Guns have already confirmed summer dates in Europe. It's the best time for a band of their scale to tour there. Arena shows are likely to be intermitted with festival appearances, securing the widest possible exposure. Since the current leg is to be extended to mid-April, the plan does seem to be to kick the European leg off in late May. I wouldn't be surprised should there be some warm-up club dates (secret or not) in the US in May, though.

Europe from late May to late July, probably.

August off.

US in September, probably, up until November/December. They need to hit the US market again at some point, but I personally think they're playing it smart by allowing the band and production gel during a detour through softer markets. This also makes US promoters more lenient as the Guns keep delivering in other places. Also, the tour planning should be better than what it was during Merck's time, as there's no album hassle involved and they basically have more time to prepare their US comeback.

For the optimal result, though, I think they'd need an opener on the level of the NIN/JA tour. Something to fit GNR's sound and go well with the fanbase (and vice versa). Otherwise, they should downscale from an overload of arenas to amphitheatres. Nothing wrong with doing places like Madison Square Garden, as they're guaranteed sell-outs, but I'd rather see them doing smaller places on the side.

Guess there's not much for Baz to sing there, aside those high harmonies in the chorus.

They're not even doing My Michelle anymore.

In terms of individual talent, they're obviously not the best possible combination of the CD era. In terms of having mutual chemistry, they're good, tho. Would've been interesting to see the 2007 lineup tackle the CD material with Ron finally melded into the lineup, as the obvious restraints of the past do not make it completely fair to any of the lineups to pit them against each other. The others weren't given a real chance to stand by a new album and tour behind it, so whether it would've worked in the long run is anybody's guess.

Having said that, this lineup is good. Ashba can grow into the role of a classic hard-rock guitar hero, and he's certainly someone you'd expect to see in a band ike the Old Guns. He has that hard-rock swagger written all over himself that personified the AFD/UYI-era band, which is definitely good news when considering that Axl will forever be indebted to that atmosphere, as it helped to propel the band into greatness.

Tommy's the best. Hands down, immense and instant old-school credibility. He's been in the band through thick and thin, which also helps to bridge things. I've grown to see Tommy as a focal point in the bands development and also, as an anchor in their sound. Tommy's always been there to provide those unassuming, thumping bass lines, upon which various guitar players have stepped in to lay their unique sound. The Tommy bass has by now been amalgamated into the Guns sound so distinctly that I'd find it hard for them to go around with him. Even Duff would be a step down, as it'd turn back the clock to the pre-Tommy era, which'd only serve to nullify the later steps of evolution.

This lineup needs only a few years, an album and some serious touring. Judging by their efforts so far, they do have what it takes to make it.

What he said.

In some ways, VR is currently where GNR was with Snakepit, Mk 1. By this I mean that IFOCS was born out of Slash's frustration while working with a democratic band. The reasons behind this frustration are case-specific on both accounts and I'm not single-handedly suggesting that Slash would be 'unable' to work in a band unit. But at both times, he definitely felt the urge to break from free from constraints imposed upon him by others and to make an album on his own accord. That, followed by a healthy amount of touring.

How this venture differs from GNR/Snakepit? For one, VR has currently no record deal and they have no label incentive to rush Slash back from his tour. Secondly, there's no frontman itching to get VR back together. If/when Slash gets around to reforming VR, they need to pick up the pieces and start from scratch. A vocalist needs to be locked down and a good chunk of demos needs to be recorded with him. All this after Slash comes back from his tour.

Slash goes out in March/April, '10. I expect him to tour up until the end of the year, which means any tangible VR activity will be pushed up to 2011. That's three years after Scott's dismissal. Depending how Slash's solo album goes, things might get interesting. If Slash has a diamond and his solo career skyrockets, one possibility is to recruit Duff, Matt and Dave as full-time members of 'Slash' and whip out a new album with them. Slash's own name would carry more weight than that of VR at this point and they could have a carte blanche to go for a top vocalist.

Then agan, they might not go for a Name. Slash had a larger than life frontman with Axl and Scott (while not as iconic) shares many characteristics with Redhead. Slash wouldn't like to be pushed aside by the frontman, who'd pick producers who in turn would have the tendency to turn Slash down in the mix. Slash wants to be up and front, stage right. No questions asked. This would exclude the career resurrection of Chris Cornell, among others. A supergroup would be out of the cards as opposed to a bulk of guys who've been playing together on and off for 18 years now.

VR also carries an uneasy history due to the name. What people currently remember is the drama surrounding Weiland and the lukewarm reception of Contraband. If the next incarnation of VR would morph into the next Slash band, they'd have a clean slate. Slash would've proven his worth and value on the first album and would be the undisputed leader of the pack. The VR boys would rack up the interest level and would do well to lend a firm rhythm section to back him up - probably the best he can get if we discount the AFD lineup as a pipedream.

The vocalist? Franky Perez.