You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
#6411 Re: Guns N' Roses » Questions » 959 weeks ago
Random rant here:
I'm sure it come across as though I am happy about where we are and where it looks like we're going as far as GnR goes. I'm not. We all lose in this scenario. Nobody is happy and I don't think anybody is ever going to be happy about it. CD may never come out. A reunion seems farther away than ever. The new band has dropped off the radar completely. No news from Guns N' Roses even through the usual channels of Beta, Del, etc. No management almost a year after Merck was fired. VR is at the very least doing something, but not much and who knows for how much longer. Album sales for VR and Baz featuring Axl are both weak even by today's standards. It's amazing how the tide has turned since the beginning of 2006 when Axl was getting ready to tour and VR were very successful with Contraband.
#6412 Re: Guns N' Roses » Questions » 959 weeks ago
no use debating this anymore as we simply don't see eye to eye on much of anything really...
We can agree on this. You won't change my mind and I'm not going to change yours. Time will though. Sooner or later you'll see it for what it is. I respect you enough to know you'll get it eventually.
#6413 Re: Guns N' Roses » Questions » 959 weeks ago
It's really interesting the range of opinions on here.
I was facinated to hear people saying the old band were sloppy, cos it was that sleaazy, bluesy, sloppiness that really made the style I thought. And i'm also interested that people see the new band as polished...as when i've seen them it seemed that they missed the beginning phrases of a lot of the solo sections of a song - almost like everyone was waiting to see if anyone else started playing the solo, and then there was the overwhelming nature of the rhythm guitar now theres 2 people playing it at any one time.
I really like the new band playing the new songs though, like IRS is awesome live...and I'd love to hear TWAT more often...and maddy is cool as well. I think the new songs really suit the different style of the new band much better.
From what I've heard, I like the new band playing their songs (for the most part). Those songs fit their style far more than the AFD/UYI material does. I think the new band, minus Axl but with a good lead singer, could stand on their own (at a much smaller level) because they wouldn't be pretending to be something they aren't. Their downfall is pretending to be a band that reached such a high level that they could never live up to what that band did. Anybody could be standing behind Axl right now and nothing would be different unless it was Slash, Duff and Izzy. Read the interest in CD thread - a lot of truth and reality in that thread.
#6414 Re: Guns N' Roses » Questions » 959 weeks ago
Communist China wrote:^ Buzz, where's your proof that people weren't disinterested in new material live in 90 and 91?
People who bought tickets to those shows went to hear the new material that had been hyped for two years. Its why GNR was able to get away with playing setlists comprised of a ton of unheard songs. Had it backfired, the band would have just switched to an AFD heavy setlist and continued the tour. There never was a backlash to it because its what people wanted.
When I bought tickets, I didn't give two shits about Jungle. I wanted to know what November Rain, Estranged, Dust N Bones,etc. sounded like.
Exactly James. They would have played almost all AFD and mixed in a new song here and there had it not been received well. People wanted to know what the band they love came up with. MTV was there covering it. Magazines talked it up like crazy. Slash was on covers of guitar magazines, Axl and Slash on other music magazines. There was way more interest in the band and what they were doing than this band will ever see.
This time around, nobody cares what the new guys came up with. It's all about hearing AFD and the other songs they love. they want Axl. they want the songs they fell in love with 15-20 years ago - nothing more. There is no attachment to the other guys on a large scale. It's Axl and his band - that's how they are always referred to these days.
#6415 Re: Guns N' Roses » Can interest (in Chinese Democracy) be regained? » 959 weeks ago
buzzsaw wrote:I don't think there's been real interest since 2002 to be honest - at least outside of the boards. First impressions are everything and had they come out and blown everybody away, they could have survived a little better than they have. They didn't - people were exposed to them through the VMA debacle and that is what post Slash era GnR will always be viewed as by much of the general public. It isn't interest anymore, it's now morbid curiosity. It's like watching a train wreck - you know what's coming, you know it's not going to be pretty, but you can't help but peek at it between your fingers as you cover your eyes. Very few people are genuinely interested in CD musically anymore. It's all about will it or won't it come out. Once that question is answered, the interest is over.
At the heart of that last statement is the reason I'm starting to believe we may never see this album.
I've been saying it for a long time. While it's good that you're seeing the writing on the wall, I do actually feel bad for you and others who had faith in this project. I knew I was right, I believe that most knew I was right but didn't want to admit it. It's hard when you get so into something that you don't really see it for what it is - you see it for what you wish it was. I think the same thing would happen to me if there was a reunion - I'd be so happy it was happening that I wouldn't see it for what it really was. I'd see it as something bigger because that's what I want it to be.
#6416 Re: Guns N' Roses » Questions » 959 weeks ago
Thanks Buzz, Yes, it did help...it reinforced to me that you didn't see any shows before UYI came out and you didn't see people going to the bathroom during an unknown 10 minute Nov Rain.
your specific quote saying that didn't occur before uyi and me specifically giving you an example of when it did. Maybe you need to read what you write.
" I've read what people that have gone to see the new band have to say - they love the old songs and about half the crowd goes to get beer or to go to the bathroom during a new song or a dreaded solo. That didn't happen on the UYI tour before the albums came out. "
I was fuckin there and it most certainly did happen. Dude, I'll go toe to toe with you all night long.:rock:
Sounds like you went to a bad pre UYI show - were you the one that mentioned the hillbilly? Enough said. I lived it, I followed it, I know exactly what was going on. You experienced what you experienced, that's fine. Someday, if you keep seeing the fabricated band, that might scratch the surface what I experienced. I was there and I did my homework. If you were there as much as you claim, you wouldn't be debating this, you'd be agreeing. Bailing during a 15 minute performance of NR when you don't know it is completely different than bailing on every single song they don't recognize and sleeping through boring solos. Shit, go look at the tours from the late 80s. People stayed around and listened to songs that were either never released or released 2-4 years later. Let's see how many people stay around for the current band playing even more cover songs than the AFD rehash they do now if they tour again. You can't compare the two at all. These guys stand no chance when compared to the Original band live and you only hurt your credibility and theirs by saying otherwise.
You couldn't go toe to toe with me for 5 minutes - save your time and energy. You aren't going to convince me that what you think trumps what I experienced no matter how many times you try.
#6417 Re: Guns N' Roses » Questions » 959 weeks ago
The new shows are a fabrication in almost every imaginable way. The band is a fabrication, the music is a fabrication, the show and energy are fabrications. It all rides the waves of what was, not what is. I've read the reviews, I've read what people that have gone to see the new band have to say - they love the old songs and about half the crowd goes to get beer or to go to the bathroom during a new song or a dreaded solo. That didn't happen on the UYI tour before the albums came out. The shows now are a production. Nothing spontaneous, nothing new, nothing that would make you think you were seeing Guns N' Roses other than Axl Rose and the songs they play. Sure, they play the songs OK, but that isn't what Guns N' Roses was. ANYBODY could be standing behind Axl and people would think it was great. THAT isn't a band. They've become everything Guns N' Roses was against - a lineup of rotating studio musicians out to make a buck. It's ambarrassing as a fan of Guns N' Roses.
For madagas, so he can understand what I'm talking about. Maybe reading it a second time will help.
#6418 Re: Guns N' Roses » Questions » 959 weeks ago
Well, I call a spade a spade. Anybody that smites because they don't like your opinion is a douchebag - even me when I used to do it. But that's a subject for another time.
It happened everywhere, though half may be an exaggeration. It likely happened more than you think it did at the shows you were at. I know you weren't looking around to see who left and who didn't - you were enjoying the show, especially when you were upfront. The people that went took it for what it was - a chance to see Axl and hear the songs they love. When it wasn't what they wanted to hear, they weren't into it. That is pretty normal. The UYI tour was the exception to the rule and obviously this band will never live up to what the band was at that time. I was just pointing out that the things people are ripping Slash and Duff for are the same things that made the old band special - I didn't mean to get into another old vs new debate. They are 2 different beasts that can't fairly be compared to each other.
#6419 Re: Guns N' Roses » Questions » 959 weeks ago
Good to see some douchebag decided to smite me for having a valid opinion.
russ: I can't comment towards what they do in VR because I haven't seen them live. I can tell you that from the GnR bootlegs, it looks like some of the intensity comes from the format of the shows and that makes a big difference and gives an appearance of the band being intense when it's really the atmosphere. All I can say is that when I saw Guns N' Roses in 1992 it was the best show I've ever seen in my life, and I have seen a ton of concerts over the years. They were rock and roll. The show wasn't huge because of the venue or the props or the size of the stage, it was huge because the biggest band in the world (at the time) was on stage. It was huge because they had an energy and a tension that you can't fake.
The new shows are a fabrication in almost every imaginable way. The band is a fabrication, the music is a fabrication, the show and energy are fabrications. It all rides the waves of what was, not what is. I've read the reviews, I've read what people that have gone to see the new band have to say - they love the old songs and about half the crowd goes to get beer or to go to the bathroom during a new song or a dreaded solo. That didn't happen on the UYI tour before the albums came out. The shows now are a production. Nothing spontaneous, nothing new, nothing that would make you think you were seeing Guns N' Roses other than Axl Rose and the songs they play. Sure, they play the songs OK, but that isn't what Guns N' Roses was. ANYBODY could be standing behind Axl and people would think it was great. THAT isn't a band. They've become everything Guns N' Roses was against - a lineup of rotating studio musicians out to make a buck. It's ambarrassing as a fan of Guns N' Roses.
#6420 Re: Guns N' Roses » Questions » 959 weeks ago
dude... if you're going to compare GnR to Poison, you clearly haven't seen them live.
No, my show was cancelled. It's not my fault I haven't seen them. I have seen bootlegs. They are a polished backing band. Pick any polished nice sounding band if Poison offends you and that is what they are. That isn't Guns N' Roses, and obviously they are aware of it too or Ron wouldn't be trying to give them a Guns sound.
