You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
#6161 Re: Guns N' Roses » The Azoff factor re-examined: could he be targeting Bucket, not Slash? » 931 weeks ago
I am sick of this shit. Buzz, does Billboard give full length interviews to people who are not rock stars? Have you ever seen any current or former new Gnr member, outside of Tommy, interviewed by any major music publication? When was Duff's last full length interview with Billboard? He is every bit the rock star Duff ever dreamed of being. You just show your ignorance about music history when you say you never heard of him prior to Gnr. That is simply ignorant and shows that you have a very small understanding of the history of rock and roll.:thumbup:
http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/news/art … 1003792309
See, that's where you're wrong, and you're always wrong when you bring him up. He's not, nor was he ever, a "rock star" - if anything, he was an anti-rock star and I'd be willing to bet you he'd say the same thing.
I'm aware his band existed. Some people even liked them (though I didn't). I'd NEVER heard of HIM until he joined GnR. Many, many more educated people in music likely STILL don't know who he is, though I'm sure if you mention the band, they'll go "Oh, he was in that band?". He's nowhere near the household name that you seem to think he is.
#6162 Re: Guns N' Roses » The Azoff factor re-examined: could he be targeting Bucket, not Slash? » 931 weeks ago
I've also been biting my tongue on this, but to be completely on topic, there's no way that if Azoff was brought in to arrange a reunion other than either the AFD or UYI lineups. I know we have a lot of BH love at this site, but let's be realistic for a second...CD is NOT going to be a huge moneymaker. The only huge moneymaker (besides Chris) is a reunion of one of the original lineups. Azoff didn't sign on for less than that.
Now he may believe (as many do) that a reunion isn't possible until CD comes out and therefore is trying to get BH back, but that's a completely different motivation long term than being brought on board just to get the 2001/2002 lineup back together. Those efforts are just the result of him striving towards the long term goal.
#6163 Re: Guns N' Roses » The Azoff factor re-examined: could he be targeting Bucket, not Slash? » 931 weeks ago
I don't think it can survive what it's already lost unless one or more of those guys come back. Most of us already think the situation is a joke regardless of who you support the most. How do you think the general public is going to respond when the album comes out and the only people besides Axl that contributed to the main writing/recording of the album have Silkworms as their writing credit?
I know we have some Tommy lovers here and I mean no disrespect to them, but I've followed music for a long, long time and never heard of Tommy until he was in GnR. Being the bassist is one small step above being the dummer - it's great to have a technically gifted player in either role, but you can more than get by with one that just get's the job done. True rock bands need a standout singer, a standout lead guitarist, and a standout songwriter (which can be the singer, the lead, or another band member). This band in it's current state has 1-1/2 of that, and it's all Axl.
Once the original guys left, none of the replacements were ever really "rock stars". I think that's one of the reasons some people don't consider this GnR anymore.
#6164 Re: Guns N' Roses » A Random Forum Post about Finck » 931 weeks ago
Since Fortus is supposedly a God, it makes you wonder why he wasn't given Finck's role in the band.
Unfortunately, we don't know that this isn't going to happen and Huge (or yet another fill in) could fill his role. All we know is that GnR can't (or at least won't since most of the new material is written for 3 guitars) hit the road in their current state. How that is going to be resolved is very up in the air.
I'm more interested in how they decide to resolve all the issues than I am in the album at this point...this has become very interesting over the past 6 months. So many possibilities have been discussed and it's quite possible that none of them end up being the end result. That's almost amazing.
#6165 Re: Guns N' Roses » A Random Forum Post about Finck » 931 weeks ago
My God.
It is like now Finck has semi-reverted back to him "old look" everyone is saying he 'sucks' again, like they did in 2001-early 2006.
My God.
(I'm not necessarily aiming this at you guys: just elements of the fanbase in general.)
Most people accepted him more because A) he didn't look like a freak anymore; B) he played the old material a little better; C) the leaks had come out and we could hear what he could do on his own songs.
The guy has talent, but his talent isn't geared towrds what GnR was, and I'm not sure it's geared towards what it is now either. As I said in another thread about him: he's where he belongs.
He's not good enough to be a lead guitarist in a band like GnR - he never was. He might have been much better in an Izzy role of writing the riffs and song structures and leaving the solos to others that could handle that style better than he can.
#6166 Re: Guns N' Roses » Entertainment Weekly suggests GN'R may perform at VMA's » 931 weeks ago
buzzsaw wrote:It makes me sick when a month ago these same people that are jizzing all over themselves were all gloom and doom - suddenly everything is peachy. In a couple weeks when everything falls through, it will be back to doom and gloom. You would think that at some point that people would learn.
Back to insulting everyone again? Should I just create a sticky thread so you can judge us all at your convenience?
You want people to be "doom and gloom" when something actually happens in GNR land? A Bucket track has for all intents and purposes become part of the launching pad, but you think Bucket fans don't have the right to be optimistic?
My optimism isn't going to be stifled just because certain people have Slash posters on their wall.
No Slash posters...sorry man, never had them. Your optimism was non existant 2 weeks ago and now you think the world is all great because there's a 1% chance BH might have something to do with a GnR release sometime in the next 20 years?
I haven't insulted anybody, yet you've taken every opportunity to insult me. I've pointed out how people can't seem to get a grip on their emotions at all and flip flop more than any politician ever has. At least I've always been true to what I believe, and amazingly, I still haven't been wrong on any GnR prediction I've made. I think it's time you consider worrying about your own posting habits and stop worrying about mine.
#6167 Re: Guns N' Roses » Entertainment Weekly suggests GN'R may perform at VMA's » 931 weeks ago
buzzsaw wrote:I think we're more likely to see Slash than BH at the VMAs with GnR - and I don't think that's going to happen either. Wishful thinking is taking over the forums...it makes me want to :sick:
Wishful thinking makes you sick? That's totally depressing, dude. What's wrong with being optimistic? Sorry, there will be no Slash with GNR no matter how much you wish it--not this year at least.
It makes me sick when a month ago these same people that are jizzing all over themselves were all gloom and doom - suddenly everything is peachy. In a couple weeks when everything falls through, it will be back to doom and gloom. You would think that at some point that people would learn.
#6168 Re: Guns N' Roses » Entertainment Weekly suggests GN'R may perform at VMA's » 931 weeks ago
I think we're more likely to see Slash than BH at the VMAs with GnR - and I don't think that's going to happen either. Wishful thinking is taking over the forums...it makes me want to :sick:
#6169 Re: Guns N' Roses » In regards to 9 song GNR Chinese Democracy leaks » 931 weeks ago
Finally listened to them. Most of the songs still suck, but the sound quality of the suckiness is much better in the remastered tracks. I left them on my mp3 player in case I want to give them another shot in the future.
Better actually sounds worse to me - they really need to boot Pitman for that song at the very least...let the rockers stay rockers. There's no reason to overdo that song.
TWAT sounds like a quality song - the only one worthy of the old band out of the 9 songs, and if they could cut Axl out of the last 2 minutes of the song, it would be even better. I'd love to hear someone that hates BH (not that I'm a huge fan) say anything bad about the guitar at the end of that song.
#6170 Re: Guns N' Roses » Mysteron confirms "Shackler's Revenge" as an actual new GN'R song » 931 weeks ago
buzzsaw wrote:We can only hope that is right, but why would you leak such bad songs if you want to build buzz...wouldn't you want to leak songs that actually kick ass? Maybe not the best, but certainly better than the majority of what we've heard.
Just an opinion but I think T.W.A.T./Better and I.R.S. were the leaks that were intentionally leaked to create the initial buzz and that the album was indeed going to be released in 2006, thus the best leaks were let out to build the hype for a more than likely Fall release. To me these were 3 of the badass songs and the latter leaks (outside of studio demos of live stuff we'd already heard anyway) were just to keep some interest going or perhaps not intentional at all. IF indeed the rest of the album were as good as the '06 leaks I think we all (for the most part) will walk away satisfied. I'd bet cash that we have heard no more than half of what will be on the final product.
Good point. While I don't think IRS is very good, this thinking at least makes a little sense...but I still don't get leaking weaker songs now, and in some cases, so much weaker that some people can't even get through the entire song it's so bad? There's no reason to let that type of song out on purpose.
