How Different Would Things Be Now If Axl Went Solo?

[BangoSkank]

I originally posted this in The Jungle and it got some interesting replies so I thought reposting it here might garner some more discussion. There's also so little happening until 7/31 so I figured I might as well post it. Mods feel free to delete or move or whatever. 

Anyway, I know it's been talked about ad nauseum whether or not GNR '98-'14 is really GNR and I'm not trying to have that discussion now. 

But as I listen to the CD leaks, watch Axl now, see how semi-broken he probably is from the whole CD experience, I can't help but wonder if anything would be different if everything post-Slash was just labeled Axl solo. Would we have more music released? Would we have had CD sooner? Would he have had an overall easier time? Would people have been more receptive to the music? He wouldn't have felt the enormous weight of the GNR name and he probably would have felt more free to do whatever he wanted. 

I know there are no real answers, but I'm curious if anyone thinks things would be different and, if so, how?

[RussTCB]

Axl is the problem, not the GN'R name. 

There's a very common miscommunication that Chinese Democracy wasn't received well. The album actually received very positive reviews in the press. It also debuted very high on the Billboard charts. Radio stations were also VERY supportive during the week and month it was released. 

You know who wasn't positive or supportive of its release? Axl.

Axl did absolutely nothing to promote his own album. So all of the goodwill, positive press, positive reviews and general buzz died out completely because Axl did nothing. 

So in short, the GN'R name isn't the problem and never was, Axl is the problem. 

[Nick85]

3 minutes ago, RussTCB said:

Axl is the problem, not the GN'R name. 

There's a very common miscommunication that Chinese Democracy wasn't received well. The album actually received very positive reviews in the press. It also debuted very high on the Billboard charts. Radio stations were also VERY supportive during the week and month it was released. 

You know who wasn't positive or supportive of its release? Axl.

Axl did absolutely nothing to promote his own album. So all of the goodwill, positive press, positive reviews and general buzz died out completely because Axl did nothing. 

So in short, the GN'R name isn't the problem and never was, Axl is the problem. 

Spot on. And if that's how Axl wanted it, as in he just couldn't be moved to promote the album in any way, that's fine....and could almost be seen as kind of rock n' roll of him.  But the way he threw blame at the label, Azoff, Slash, Jimmy Iovine in the handful of interviews he did, and MONTHS later, it makes him seem utterly un-self-aware.  It's like...Dude...you were completely MIA...was Azoff going to go on SNL and play Better & Chinese Democracy?  Nah dude, that's on you to get that shit going.  He couldn't be bothered, but still wants to blame others when it quickly tapered off. 13 years later and I'm still wondering exactly what he was thinking. 

[RussTCB]

1 minute ago, sofine11 said:

Spot on. And if that's how Axl wanted it, as in he just couldn't be moved to promote the album in any way, that's fine....and could almost be seen as kind of rock n' roll of him.  But the way he threw blame at the label, Azoff, Slash, Jimmy Iovine in the handful of interviews he did, and MONTHS later, it makes him seem utterly un-self-aware.  It's like...Dude...you were completely MIA...was Azoff going to go on SNL and play Better & Chinese Democracy?  Nah dude, that's on you to get that shit going.  He couldn't be bothered, but still wants to blame others when it quickly tapered off. 13 years later and I'm still wondering exactly what he was thinking. 

I'm 100% guilt of going along with what Axl had to say at the time. I spent many hours on here saying things like "YEAH! The damn label didn't promote the album!" but really, it's just that Axl didn't lift a finger to do anything. 

[CAFC Nick]

Well what we can say for certain is that Axl would be worse-off financially.

He mentioned on the chats back in '08 that keeping the name was as much as commercial decision as it was an artistic one. Pretty certain to say that Axl Rose solo band wouldn't have been headlining European festivals back in the Nu-GNR era.

[Nick85]

Just now, RussTCB said:

I'm 100% guilt of going along with what Axl had to say at the time. I spent many hours on here saying things like "YEAH! The damn label didn't promote the album!" but really, it's just that Axl didn't lift a finger to do anything. 

Same. I remember hearing that in late 2008 the label was trying desperately to get in touch with Axl, but he just couldn't be reached.  In retrospect, that's so perfectly on-brand. He was probably stewing in his Malibu castle, while Beta and Fernando played telephone explaining to Axl why the album slipping into obscurity was part of some nefarious plot to force him to reunite with Slash.  He basically said as much.  How do you even begin to reason with that kind of mindset?

[BangoSkank]

1 hour ago, sofine11 said:

Spot on. And if that's how Axl wanted it, as in he just couldn't be moved to promote the album in any way, that's fine....and could almost be seen as kind of rock n' roll of him.  But the way he threw blame at the label, Azoff, Slash, Jimmy Iovine in the handful of interviews he did, and MONTHS later, it makes him seem utterly un-self-aware.  It's like...Dude...you were completely MIA...was Azoff going to go on SNL and play Better & Chinese Democracy?  Nah dude, that's on you to get that shit going.  He couldn't be bothered, but still wants to blame others when it quickly tapered off. 13 years later and I'm still wondering exactly what he was thinking. 

All of this is 100% true. I always thought the label kind of forced him to release it and he just didn't stand behind it and that was why he never showed for anything. But I mean, he could have STILL made an appearance somewhere, gave an interview, whatever. 

1 hour ago, CAFC Nick said:

Well what we can say for certain is that Axl would be worse-off financially.

He mentioned on the chats back in '08 that keeping the name was as much as commercial decision as it was an artistic one. Pretty certain to say that Axl Rose solo band wouldn't have been headlining European festivals back in the Nu-GNR era.

Eh, I don't see why he couldn't have headlined. If he played his cards right he could have eventually pulled an Ozzy and made a name for himself as a totally separate act from GNR.

[Nick85]

5 minutes ago, BangoSkank said:

All of this is 100% true. I always thought the label kind of forced him to release it and he just didn't stand behind it and that was why he never showed for anything. But I mean, he could have STILL made an appearance somewhere, gave an interview, whatever. 

Literally anything. He's Axl Rose. Whatever he offered up in the way of promotion would have had eyeballs on it and would have only helped.  He chose not to lift a finger. The closest thing to promotion he did were those forum chats nearly a month later. Most artists do that just for fun, as in converse with fans.  Then radio silence for another couple months until that laughable Del James interview where Axl was clearly unhappy with the state of...well...everything.  It was so bad haha

Edited July 6, 2021 by sofine11

[BangoSkank]

1 hour ago, sofine11 said:

Literally anything. He's Axl Rose. Whatever he offered up in the way of promotion would have had eyeballs on it and would have only helped.  He chose not to lift a finger. The closest thing to promotion he did were those forum chats nearly a month later. Most artists do that just for fun, as in converse with fans.  Then radio silence for another couple months until that laughable Del James interview where Axl was clearly unhappy with the state of...well...everything.  It was so bad haha

Did he explain in the chats why he went radio silent? I'm trying to read them in the archive, but can't open most of them for some reason.

[tkarmy]

I love Axl but he’s an insecure Narcissist with a persecution complex.

ya the label pulled it from him and that sucks but entitled much??? They gave you 15 fucking million dollars and over a decade to give them something. The fucking ego is laughable.

they pulled it and it has some wrong words and missing some artwork. Big fucking deal no one reads or cares about that stuff anymore anyway. If you needed the artwork etc. Do a post on your site and let whoever cares download it. Don’t pout like toddler.

it did reasonably well but Axl shit the bed by not showing up and well just being axl.  

Edited July 6, 2021 by tkarmy

[Nick85]

42 minutes ago, BangoSkank said:

Did he explain in the chats why he went radio silent? I'm trying to read them in the archive, but can't open most of them for some reason.

The closest he got to an explanation for that was saying he had been asking the label for a "marketing plan" for a while with no results.  Then you have the label saying they were trying to get ahold of him around the release and he wasn't playing ball.  It seems like they tried to get him to do "something" but at that point Axl was just too far gone with his personal isolation and entrenchment that he just resigned himself to watching the rollout from the shadows.  I'm sure after a decade of back and forth, the powers that be knew better than to push him too hard, and were happy to break even with the Best Buy deal and subsequent sales. 

[Blackstar]

I do believe that without the burden of the name Axl would have been more free to explore whatever direction he wanted. Some of the very first bunch of people he recruited post-Slash, like Vrenna and Abbruzzese, were, according to themselves, genuinely interested to work with him on a solo project or under another name - probably it was the same with Finck, Howerdel, etc.. Then, most of those who came in later saw it as a job opportunity.  I also believe that the reception would have been better - although there were positive reviews, there was a lot of negativity as well. By keeping the name, Axl put himself to the unfair position to feel that he had to live up to or compete with the old band, even to the point where he probably saw everything that celebrated classic GN'R (like Marc Canter's book) as something that undermined his effort with the new band. I think a lot of his insecurities and shortcomings of the CD era had to do with that. In the end, of course, it comes down to his personality, but given that he is who he is, the name made things worse in that regard.

On the other hand, although the label (most likely) didn't believe in the new band and would have preferred a reunion, the GN'R name was an asset to them, so they financed the project until early 2004. But if Axl had gone solo or started another band, the money would have been much less and the label might even drop him after the merging with Interscope (like they did with Slash) - at the very least, he would have been dropped if he hadn't met the first deadline. Of course, Axl could have then found another, smaller label, but I don't know if he would've had the drive to start over in the "wilderness" without some security.

[SoulMonster]

1 hour ago, BangoSkank said:

Did he explain in the chats why he went radio silent? I'm trying to read them in the archive, but can't open most of them for some reason.

With "archive" do you mean the A4D site? 

Anyways, here's what I written so far about Axl remerging for interviews and his own reasons for not doing more press (hint: because the press hated him): (29) 28. AUGUST 2008-FEBRUARY 2009: CHINESE DEMOCRACY IS RELEASED - Page 2 (a-4-d.com)

[Free Bird]

1 hour ago, BangoSkank said:

Eh, I don't see why he couldn't have headlined. If he played his cards right he could have eventually pulled an Ozzy and made a name for himself as a totally separate act from GNR.

Eh, because he's Axl Rose? There's no need to speculate because we've seen what he did. 

There's no way he would have headlined big venues without the GNR name. Not with effort he gave since '96

[-W.A.R-]

He would have had far less of a budget and would have been far less of a draw without the name.

However he would have had more musical freedom (not feeling he needs to make a rock record) and the budgetary constraints would have kept him in check from overindulgence.

[-W.A.R-]

Also i see Axl forming another band eventually or the reunion happening far sooner. Him being able to tour with the name is what kept him from fading into obscurity for so long.

Edited July 6, 2021 by -W.A.R-

[Blackstar]

I think that most of the people who supported the NuGnR did so because they believed in Axl  or felt that he makes GnR (or at least that as long as he's there, it's GnR). So I don't see why the same people wouldn't have supported him all the same had he gone solo or with another band name. Maybe he wouldn't have drawn the same big crowds in South America and I don't know if he would have headlined European festivals (I think he could have if he had released music and the band was good), but definitely he wouldn't have done worse than NuGnR did in the US.

Edited July 6, 2021 by Blackstar

[IrishgunnerII]

It might have allowed all the issues that axl had with the former members to subside a lot sooner than 2015/16 because out of sight out of mind would possibly have helped him, but that’s me speculating on what ifs which isn’t an exact science, or a science at all. I saw the Axl only version of GNR twice and I know some don’t consider that GNR and that’s their point of view. I happen to think they were because the name was on the tickets. I do think the name put pressure on Axl to kind of prove that he could do it without slash which was probably too much pressure. I liked CD and I think the album would have fared better not under threat GNR name. 

[adamsapple]

I assume had he released CD under any other name, the label would not have been as patient and supportive and some musicians and producers might not have been as interested in working with him either.

[GnR Chris]

Axl Rose is a brand unto itself. So yeah, Axl chose the path of most resistance in foregoing a "solo" project and continuing with "Guns N' Roses" as a band. But that was his right. And I'm sure it was more financially beneficial to leverage that name.

Rock was still mainstream in the early 2000s, but with a bunch of awful bands like Korn and Limp Bizkit. There was definitely an appetite for Axl to re-emerge. with or without GNR. In fact, I think people would have been far more receptive if Axl started a new group like Slash and Duff did with Velvet Revolver. You would have far less people shitting on it saying, "It isn't Guns N' Roses without Slash" or "Who the hell is this guy with a KFC Bucket on his head?"

Just talking about Axl and GNR in the Chinese era totally bums me out to see how seemingly driven he was to create a new version of a classic act, yet now it's the same old endless touring.

Edited July 6, 2021 by GnR Chris

[thomasmcole]

I imagine things would be very different, for example we'd be waiting 13yrs for a new Axl solo album instead of a new guns album... 

[BangoSkank]

21 minutes ago, GnR Chris said:

Axl Rose is a brand unto itself. So yeah, Axl chose the path of most resistance in foregoing a "solo" project and continuing with "Guns N' Roses" as a band. But that was his right. And I'm sure it was more financially beneficial to leverage that name.

Rock was still mainstream in the early 2000s, but with a bunch of awful bands like Korn and Limp Bizkit. There was definitely an appetite for Axl to re-emerge. with or without GNR. In fact, I think people would have been far more receptive if Axl started a new group like Slash and Duff did with Velvet Revolver. You would have far less people shitting on it saying, "It isn't Guns N' Roses without Slash" or "Who the hell is this guy with a KFC Bucket on his head?"

Just talking about Axl and GNR in the Chinese era totally bums me out to see how seemingly driven he was to create a new version of a classic act, yet now it's the same old endless touring.

I so agree with this.

And obviously using GNR gave him access to more money, but could it really have been that much more? I get that they were a music juggernaut, but Axl Rose solo would still have been a brand name, there was huge amount of interest in him, and I have to think the record company would have put out a pretty amount of money for him. 

Hot take: the 2002 tour would have had a better chance of finishing if he was solo.

[RussTCB]

Anyone who thinks the GN'R name is the reason that Axl Rose lacks any sort of productivity is kidding themselves. 

[Draguns]

I have said this before and I'll say it again. Axl's biggest business mistake was trying to recreate GNR with new members. He should have put the name on hiatus until he worked things out with Slash and Duff.  He could have went solo and  would have been able to create any type of music he wanted. People would still follow him. The record company would have given him money. He would have still been able to play venues like MSG. Instead of this, he was performing in a half filled venue like the Izod Center,  which was about to be shut down in 2011. 

[©GnrPersia]

9 hours ago, BangoSkank said:

I originally posted this in The Jungle and it got some interesting replies so I thought reposting it here might garner some more discussion. There's also so little happening until 7/31 so I figured I might as well post it. Mods feel free to delete or move or whatever. 

Anyway, I know it's been talked about ad nauseum whether or not GNR '98-'14 is really GNR and I'm not trying to have that discussion now. 

But as I listen to the CD leaks, watch Axl now, see how semi-broken he probably is from the whole CD experience, I can't help but wonder if anything would be different if everything post-Slash was just labeled Axl solo. Would we have more music released? Would we have had CD sooner? Would he have had an overall easier time? Would people have been more receptive to the music? He wouldn't have felt the enormous weight of the GNR name and he probably would have felt more free to do whatever he wanted. 

I know there are no real answers, but I'm curious if anyone thinks things would be different and, if so, how?

Dave Grohl was just a drummer in Nirvana and most casual people/fans didn't probably know his name at the time unlike Axl Rose. But Dave managed to create Foo Fighters. Reinventing the wheel from scratch without looking back at his Nirvana years. Today Foo Fighters is headlining festivals.

Point being:
If Axl would go completely solo,
under his own name or any other name than GNR,
and most importantly would behave like an organized, normal and active musician and tour, promote and release albums every few years,

His band could become as big as classic GN'R.

And to be fair Axl didn't even need to put massive effort like Dave Grohl to achieve this. He just needed to behave normal and work 9AM to 3PM everyday.

 

 

Edited July 6, 2021 by ©GnrPersia