Jump to content

Slash and Paul Huge


Recommended Posts

56 minutes ago, mystery said:

Ironic isn't it?

Well, Slash had played on two songs co-written by Paul, he had also played songs written by West Arkeen, etc. He probably wouldn't have minded doing that again, hadn't there been all the conflicts, hadn't Axl brought Paul in the studio with the band and had instead just said, "Hey Slash, Paul and I came up with these ideas in my home studio, can you do something with them?" And Axl could have sung on a couple of Slash's Snakepit songs as they were, Slash could have played on a couple of Axl's ballads, then they could have worked together to develop some of the other Slash stuff, etc.

But there were many issues and their problems were much deeper, so then each of them said no to what the other wanted, and Slash took the Paul thing very personally. Although at the time (and for the first 5-6 years after he quit) Slash would emphasize on their musical differences (and secondarily Paul) as the main reasons for the breakup, he would later say that it wasn't the real cause and that he wouldn't have had a problem working with Axl even on an industrial song if everything else had been right. Axl, from his own side, has also denied that the breakup had to do with the musical direction.

I believe that now they have sorted a lot of this stuff out, and Slash won't have a problem working on some songs co-written by Paul as long as he doesn't have to work with him directly :lol:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Blackstar said:

I believe that now they have sorted a lot of this stuff out, and Slash won't have a problem working on some songs co-written by Paul as long as he doesn't have to work with him directly :lol:

It would be interesting to hear that conversation, what they talked about in regards to that.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, MaskingApathy said:

It would be interesting to hear that conversation, what they talked about in regards to that.

I would be more interested to hear them squaring up from Axl referring to Slash as a murderer, but I don't think either of them have found it sensible to revisit some of the ugliest things said back in those days.

Edit: Figuring someone might ask about this so you can read about it at the bottom here: (2) 07. 1987: APPETITE FOR DESTRUCTION (a-4-d.com) Of course, Axl could have been referring to something else than Crew's death, but I find it more likely it was about his OD. "Stone cold". Harsh words if there ever was any.

Edited by SoulMonster
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Blackstar said:

By the way, Art Tavana in his recent GnR book quotes an email he got from Paul, where he basically says that his role has been misunderstood by the fans and that he'd like to tell his side (and talk in general), but he's prevented by his contract.

@Blackstar I assume you read the book, may I ask how you liked it? I've been keeping an eye on it for some time and I wanted to get it. Quoting an email from Paul, even if just saying he can't talk because of NDA, seems gold to me. Is there any other new info like this in the book that makes it worth reading? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Twinaleblood said:

@Blackstar I assume you read the book, may I ask how you liked it? I've been keeping an eye on it for some time and I wanted to get it. Quoting an email from Paul, even if just saying he can't talk because of NDA, seems gold to me. Is there any other new info like this in the book that makes it worth reading? 

It's half biography and half essay about the public perception of the band from Tavana's cultural perspective as a fan. It revolves around Axl's life and personality, so the book is basically about him. The perspective is interesting as such, but I've read another book that did that better, in my opinion. Each chapter deals with a different subject where biographical information is combined with pop culture references and Tavana's interpretations and comments. I thought that he makes some intriguing observations, but also that he sometimes stretches some points and omits others that don't fit his interpretations.

The factual part has little new information. It relies mostly on well known articles and interviews (the RS 2000 article is cited a lot. I don't know whether it is because he considers it a credible source or because it's one of the article that shaped the fans' perception of Axl - probably both) and then some original interviews with Goldstein, Niven, Zutaut, etc.. The Paul email is definitely the highlight. There is some stuff about Axl obtaining the rights to the band name, but I don't know if it's based on information or if it's speculation. It doesn't cover the CD era much, because he has covered it in the Billboard article and didn't want to just reuse that in the book. Other than that, there are a couple of anecdotes as well as rumours/hearsay about the reunion (like "Speaking privately to friends, Axl said..."). It covers things discussed by the fans, like the leaks saga, the video takedowns, TB's role, etc.

Edited by Blackstar
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Blackstar said:

It's half biography and half essay about the public perception of the band from Tavana's cultural perspective as a fan. It revolves around Axl's life and personality, so the book is basically about him. The perspective is interesting as such, but I've read another book that did that better, in my opinion. Each chapter deals with a different subject where biographical information is combined with pop culture references and Tavana's interpretations and comments. I thought that he makes some intriguing observations, but also that he sometimes stretches some points and omits others that don't fit his interpretations.

The factual part has little new information. It relies mostly on well known articles and interviews (the RS 2000 article is cited a lot. I don't know whether it is because he considers it a credible source or because it's one of the article that shaped the fans' perception of Axl - probably both) and then some original interviews with Goldstein, Niven, Zutaut, etc.. The Paul email is definitely the highlight. There is some stuff about Axl obtaining the rights to the band name, but I don't know if it's based on information or if it's speculation. It doesn't cover the CD era much, because he has covered it in the Billboard article and didn't want to just reuse that in the book. Other than that, there are a couple of anecdotes as well as rumours/hearsay about the reunion (like "Speaking privately to friends, Axl said..."). It covers things discussed by the fans, like the leaks saga, the video takedowns, TB's role, etc.

The problem is the author hasn't been around for nearly enough time to tell us anything we don't already know.

Like the video takedowns - he has no idea who is behind them, and has absolutely no idea who the main suspect is, why he's doing it and what his relationship is with Team Brazil.

His simplistic take on the video takedowns is what anyone would come away with in about 10 mins of research, rather than actually trying to drill into it and discuss it with the person who is actually doing it, his friends, his enemies etc etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, MaskingApathy said:

It would be interesting to hear that conversation, what they talked about in regards to that.

Maybe there's a line on the contract that says: "Slash can record and write songs for GNR as long as Paul Tobias is not performing it on the same record". :lol:

 

9 hours ago, Blackstar said:

(the RS 2000 article is cited a lot. I don't know whether it is because he considers it a credible source or because it's one of the article that shaped the fans' perception of Axl - probably both) and then some original interviews with Goldstein, Niven, Zutaut, etc.. The Paul email is definitely the highlight. There is some stuff about Axl obtaining the rights to the band name, but I don't know if it's based on information or if it's speculation. It doesn't cover the CD era much, because he has covered it in the Billboard article and didn't want to just reuse that in the book. Other than that, there are a couple of anecdotes as well as rumours/hearsay about the reunion (like "Speaking privately to friends, Axl said..."). It covers things discussed by the fans, like the leaks saga, the video takedowns, TB's role, etc.

I would love to know how was the story behind that Ultimate Guitar article where the author clearly had the Village leaks from Zutaut several years before the leak. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Voodoochild said:

I would love to know how was the story behind that Ultimate Guitar article where the author clearly had the Village leaks from Zutaut several years before the leak. 

Yes, the New York Times writer, too. He had interviewed Zutaut for the article, and from the way he described the songs to the Sp1at website it sounded that what he had heard was part of the Village leaks.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know this thread is about slash and Paul huge, but that incident IMO incapsulates the whole issue with GNR post UYI tour, when the lack of communication in the band got worse. I don’t know why Axl couldn’t have simply asked slash would he be okay with working with Paul. The worst slash could have said was no, but while I agree that slash had(and still has) an ego because given he was at the time one of the best guitarists in the world, it’s hardly a shock, he’d take issue with someone being forced on him.

it’s a what if, but I think Izzy leaving the band was a detriment to the band both in terms of songwriting but also in terms of him being a go between between axl and slash.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, IrishgunnerII said:

I know this thread is about slash and Paul huge, but that incident IMO incapsulates the whole issue with GNR post UYI tour, when the lack of communication in the band got worse. I don’t know why Axl couldn’t have simply asked slash would he be okay with working with Paul. The worst slash could have said was no, but while I agree that slash had(and still has) an ego because given he was at the time one of the best guitarists in the world, it’s hardly a shock, he’d take issue with someone being forced on him.

it’s a what if, but I think Izzy leaving the band was a detriment to the band both in terms of songwriting but also in terms of him being a go between between axl and slash.

I feel like that era from 1994-96 was full of tension and power struggles between big egos in Slash and Axl. Both were at the point where it seems they wouldn't back down from each other. They had just completed a massive tour and were firmly established at that point so there seemed to be no rush or urgency to record music or tour any time soon from Axl.

Difference is Axl held all the power and I'm sure the band felt trapped at times to Axl's whims. Just seems to me you had a band that accomplished more in 5 years than most do in 20 and deep down had no firm idea of what to do next.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, VampireSoul said:

Slash also says that Axl is incapable of lying, so who to believe here 😄 Maybe they both just experience the situation differently and suck at communication. I wouldn't be quick to write off Axls side of things. 

I think this happened most of the time. Miscommunication was probably the main reason for the break up.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, VampireSoul said:

Slash also says that Axl is incapable of lying, so who to believe here 😄 Maybe they both just experience the situation differently and suck at communication. I wouldn't be quick to write off Axls side of things. 

I’m of the opinion that when people talk about Axl not lying they’re not necessarily saying what he claims is actually true..I think they realize they’re dealing with a “unique” person who actually thinks what he’s saying is true..even if it’s ridiculous. I guess you could call this using your illusion or delusion to be even more precise. 
 

You’re right though, communication between them was obviously an issue. Add in yes people and hanger on types chirping in your ear and it doesn’t take long for professional/personal relationships to become fractured. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The part that nor Slash, Duff or Matt never say is that they were fucked up junkies during that period. Not saying Axl was an example, but we have to put things in perspective that they cannot reason as "normal" people do. This is why maybe sounds crazy that the biggest band in the world was broken up by Paul Huge. It was not Paul's fault, obviously, he was the perfect excuse. Also once the lawyers thing came into place there was no turning back.

It is a shame because GNR was damaged really bad and non of the sides took an advantage on going solo. You might say "Axl kept the name and profit from touring with new guns", but after that you see that maybe what Axl made in 15 years with new guns then made it in 5 concerts with Slash and Duff.

Finally, see that nobody never took accountability for what happened, it was always the other people's fault.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, VampireSoul said:

Slash also says that Axl is incapable of lying, so who to believe here 😄 Maybe they both just experience the situation differently and suck at communication. I wouldn't be quick to write off Axls side of things. 

Yes, the lack of communication and each of them seeing things differently was a big part of the problem.

In this particular case, Axl said he brought in a friend of his as someone to jam and write with, who might or might not become a member, record or tour with the band. To him that was "normal," there was nothing odd about it.

But to Slash and Duff that concept was probably incomprehensible or nonsensical. To them someone just either was or wasn't in the band, so since they were supposed to write with that guy, it meant that he would be in the band - and they didn't want him in the band.

1 hour ago, lost un the jungle said:

The part that nor Slash, Duff or Matt never say is that they were fucked up junkies during that period. Not saying Axl was an example, but we have to put things in perspective that they cannot reason as "normal" people do. This is why maybe sounds crazy that the biggest band in the world was broken up by Paul Huge. It was not Paul's fault, obviously, he was the perfect excuse. Also once the lawyers thing came into place there was no turning back.

It is a shame because GNR was damaged really bad and non of the sides took an advantage on going solo. You might say "Axl kept the name and profit from touring with new guns", but after that you see that maybe what Axl made in 15 years with new guns then made it in 5 concerts with Slash and Duff.

Finally, see that nobody never took accountability for what happened, it was always the other people's fault.

Duff was sober then.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, rumandraisin said:

Paul is still associated with the band in some capacity as far as I understand, he also helped with the album credits and CD liner notes. 

That was before the reunion. His position (if existent) could have changed since them. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/21/2021 at 3:08 AM, Sosso said:

"The public gets a different story from the other guys ­ Slash, Duff, Matt - who have their own agendas. The original intentions between Paul and myself were that Paul was going to help me for as long as it took to get this thing together in whatever capacity that he could help me in. So when he first was brought into this, he was brought in as a writer to work with Slash. At the time those guys never suggested one name. Nobody else. Ever.
Paul was one of the best people we knew who was both available and capable of complimenting Slash’s style. You could bring in a better guitar player than Paul. You could bring in a monster. I tried putting Zakk Wylde with Slash and that didn’t work. It brought out some interesting things in Slash but it was a different approach that ended up being overpowering and didn’t bring out the best in Slash. It brought out some interesting things and it would’ve worked to do some songs. But Paul was only interested in complimenting Slash, laying down a foundation of a riff or something. That would accent or encourage slash's lead playing. Now whether or not Paul was going to be officially on the album or on the tour that really wasn’t an actual consideration at the time. It was in the air as a possibility but Paul was a friend trying to help us and he had a huge respect for Slash. He is and this is the bottom line a good man and that's the reality behind things. That doesn't change what took place with old Guns. I feel that some of the recordings we did in that limited amount of time had some of the best playing that Slash had done at least since Illusions. I was there. I know what I heard and it was pretty exciting.”

http://www.heretodaygonetohell.com/news/shownews.php?newsid=490

The most interesting part in this Axl quote is the last sentences. Despite everything, Axl thought that some great stuff came out of those Slash-Paul Tobias sessions. And that's definitely not something Axl made up later, because in an interview from 1995 Slash also said that Axl thought they had some "great songs," and those songs he was referring to could have been only from those sessions in 1994, since, other than the failed sessions with Gilby and the Snakepit songs in March/April 1994 and the ones with Zakk Wylde in early 1995, no other sessions took place in that period.

I'd really like to hear that stuff. Obviously it wasn't completed songs with vocals and probably not even completed instrumentals, but I'd be curious to know if Axl was right and they were good song ideas or he was just "delusional."

Edited by Blackstar
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/21/2021 at 3:07 AM, Voodoochild said:

Paul came in to bring back the sleazy and dynamic rhythm guitar that Izzy had. Gilby didn't, and it's very noticeable in any UYI show or even on TSI. 

The "Paul is not a good guitar player" is very much a rhetoric made by Slash to justify his disliking (which was followed by Duff and Matt), IMO. I didn't read Slash's book, so I know nothing about the supposed "attitude" Paul had toward the other members, but it seems like Duff and Matt were still working with him for a time after Slash left.

I can count several things, but just listen to his work on The Blues and Madagascar. Even his side project Mank Rage had some very good rhythm guitars. 

Also, let me say: his guitar in SFTD is actually kinda cool. Yes, the mixing is clearly a knock at Slash with the levels, but I really like the rhythm guitar there. 

That was bad mixing. Robin's guitar was all over the place too. The three guitar mix were always hard for the band.

Very interesting. It's an impressive feat he managed to talk to Paul at all, let alone about this subject. Tavana says he wrote for several media outlets, so I guess he's credible with his credentials. 

If i remember correctly, the rythm guitar in sftd is slash's and paul is playing only the solo overdubs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For years, I thought his nickname was "Huge", as in "very large" and I couldn't really work out why because he seemed to be of a pretty average height and build. It was only recently that I realised that it's pronounced "HyooGee" and now I'm not sure if I'm more or less confused because I've no idea what that even means.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Graeme said:

For years, I thought his nickname was "Huge", as in "very large" and I couldn't really work out why because he seemed to be of a pretty average height and build. It was only recently that I realised that it's pronounced "HyooGee" and now I'm not sure if I'm more or less confused because I've no idea what that even means.

It's his real name; he was born Paul Huge. Then for some reason he changed it to Tobias, which was his mother's family name.

  • Like 1
  • Wow 2
Link to comment
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...