bandmate, making it a we're-all-in-this-together kind of situation. Whereas Paul was definitely more single-minded. (Laughs.) Paul's got a bigger ego than anyone I've ever worked with. And he's more self-conscious than anyone I've ever known. Axl is definitely way more of a collaborator than Paul will ever be. With Axl, I feel like I'm actually part of a band. We're all writing these songs, and we're all playing them. I just feel more a part of it. Axl checks his ego at the door. He comes in and he gets involved, you know? That's a way better vibe to make music with.

I don't think anybody is in a position to question the way Axl writes and records. It might be a longer process, but it works. [...] [It] very much involves the rest of the band. Axl has a way of pulling out the best from each guy in the band, and that takes time.

[Comparing Axl with Paul Westerberg]: The difference is Paul was more of a dictator-type songwriter. It was his way and he wasn’t terribly open to outside input. Axl is more of a producer. He draws the best out of each guy and incorporates that in there, you know, more of a team player kinda thing. He really wants to have a band, not just be out there saying, ‘Hey I’m Axl Rose, I’m the (expletive) leader of this band.’ He doesn’t put up pretenses, sort of lets us do our thing and we end up sounding like band. Paul liked to be the band.

And these are just some quotes from the period 1999-2004. I expect many more as I work my way towards the present. 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, DTJ80 said:

True - a better example is Black Sabbath...Iommi was the only original member for about 3 albums! Ozzy fired and the other two left - although the quality of those albums ranges from bad to very good apparently!

Yes. But even that happened more organically and gradually with one member after the other leaving / getting fired. Black Sabbath did become somewhat of a joke though, in terms of a band context, with dwindling audiences and only Dio and Ozzy (and Geezer, Vinny and Bill) returning became somewhat respected and welcome in big places again. And Seventh Star actually was a solo album and only on the record company's insistence was released as Black Sabbath. So what is written on the sleeve really means nothing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

I assume those five guys would be Axl, Slash, Izzy, Steven and Duff? Then I suppose UYI wasn't a GN'R record, either, since Matt had replaced Steven by then. 

And although Chinese Democracy wasn't written by the exact 5 guys who wrote and recorded AFD (together with some other writers like West Arkeen), or the 5 guys who wrote and recorded UYI (again, together with other songs writers and performers), or The Spaghetti Incident (hey Gilby!), it certainly was a collaborative effort and not a solo record:

In the words of Tommy, who - with all due respect - I consider more knowledgable on this than you:

 

Axl doesn’t bring in a song and tell everybody how it goes. ... He’ll take one idea, then ask somebody else to finish it. He’s trying to draw the best out of each individual.

Geez. Don't play stupid now. You really don't want to compare the UYI situation, where a drummer was missing to the CD situation, where everyone was missing.

And I already posted that Axl himself says he doesn't consider it a solo album, so no need to bring in Stinson's take, even though that first statement probably proofs that Axl needs other people to finish a song. He's no Trent Reznor. But the band that recorded CD also no GNR. At the end of the day, he was the leader or moderator (or whatever you wanna call it, he's the one with the record deal) of that project, no matter how much others think it's an equal band situation. Just like other solo artists, like the aformentionend Ozzy and Alice and many more, wo don't do everything themselves, work.

Edited by PatrickS77
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, PatrickS77 said:

Yes. But even that happened more organically and gradually with one member after the other leaving / getting fired. Black Sabbath did become somewhat of a joke though, in terms of a band context, with dwindling audiences and only Dio and Ozzy (and Geezer, Vinny and Bill) returning became somewhat respected and welcome in big places again. And Seventh Star actually was a solo album and only on the record company's insistence was released as Black Sabbath. So what is written on the sleeve really means nothing.

Yep - think it was BS ft Tony Iommi?

I mean from the AFD5, Adler fired, Izzy quit as did Slash 5 years later and then Duff a further 2.....the years when it was just Axl and Duff would have been interesting.

Its always going to be one of those subjects that divides unfortunately. Fun to debate though. 👍

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, PatrickS77 said:

Yes. But even that happened more organically and gradually with one member after the other leaving / getting fired. 

Not only was the reconfiguration of Guns N' Roses a gradual thing, it happened over many years.

Axl, Duff, Slash, Dizzy, Matt, (Paul)

Axl, Duff, Dizzy, Matt, Paul

Axl, Duff, Dizzy, Vrenna, Paul

Axl, Duff, Dizzy, Robin, Paul

Axl, Dizzy, Robin, Paul,

Axl, Dizzy, Josh, Robin, Paul

Axl, Dizzy, Tommy, Josh, Robin, Paul

Axl, Dizzy, Tommy, Josh, Paul

Axl, Dizzy, Buckethead, Tommy, Josh, Paul

and so on.

All of these lineup and players were involved in the writing and/or recording of new music. I recently talked to Krys Baratto who was involved as a session musician while Matt and Duff focused on the Naurotic Ousiders and he would describe the fluidity of the band and how many people came and went. It simply wasn't a case of UYI integrating with only Axl left, and then new guys coming in. There were overlaps.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...