Here Today... Gone To Hell!

On the Illusion albums, Izzy Stradlin is credited with rhythm guitar while you're credited with lead and rhythm. How does that break down on any given track?

Slash-It's simple. Izzy, even on the songs he wrote, put on a very bare-bones guitar part -- just basic chords. And sometimes, very rarely, a single-note melody. He has one guitar solo on Illusion I -- at the beginning of "Back Off Bitch."

You also solo on "Back Off Bitch."

Slash-Yeah, I play the main solo. I used to play this high-end trill thing for the first solo, but I could never play it consistently. So I just took it off altogether and let Izzy put a lead on, which is really a lot cooler.

 Source is a Guitar World  interview from '92

That still doesn't address the main point of my OP.
Izzy was clean after 1989 and yet his amped was turned WAAAY down live, so that only Slash's guitar is audible.
Gilby, who had no substance abuse issues, again, had his amp turned WAAAY down live, and is only on Rhythm Guitar on TSI.
Slash plays lead and rhythm guitar, while Gilby only plays rhythm, on the first Snakepit record - a record Gilby helped to compose!
On all subsequent albums of his own, Slash has never shared guitar duties with anyone. The only exceptions to this in his career are AFD and the Sympathy for the Devil cover.

That still doesn't address the main point of my OP.
Izzy was clean after 1989 and yet his amped was turned WAAAY down live, so that only Slash's guitar is audible.
Gilby, who had no substance abuse issues, again, had his amp turned WAAAY down live, and is only on Rhythm Guitar on TSI.
Slash plays lead and rhythm guitar, while Gilby only plays rhythm, on the first Snakepit record - a record Gilby helped to compose!
On all subsequent albums of his own, Slash has never shared guitar duties with anyone. The only exceptions to this in his career are AFD and the Sympathy for the Devil cover.

Gilby: [...] Nobody really seemed to know what Izzy played. I would perform something, and Slash would say, "I thought you knew this tune," and I'd argue that I did. And then he'd say "No, you don't You are playing my part!" And then we'd realize that you couldn't really hear Izzy's part on some of the songs. So the we had to try to reconstruct his parts the best we could [Guitar World, November 1992]

Hahaha.  I'd never heard this one.

I never really believed all that business about turning him down, until I heard 'Rocket Queen' on the live album.

Emily, I think they are all slightly off in their own way....funny shit. : ok:

Back Off Bitch was written during the AFD sessions.

Even before that, I thought.

I would argue that in part, Izzy's ''demotion'' on UYI also came because of the structure of the songs demanded more of a rhythm player and not another lead. I can't imagine estranged with another guitarplayer playing lead in there, it would sound intrusive. But its an Axl song, a piano based song, its just different. And there where more axl songs on UYI than in AFD.
Not surprisingly, Back off Bitch is one of the tracks that sounds more like AFD, and his input on that one is more like his input on the AFD songs.

Interesting point. So you're saying the reason Izzy played less on those albums is because of the songs themselves. And therefore Gilby, just filled his shoes, and never really had a chance to be more than a rhythm player alongside Slash.

Do you think the rest was a result of that? Like "These songs don't need my parts so why bother?" when the other guys asked him to redo something for example?
 


/jarmo

Slash's ego caused it....pretty clear. He wanted all the glory. He thought he could do all the parts by himself...ala Jimmy Page. The problem is he is and never was as good as Jimmy Page. Slash is a badass...no doubt. However, he needed huge support in Izzy and Axl. Page didn't need shit....Townsend didn't need shit...Hendrix, etc. They ran the show top to bottom. Slash tried to do that and it didn't work. One could say that about Axl as well but I personally believe Axl is WAY more talented as an artist than Slash is. To me, Slash is a stereotypical 70's blues rock guitarist. What does Slash actually have over say someone like Gary Rossington from Lynyrd Skynyrd? Tuesday's Gone vs Estranged? Freebird vs November Rain? Sweet Home Alabama vs Sweet Child O Mine....Jungle vs Saturday Night Special? NOTHING. Mick Ronson, Joe Perry, the list of guitarists goes on and on.....his ego was a very big problem that nobody wants to admit to because he painted himself out to be the victim. Bullshit.

What does Slash actually have over say someone like Gary Rossington from Lynyrd Skynyrd? Tuesday's Gone vs Estranged? Freebird vs November Rain? Sweet Home Alabama vs Sweet Child O Mine....Jungle vs Saturday Night Special? NOTHING.

Interesting point. So you're saying the reason Izzy played less on those albums is because of the songs themselves. And therefore Gilby, just filled his shoes, and never really had a chance to be more than a rhythm player alongside Slash.

Do you think the rest was a result of that? Like "These songs don't need my parts so why bother?" when the other guys asked him to redo something for example?
 


/jarmo

Maybe Axl and Slash had more to say during UYI.

I don't know because I wasn't there.

Slash's ego caused it....pretty clear. He wanted all the glory. He thought he could do all the parts by himself...ala Jimmy Page. The problem is he is and never was as good as Jimmy Page. Slash is a badass...no doubt. However, he needed huge support in Izzy and Axl. Page didn't need shit....Townsend didn't need shit...Hendrix, etc. They ran the show top to bottom. Slash tried to do that and it didn't work. One could say that about Axl as well but I personally believe Axl is WAY more talented as an artist than Slash is. To me, Slash is a stereotypical 70's blues rock guitarist. What does Slash actually have over say someone like Gary Rossington from Lynyrd Skynyrd? Tuesday's Gone vs Estranged? Freebird vs November Rain? Sweet Home Alabama vs Sweet Child O Mine....Jungle vs Saturday Night Special? NOTHING. Mick Ronson, Joe Perry, the list of guitarists goes on and on.....his ego was a very big problem that nobody wants to admit to because he painted himself out to be the victim. Bullshit.

Jaeball, they are both at fault...equally in my mind.  :-\

I've always gotten a good kick out of the idea that Slash was a bad guy for not wanting to concede any and all control in Guns N Roses., particularly when it came to the guitar parts.

Everybody knows who Axl Rose is right? Nobody here thinks maybe him dissolving their partnership and forcing Slash and Duff to sign contracts to be in Guns N Roses, in hindsight, wasn't a smart move?

I think they were both fools for how they handled those years, and Slash was a real snake int he grass for years , with the help of Perla when playing the press against Axl.

BUT FOR GODS SAKE ONE TIME...

I'd love to read one of you admit that maybe just maybe Axl's power play ruined any chance of them continuing thru their other obstacles. (such as Izzy's departure, and who to replace him).

You can argue till you're blue in the face that Axl was right to do so, more talented, better suited to lead ... but what was the end result?

I've always gotten a good kick out of the idea that Slash was a bad guy for not wanting to concede any and all control in Guns N Roses., particularly when it came to the guitar parts.

Everybody knows who Axl Rose is right? Nobody here thinks maybe him dissolving their partnership and forcing Slash and Duff to sign contracts to be in Guns N Roses, in hindsight, wasn't a smart move?

I think they were both fools for how they handled those years, and Slash was a real snake int he grass for years , with the help of Perla when playing the press against Axl.

BUT FOR GODS SAKE ONE TIME...

I'd love to read one of you admit that maybe just maybe Axl's power play ruined any chance of them continuing thru their other obstacles. (such as Izzy's departure, and who to replace him).

You can argue till you're blue in the face that Axl was right to do so, more talented, better suited to lead ... but what was the end result?

Jaeball, they are both at fault...equally in my mind.  :-\

Axl?s power play was good for Ax?s ego, but a kick in the balls for Slash and Duff, and the future of Guns N? Roses and it?s fans.
Really can?t fathom how he ever thought that was going to work. Maybe he didn?t care.

I think it?s clear they all fucked up.
Adler certainly made his own bed, but his departure set GN?R?s demise in motion.
Izzy is on record saying the songs didn?t work without him.
Throw on top of that, Izzy not wanting to risk his own sobriety, and Axl becoming a control freak, made it easier for him to walk away.

Music aside, Izzy was also the voice of reason between the two big egos of the band, Slash and Axl.

Maybe there was nothing they could have possibly done to keep Izzy around, but he was the heart and soul of the band, but Slash and Axl?s egos were probably too big to realize it.
I think they were still very capable of making quality music, but GN?R as we had known it was over.

I think the biggest mistake they all made, which many posters here still do today, was not recognizing how instrumental each member was to the success of the band.
Thinking they could replace members, rather than work things out. Once one member was out, it became a domino effect, and made it easier for the next guy to walk away when things got tough.

Axl?s power play was good for Ax?s ego, but a kick in the balls for Slash and Duff, and the future of Guns N? Roses and it?s fans.
Really can?t fathom how he ever thought that was going to work. Maybe he didn?t care.

HE must have cared and must've thought it was going to work, if he didnt maybe they would still be together. I do agree that once one member of the band was out, others follow and it became a domino effect. But it might not have happened and it could have still worked out. I don't like Matt Sorum as a person, but I do enjoy what he brought to the table in UYI, I think it clicked and it worked with what Axl and Slash where trying to accomplish.
After all these years, I think they should've tried harder. But there's an ugly side to everything, some people idolize Izzy a bit too much in my book, maybe because they feel related to his persona, but I always wondered about his fear of GNR doing arenas and being big, it was irrational, he should've just rolled with it, and in my opinion, it was just that, he was scared of the attention. I also don't understand his lack of interest in playing and creating songs, he was good at it, yet him being a guitar player and not touching your guitar in over a year?  I play the guitar, I don't ever go 1 week without playing it. He had the opportunity to play for a living and he walked away from it, that shows lack of passion in my opinion.

I think if Axl really cared, he was incredibly naive to think once equal shareholders would be in love with the idea of suddenly becoming his employees.

All has said that he felt he needed to take ownership of the name because of the shape that Slash and Duff were in.  I'm sure he was getting advice as well.  I don't blame him.  In a perfect word, I don't think Axl would have felt compelled to pull that move.

Yeah.
Slash was dead for a moment in 1992, and Duff wasn't exactly the poster boy for healthy living until 1994...




/jarmo

Now at that time I didn?t know or think about brand names or corporate value etc. All I knew is that I came in with the name and from day one everyone had agreed to it being mine should we break up and now it was in writing."

Edited to add: Well, you could ask yourself whether or not any of this would've happened if everything was awesome at the time? If they hadn't tried to fire Axl back in 1988 for example....

/jarmo

I actually think slash and duff new exactly what they were signing.   I believe Axl when he says everyone agreed that he came in with the name and it was his to take with th him if the band were to ever break up

What I don't think slash or duff were expecting.  Was for Axl to quit the band/partnership.  And start over fresh with the name guns n roses and try and put both slash and duff u set a contract.   I am pretty sure that was a surprise to those guys.

And really that move has nothing to do about protecting Axl or protecting the name guns n roses.  It comes across as a true power play.  Where he wanted full control and wanted to be the boss

Also, while the contract was signed in 1992, Axl didn't activate the "name clause" until August 1995, by which point Duff was totally clean and sober and healthy, and Slash was occasionally dabbling but not addicted as he had been.

Well said.

Totally agree.

I have long thought that they didn't think there was much of a Guns N' Roses without them anyway.

I agree that "sign or I don't go onstage" thing is not real.  Just like Axl said, no court would ever enforce that.

Slash definitely didn't think GNR could exist without him but in reality GNR existed both before Slash and after him.

Him quitting was a power play, if anything.

The only reason any of this became a point of contention and so publicized is because Slash became bitter when he wasn't allowed to return to the band after quitting multiple times.

 So, rather than being honest with the public and explaining that he quit as a power play and then was rebuffed when he tried to rejoin, it was more beneficial and convienient to his career to  lie and spin the story that the band was stolen from him.

He and Duff both lied about signing under duress and about the actual time they signed it..or else they were too stoned and drunk to remember accurately.

I agree that "sign or I don't go onstage" thing is not real.  Just like Axl said, no court would ever enforce that.

Exactly, they did not sign under duress and did not sign at the times they both said they did.

 It was agreed from day one that Axl was the one bringing the name to the table. Slash and Duff were joining a pre-existing band.

They were given their fair share of ownership in the band and there were no complaints, there was no issue until much later after Slash quit and decided it looked better to be a victim, PR spin.

A band's partnership agreement has to establish protocol for voting rights, distribution of assets, resolutions for departures, etc.

Slash and Duff did not give up their voting rights. A majority was still needed for band decisions.

Slash and Duff were not giving up anything at all. They were simply agreeing that they couldn't vote Axl out and then use the name he created for a band he founded before they ever joined.

(Note-it was no accident that VR had the Gun-name connection, it was to be called "loaded" initially and if they could have legally called it GNR they undoubtedly would have IMO.)


Nobody is disputing that Slash and Duff were an important part of GNR's success. Nobody is disputing that the name's value increased during Slash and Duff's tenure-This was nothing unusual nor was it a point of contention. It was simply putting something into writing that had been understood from day one.

Also -they quit, they were not fired nor forced out.Axl, Slash and Duff are still business partners. They all receive money from record sales and merchandise. It's not Axl paying the others. It's the label paying all of them, merchandise companies paying all of them, publishing companies paying all of them, etc.

But neither slash or duff quit the original parntership. 

Ask was the one that quit and then tried to restart the band with both slash and duff as employees under contract.    The terms of those contracts I have no idea.   They could of been totally in the favour of slash and duff.  Or not. 

But the they were not the first ones to leave.   Axl left.   Reformed the structure of the band.   Slash never left as he never signed a contract.   Duff quit a few years later.   

And don't get me wrong I am a huge supporter that Axl was the only one that if the band broke up could carry on with its legacy

But this bs that the band was around before slash and duff and around after is just be

Yes the name was around before.  And yes the brand was around after.    I would argue that the strengh of the brand now has as much to do with slash, who hasn't been in the band for years, as it does with Axl

You're ignoring one major point.
On August 31st 1995, Duff and Slash were still in the band, and it was Axl who decided to leave the legal partnership, and sent them a letter informing his intent to do so, and that he was going to form a new band called Guns N' Roses, which they could join - on his terms. Not as equal members with equal voting rights. A new legal partnership from which they could be jettisoned by Axl at any time. This move is what helped them to leave the 'name'.

How am I ignoring you and your little history lesson you are trying to push here? Fyi- I think there are a good many members here aware of the facts as well as the history. ;)

 I am stating facts about what actually happened and why the new partnership needed to be redefined.

Axl-from the chats in 08'

"Why keep the name? I?m literally the last man standing. Not bragging, not proud. It?s been a fucking nightmare but I didn?t leave Guns and I didn?t drive others out.

With Slash it?s been nothing more than pure strategy and saving face while manipulating the public like he used to me. I earned the right to protect my efforts and to be able to take advantage of our contract I?d worked hard for where Slash?s exact words were that he didn?t care.

I get that some like a different version or lineup the same way some like a specific team line up or a particular year of a specific car but because you and I are getting played I?m supposed to throw the baby out with the bath water?"

"I didn?t make a solo record. A solo record would be completely different than this and probably much more instrumental. I made a Guns record with the right people who were the only people who really wanted to help me try, were qualified and capable while enduring the public abuse for years .

"The songs were chosen by everyone involved. I didn?t want to do This I love in anyway shape or form and Robin and Caram insisted gaining Tommy?s and the others support."

" There?s been a lot of pressure to go with using my name (all external) but that never felt right to me for this band and the parameters in regard to this music have lots more to do with the mindset of Guns than something else. The instrumental I wrote for End of Days that?s more a solo effort at least presently."

"As far as a new name?this is who I am not whatever else someone else thinks of. I don?t see myself as solely Guns but I do see myself as the only one from the past making the effort to take it forward whether anyone approves or not and giving beyond what many would or fight for to do so. "

"The name helped the music more than you could ever know and I?m not talking in regards to studios or budgets I mean it as in being pushed by something and having to get the music to a place where I can find my peace regardless of what anyone says."

" And that wasn?t fully achieved until the last round of mastering and swapping out a version of a track at the pressing plant that had gotten inadvertently changed at the last minute."

"Also the name was what the industry wanted as well and the burden of keeping it was something to endure in order to make the record. After the monies invested by old Geffen (that were decisions made that have worked out for me but I'm on record as having opposed) dropping the name became suicide."

"The cost of legal battles has been astronomical but I felt the deal made with Universal was fair for where it is and most things balanced out for both sides."

"David Bowie likes Floyd with Barret, many with Waters and those without. And there are those who like all the different lineups. Imo what makes our situation a bit more unique at least in how it?s played out is the ugliness of what really took place."

" If I?d done what was said then I?d say fuck me too. I also realize this is just one issue in something with upteen however many more so conclusions can?t be formulated off this little bit alone by most which is more than understandable."

"That said because someone leaves the shop I started in which I still legally have the rights to the name I started it with? makes up a bunch of nonsense to win public and legal support in an effort to get whatever it is they want at mine and the public?s expense?"

" I don?t feel any reason whatsoever I should have to throw what I?ve not only worked for but fought and suffered for away because some hurt, angry, betrayed, misguided and lied to people with a lynch mob mentality, joined by others who could care less (especially in the media), enjoying the controversy and hate, choose one over the other regardless of what?s right because they want what they want. And you can still prefer then as opposed to now and no one?s arguing your right to do so."

"In regard to nuGuns, I get that sometimes it helps to be able to clarify. Personally I call this Guns and the Illusions or previous lineups old Guns."

"We can play what we want as far as I?m aware."

"It wasn?t so much that it was a good course or that if looking back I could do something differently it?s that for better or worse it was the only course and had I not done this Slash would have succeeded in destroying me publicly much more than he, others or myself have so far and I would have gone bankrupt."

"I don?t know where I?d be but there?s clearly no happy ending there and with everything else that had gone on in every other area of my life the devastation isn?t something I feel I would have overcome at least to any real degree publicly. "

"Hopefully I would?ve been able to pick myself up enough to get a job or sing somewhere else but I doubt anything that significant."

"The sharing thing is interesting but even with all this time the complications of the red tape and trying to get something out fall on my world to sort and not theirs. They are amazingly supportive and do their best to keep me in up spirits and focused which I had less and less of in Guns way before Sweet Child caught on. If that were to change then that may be something to look at. I hope for us to grow more together as we continue so who knows."

"If I hadn?t secured the rights I don?t know where I?d be and I?d probably call what would then be the current lineup ?Those mother fuckers!!? rofl-lol.gif

"The name is something I take great pride in as I feel anyone who?s been a part of it should, the same as other bands or teams etc. The burden when it is such is a nightmare but not as much or as hopeless as I?d imagine without it could have been."

"On the what?s the difference? I think I get what you?re asking? I feel it depends on how and in what ways either the formers members are using the association and what the true circumstances regarding why they moved on from both the band and the name that would or could affect the decision to continue on with the name by in this case this lineup and or myself."

You realize that nowhere in that diatribe is there an actual reason given for the August 1995 thing. Because that action was inexcusable.
I could see if Guns N' Roses existed for several years and had put out a few albums before Slash and Duff joined. But it didn't. It existed for perhaps 4 months at most and went nowhere until they joined. And if you want to be technical about it, Izzy also founded the band with Axl. Let's not act like the band was Axl's solo project from day one; We can rest the pom poms down for a minute.

Nobody has any pom poms Miser, it is common for trolls like you to mount a personal attack when they are running out of ammo  or when the discussion doesn't go to suit them.

Nobody ever said Izzy was not a co-founder- straw man argument.

The facts surrounding the '92 partnership have not changed in the last 7 years, but the tone has changed a bit since it was definitively proven that Axl was telling the truth all along and that Slash and Duff were lying all along.

Axl took over the band out of necessity. Who exactly was supposed to be running the band? Slash? Duff? They were passed out half the time and were in no condition to be running anything. If anything, it was fucked up to put all of that burden on Axl.

The agreement did not allow Axl to fire either of them. Both of them quit.

"Slash came back for some writing down at the studio, totally negative and belligerent, quits the fucking band and then publicly spins it into somehow he got pushed out." (Del James, Mudkiss, 2008)

The old partnership agreement outlined various scenarios based on four votes. A new agreement was needed to outline various scenarios based on three votes. What Axl wanted was protection from Slash and Duff voting him out and then Slash and Duff having sole ownership of the GNR name even though they did not create the name and had joined an existing band as replacements.

There was no objection to this nor was it anything out of the ordinary or controversial. It was common sense.

Axl even tried to show Slash he was making a mistake-

"Axl contacted those closest to me, telling them I should change my mind. He called my dad, my security guard, my wife, Renee, and told each of them that I was making the biggest mistake of my life. He said that I was pissing away so much money because of my decision." (Slash, autobiography)

Here's what Duff said after Slash left-
I am [in GNR] & everything is going to be cool as far as that is concerned. [...] Guns is doing a record so of course Matt & I will be in the studio for at least 3-4 weeks in February. [...] We have song titles, but no album title. I don't want to let the cat out of the bag. [...] We progress naturally. As far as the rumor that one person wants us to change, that's just not true." (Duff chat, 12/17/96)

You keep going back to 1992. Axl did not have the name in 1992. Everyone was equal in 1992. Yes, Duff was nodding out in 1992. Axl only got the contract which said he would get the name if he quit the band or was fired. Axl got the name in 1995 by quitting the band.
I am talking about 1995. When Duff was sober and not nodding, and Slash was still dabbling but "beyond the heavy nodding" as your own quote demonstrates. There was no reason for the power grab in 1995.

He's certainly done a great job of "salvaging it" since 1995.

So, every single person is a liar except for Axl? Everyone except Axl engages in 'revisionist history'? It's a massive industry wide conspiracy against Axl? Are Bumblefoot, DJ, Robin, Brain and Josh Freese in on it, too? Why does it seem like tons of people quit around Axl or get tired of working with him?

It's pretty sick to be utterly blind. Cults are scary.

But would they have tried to fire Axl in 1988 if he didn't have a problem with late starts or even sometimes not showing up for shows?

Also, while the contract was signed in 1992, Axl didn't activate the "name clause" until August 1995, by which point Duff was totally clean and sober and healthy, and Slash was occasionally dabbling but not addicted as he had been.

For all of the 7 people who keep screaming to the high heavens on the Internet that Guns N Roses existed before Slash Duff and Steven played with Axl and Izzy ...

Keep fighting the good fight !

Axl securing the rights to the name of the " band he started with Izzy" has nothing to do with then having Slash and Duff sign contracts to be his employees.

I see them as seperate issues, he could have secured ownership of the name without taking it there.

For the last time ... If he wanted to forge ahead with them like he claimed ... Then that was foolish and naive to believe they'd go along.

I once read Axl wanted the name because, in case of the death of Slash or Duff, there could've been trouble with the wives at that time? If so, why not typing up a contract which says that the remaining members have control over the name in case of a death case (wives excluded)

Axl securing the rights to the name of the " band he started with Izzy" has nothing to do with then having Slash and Duff sign contracts to be his employees.

I see them as seperate issues, he could have secured ownership of the name without taking it there.

For the last time ... If he wanted to forge ahead with them like he claimed ... Then that was foolish and naive to believe they'd go along.

He tried to create a new deal because he saw the end of the old band. Self preservation because him and Slash were done....that was the end of the old band and he knew he would have to start over. The real casualty was Duff who tried to hang on. Matt was a hired employee already so Ax could take him or leave him either way....just a drummer.

For all of the 7 people who keep screaming to the high heavens on the Internet that Guns N Roses existed before Slash Duff and Steven played with Axl and Izzy ...

Keep fighting the good fight !

I think if Axl really cared, he was incredibly naive to ...

Legally there was a Name before Slash and Duff, but that name had no substance or identity.  Everybody knows that, except for the 7 people you mentioned.

It's foolish to be discussing a 20+ year old issue that probably happened when you were in diapers, or were sperm but it doesn't stop you, does it ? :D

Nothing said now will change a thing in the past, but people want to keep on beating that deceased equine because it didn't happen the way they thought it should.

Everybody knows it.
It's just one of those facts from the GN'R history that if you bring it up, expect those who don't like it to try to ridicule you...

Like if you make jokes about it, it'll change!



/jarmo

Technically, using the "Slash and Duff were replacements" logic,

When people think of Aerosmith, do the names Jimmy Crespo and Rick Dufay immediately spring to mind? Ray Tabano?

Nobody's using that logic so the rest of your post is irrelevant.

Nobody ever said that the AFD line up wasn't more successful than the one with Tracii. Nobody really made any comments about anybody being replacements. Nobody said Tracii was a huge influence on GN'R's sound or image. Nobody claimed Ole or Rab made the band. None of that has happened.

The only thing people have pointed out to you, and others like you who don't like to be reminded of it, is that Guns N' Roses' history is one thing and what people choose to remember is something else.
You can't change history. You can't change the fact that LA Guns and Hollywood Rose became Guns N' Roses with a different line up than what recorded the first album. Hello, McFly?

I do not know why that upsets you to the point that you need to be defending the Appetite line up against this "attack".

You're one calling people sad, and ironically enough here you are trying to defend people who chose to ignore a fact because it doesn't sit well with the idea that the band was nothing until certain people joined... Well, it was Guns N' Roses. That's something... Sorry. Keep arguing that it wasn't until you turn blue, won't change the fact. :)



/jarmo

There's facts that are pretty much utterly irrelevant though. The only reason people bring up Tracii, Ole or Rob is to justify the new band.

But, Tracii's involvement with Guns is utterly irrelevant both in the band's history and pop culture. It's just used to diminish Slash and Duff, "See, the band existed before them, which means it was Axl's band from day one, and so could exist and still be Guns after them." That's the line of thinking I've seen "from others like you".

Slash was a control freak...But so was Axl. It doesn't make a person any less of a fan to admit their heroes have flaws like everyone else.

Well, I can only speak for myself.

When I started this site in 1996, over 19 years ago. There was really no "new band" at that moment.
But you know what? I was still interested in the band's history and how it all came to be, hence this section: http://www.heretodaygonetohell.com/history/index.html

Now, go ahead and tell me with a straight face about how that is only there to "justify the new band". Go ahead!





No, it's used to tell the actual history of the band. As it happened...
Kinda like evolution..... Not like "and then one day Adam..."

You start to look like one of those sad AFD apologists who can't take the fact that GN'R started before that line up! Oh the horror....  :D





/jarmo

Bad analogy.

You can start a car without windshield wipers, but the band Guns N' Roses started with those guys...
Sorry.


Question, does it bother you that Slash played in Hollywood Rose with Axl, but it wasn't called Guns N' Roses? And why does it upset you that GN'R started without Slash, Duff and Steven?



/jarmo

Bad analogy.

You can start a car without windshield wipers, but the band Guns N' Roses started with those guys...
Sorry.


Question, does it bother you that Slash played in Hollywood Rose with Axl, but it wasn't called Guns N' Roses? And why does it upset you that GN'R started without Slash, Duff and Steven?

/jarmo

Yes, I admit. My agenda is to stick to facts....


/jarmo

Well it all depends on your definition of original I guess.  Just like a definition of a 'band'. That is another boring topic fuelled by agendas.

Original could be the first people in a particular position no matter how short lived or it could be the first group of people to actually create under the name. I think both are valid therefore the argument holds little validity.

Well it all depends on your definition of original I guess.  Just like a definition of a 'band'. That is another boring topic fuelled by agendas.

Original could be the first people in a particular position no matter how short lived or it could be the first group of people to actually create under the name. I think both are valid therefore the argument holds little validity. I probably slightly side with the AFD being 'original' as I would view the first guys as like a draft copy before the first print but you know the argument that the AFD line up technically isn't the original band holds water too.

If you think Slash and Duff were at all important in GN'R's history - you hate Axl and aren't a real fan. You can either like Slash, or you can follow the truth and the light and follow Axl - there's no midway point. Axl's never done anything wrong, ever. And Slash has always been wrong.
Slash and Duff were just replacements. Guns would've been as big - if not bigger with Tracii - without the egos and musical myopia of Slash and Duff holding Axl back even in 1987. True facts.

What do you get out of blatantly trolling this board? Some sick satisfaction?

Facts are that GNR was formed with Axl, Izzy, Ole, Rob and Tracii, it didn't last long and wasn't successful but it is a fact and remains a fact even if it upsets some.

for god's sake, stop it already. you are the most insulting and derogative person on this board and keep complainig about others being insulting. comments like "that's what idots say" (I'm paraphraising) and your sperm-comment are what some may call passive aggressiveness. I just don't get why you are allowed to do that?!

That post is called sarcasm. Sarcasm =/= trolling. I know that, in your eyes, everyone who doesn't tow the line 1000% = a troll and a hater, but let me explain something:
I have every single Guns N' Roses album. Yes, including Chinese Democracy.
I've been to the shows on several occasions when life circumstances and money permitted.
My personal preference is the Use Your Illusion albums and era, but I like all eras. I still have my VHS tape of the 2002 VMA's performance.

Just because someone holds different opinions from you doesn't make them a fake fan or a troll.

Okay, but why does the fact that GNR was at its most successful and relevant when the band had Axl, Slash, Duff and Izzy upset others - even though it's also a fact? We all have our facts. I don't get off on belittling GN'R members. You do.

Okay, what age were you in 1995-6?

If you weren't born nor in the oven you were most likely still sperm. It's not derogatory, it is a biological fact.

Did you not know that? :D

You can start a car without windshield wipers, but they're not important ingredients to go forward.
Slash and Duff were. Or are you going to deny that Slash and Duff were important to Guns N' Roses' success?

Does it bother you that new GN'R will never be as successful as Slash and Duff era Guns was?

Original could be the first people in a particular position no matter how short lived or it could be the first group of people to actually create under the name. I think both are valid therefore the argument holds little validity. I probably slightly side with the AFD being 'original' as I would view the first guys as like a draft copy before the first print but you know the argument that the AFD line up technically isn't the original band holds water too.

It seems to upset you to the point that you spend days and days going on and on about how important Slash and Duff were.

While nobody claimed the opposite! Fucking priceless.  :hihi:

Looks like you associate Guns N' Roses with certain people. That's it.
So Guns N' Roses can't evolve because 4/5 of the people were fired or quit.

Some have an emotional attachment to a specific line up, and then that's the only one that matters to them.

To me, GN'R has kept evolving, changing or whatever you wanna call it since 1985. The first big change was when Tracii, Ole and Rob were gone. The next one was Steven getting the boot and then Izzy leaving and so on.... Now, let's see how this gets twisted into me hating the old band!



/jarmo

Never said or thought you hated any version of the band.

sidenote:
in 1995 I was going to school. already back then I had more manners than you in your forties because my parents were good ones. plus, I was not THAT self-indulgent and ignorant.

:hihi: your sole intention is to belittle and to insult your discussion partner. that's a fact and you know it, but you're not being honest about it. sad.

EmilyRose: "these kinda arguments are always brought up by stupid people. but hey, I didn't call you stupid..."

ridiculous.

for now, I spend enough time talking to you. I'll come back and talk to you when I feel so. but it's the best to ignore you and I think that works pretty well for a lot of Users on this forum.

I think there were two evolutions of guns n roses

You have the original one up until 1995

Then you have the version that Axl started over again.  Once he quit the original

My issue with it... is that you guys are so hung up on the name and not the entity..

Same thing with the evolution of "Guns N Roses" ... GNR didn't evolve ... it completely changed.. there's a big difference. It just used the same band name on the concert tickets. Axl... he evolved his sound... the band...they left...and then the band that changed the sound... they left too ! (which is truly unfortunate)


Let me re phrase... I don't have an issue with it, I could care less what a handful of you think about what the "original" band consisted of. I just don't understand why the name of the band seems to be so confusing. It's all moot doe.

No, the original lineup did not last until 1995.

This might come in handy for you :D
http://www.heretodaygonetohell.com/history/index.html

Disclaimer: By knowing and acknowledging the actual history of GNR does not in any way mean I dislike,or discredit any member of any lineup.

Decay is also a gradual change, of course...  :P

I wasn't talking about the line-up.

I was talking about the business structure of Guns.

From all accounts is was pretty straight forward up until 1995 (regardless of the lineups)   People came and went

But

It was only in 1995, when Axl quit.  That the evolution began.  Were all full time members were asked to become employees under Axls new GNR

No, I disagree- GNR has been evolving since Tracii and Rob and Ole were replaced by Slash, Duff, and Steven.

It continued when Steven was replaced by Matt, Dizzy was added, and again when Izzy was replaced by Gilby and so on.

There is no such thing as "new GNR" it is GNR.

According to Axl himself he thinks of it as "Old Guns" and "Guns".

Right, from the 08 chats :)

Yes, so it seems he thinks there's some divide there.

Is Axl disrespecting the old line-up by calling them "Old Guns" then? Just using the same logic the other way around.

For the record, I don't think either Axl or the fans calling the line-ups Old- or New-GNR are doing so in disrespect, it's generally to differantiate between pre- and post-1995 Guns I think.

No, I disagree- GNR has been evolving since Tracii and Rob and Ole were replaced by Slash, Duff, and Steven.

It continued when Steven was replaced by Matt, Dizzy was added, and again when Izzy was replaced by Gilby and so on.

There is no such thing as "new GNR" it is GNR.

Again

I wasn't talking about the line ups changing.   

Guns lineup has changed from 85-2015...   Yes..  I don't know why you keep bringing this up, as it has nothing to do with what I am talking about

There is a different between New GNR and NUGNR.

NUGNR comes from the period NUMETAL was in the radio and everyone with a bit of good taste hated it.

NUGNR is derogatory. New GNR is not.

No, I disagree- GNR has been evolving since Tracii and Rob and Ole were replaced by Slash, Duff, and Steven.

It continued when Steven was replaced by Matt, Dizzy was added, and again when Izzy was replaced by Gilby and so on.

There is no such thing as "new GNR" it is GNR.

And there is a difference between talking about how the business structure worked in guns apposed to how the lineups are

I refer to old gnr, as 1995 and prior.  When there was actual full time band members with equal say.  (was!, not all)

I refer to new gnr, as 1995 to present.  After Axl quit, started the business fresh, tried to make everyone employees and gone where the full time band members with equal say..

that's where you and me disagree in our point of view. You consider GNR to be GNR when it got the name. I consider GNR to be GNR when it got an identity. You seem to consider evolution as the revolving door of musicians, I consider evolution the sound of the band. One band member leaving may not impact the sound of the band, but deciding to drastically change the sound of the band does. However I don't think Axl actually achieved it. Adding little farts to better doesnt make it industrial. To me Chinese Democracy does sound like a GNR album. That's why I say there's not much evolution.
UYI evolved much more from AFD, not because it had Matt Sorum, but because Axl and Slash drove their sound in uncharted territory

Nobody added "little farts" to the music. It's very clear what your direction and agenda is here.

I personally think Chinese Democracy was an evolution from the UYIs much like they were from Appetite.

Nobody added "little farts" to the music. It's very clear what your direction and agenda is here.

I personally think Chinese Democracy was an evolution from the UYIs much like they were from Appetite.

I have no Agenda, but saying I do is a good way to not add anything to the conversation.  I love better. But I would rather listen to the Demos and the live performances than the song on the album, those do not have those unnecessary little farts that sound bad on my very good audio technica headphones.

I like Chinese.

But to call it a evolution, is a stretch

It is just a different album than that of Appetite or the UYI.   Not a evolution

I don't make the division there and most certainly don't employ your questionable and debatable constraints and descriptions.

With new gnr post 1995, what I see most evident with the band are.  Lack of new music and lack of press.  Prior to 1995, the band was making/releasing music all the time.  The band was constantly doing interviews.  After 1995, when Axl became the boss, it seems we have gotten a lot less music and lot less interviews

That is subjective, that is the way you see it but not the way I do.

I see it as a natural progression and evolution from the illusions.

For myself, to be a evolution of music, there would have to be a continuum of musicians in the band.....  With guns there is only one member who has continuously been in the line up..   So to call the albums a evolution is wrong.  They are just different.  And to call them a evolution of just Axl, is also wrong.  Because CD is the first guns album he had full power and say on.   Now of the next album came out with the exact same musicians on it as CD and has a different sound, that could be argued as a evolution

How am I supposed to take you seriously when you describe the music as having "little farts" added?

Laughable.

It's certainly a stronger argument.

For myself, to be a evolution of music, there would have to be a continuum of musicians in the band.....  With guns there is only one member who has continuously been in the line up..   So to call the albums a evolution is wrong.  They are just different.  And to call them a evolution of just Axl, is also wrong.  Because CD is the first guns album he had full power and say on.   Now of the next album came out with the exact same musicians on it as CD and has a different sound, that could be argued as a evolution

Because that's the most accurate description of what those effects sound like. LIke little air explosions piercing through my headphones. Little air explosions= little farts. Im not saying Axl farted on the album.

I was trying to say the same thing. You said it better.

Although like I said, I dont think they have to have the exact same musicians? But to change the roster altogether except one, then yeah its completely different. Also, whether anyone likes it or not, some members are more important than others in that distinction.

On the Illusions Matt and Dizzy played, they were not on AFD-
If you weren't around back then, people complained about UYIs not being the same as Appetite.

Did the sound evolve because the people in the band changed, or did the people change because the sound evolved?





/jarmo

On the Illusions Matt and Dizzy played, they were not on AFD-
If you weren't around back then, people complained about UYIs not being the same as Appetite.

You are the only one today saying the sound of Guns has evolved.   I am saying it has just changed

It changed from AFD to UYI to CD.   There was no evolution.  Like you said there was different musicians on different albums.

It's certainly a stronger argument.

Did the sound evolve because the people in the band changed, or did the people change because the sound evolved?





/jarmo

I was around and do remember, but the people who complaint was a vast minority considering the hit they had with November rain, even Matt Sorum admitted he was wrong to criticize November rain before it came out when he saw how much people liked it.

There were people that complained about every album, every single one had its detractors because people are creatures of habit.

How dare a band evolve , it's outrageous! :D

The sound never has evolved, it has changed.  And that's in part to having new musicians in the band and having Axl in the band as the boss

Did the people in the band leave because the music changed?  Maybe...   I think a few of the members left because Axl wanted to go in a different direction with the sound of the band.   They were employees at that time.  Not equal band members.  Would they of left if they were not employees?   I am not sure.  

You could argue that Axls musical tastes have evolved and have changed the direction of Guns..  But that will leas to the argument that Guns is ultimately the Axl Rose project...  

And again you cant even say his style has evolved on albums because he only had full control on CD, no other album

So was the CD a evolution of sound for guns or Axl?  No    It could of been the sound Axl has always wanted.  How is that a evolution if it is basically his fist album, with his first real sound

The true test of a evolution of sound would be the next album from guns.  If it had all the same players on it from CD, and moved in a different dirrection

A lot of the songs on the UYI albums were written around the time of AFD, some even before AFD, some could of even been put on AFD...  How is that possibly evolving?   

A lot of the songs on the UYI albums were written around the time of AFD, some even before AFD, some could of even been put on AFD...  How is that possibly evolving?   

The sound never has evolved, it has changed.  

Some people may confuse the sound of a band with them just choosing specific songs to make an album sound cohesive.

That makes very little sense. The whole idea of evolving is that it doesn't stay the same. If something doesn't stay the same, it's changed....

Since you're so hung up on who plays on the songs, instead of the songs themselves.
How do you explain the fact that the songs Axl wrote in the 1980s doesn't sound exactly as the ones he wrote for Chinese Democracy? Is it just down to the fact that he had others around him pushing him in a certain direction? Is that what you're saying?

Or is this because he changed? Or is it because he evolved as an artist? The same can be said about any current or former band member as well.



/jarmo

Who are those people that confuse "the sound of a band with them just choosing specific songs to make an album sound cohesive?" :D

That makes very little sense. The whole idea of evolving is that it doesn't stay the same. If something doesn't stay the same, it's changed....

Since you're so hung up on who plays on the songs, instead of the songs themselves.
How do you explain the fact that the songs Axl wrote in the 1980s doesn't sound exactly as the ones he wrote for Chinese Democracy? Is it just down to the fact that he had others around him pushing him in a certain direction? Is that what you're saying?

Or is this because he changed? Or is it because he evolved as an artist? The same can be said about any current or former band member as well.



/jarmo

The only way the music can really evolve is if there is a steady lineup from one album to the next.  

Agreed.

But my god, let's just stop dancing around it.  It you don't fully commit to the "evolve" premise, you have to admit Axl sacked the band that made them all famous and is continuing on with a sham version of GNR with a bunch of dudes that don't have anything to with their legacy.

Isn't that really what this is about, end of the day?

Yet I do see what he is trying to say. Its a valid point of view.

The way I see it he's talking about people.
Did GNR lead guitar evolve throughout the years or, did it change? He says it changed because the person doing the lead guitar playing changed. From Slash, to Buckethead, Robin, DJ Ashba?.

IF it had been Slash all those years, and he is displaying a different sound between 1987 and 2015 in the same band, then the way he sees it there's evolution.
IF we're talking about the lead guitar sound of the band between 1987 and 2015, he sees it as changing, not evolving, because its not the same person.

Axl has evolved...  I hope he has, he is around 50 years old and shouldn't be writing songs or singing like he was when he was in his early 20s.  But is Guns N Roses, just Axl?   You cant say the sound of guns has evolved, just because one member that was around from day one has.

I am not hung up on any artist or musician or who plays the songs.  I love the music.  But to say the Guns N Roses has evolved because the music on CD is different than AFD, is wrong.  The music is just that, different.  It changed..

Haha, well that's a bit unfair at the dudes that worked on Chinese Democracy. Im sure they went in giving it their best. Which is why I was disappointed when Tommy said he was grateful for the ''Gig'', like it was a job that paid well. Maybe he saw it like that all along but I don't think all of them did. DJ certainly didnt, but he left.  :(

Axl, in his own words, said that post 1995 was to be a new band which shared the name Guns N' Roses...Are we to dismiss Axl's own words and claim that this band, and the pre-1995 band, are one and the same?

"This will serve as notice [that] effective [...] Decemeber 30th 1995, I will withdraw from the partnership. [...] I intend to use the name 'Guns N' Roses' in connection with a new group which I will form."

Yeah, the logic is that since you changed the players, the sound can't have evolved.
Even though there's the one guy there who's been the constant through all the changes.

I just don't agree with that.

So you admit the fact that the constant who's been in the band since day one has evolved, you can see that. But you can't see that because he has evolved, it would affect the music he writes for the band called Guns N' Roses, and thus making the band's music evolve as a result....

The way you see it is that the chef in the kitchen went to Europe for a year to study cooking, but when he got back, he's still just making the same cheese burgers as he was cooking before the trip.... Even though the kitchen staff changed and they're introduced new ingredients for the items on the menu. They didn't evolve because people learned and experienced new things, they changed!  :P

Was that one guy responsible for the the sound?

The constant who has been in the band since day one - was he responsible for the guitar sound, drum sound, bass sound on every record? Was he in charge since day one?
Where do you see a logical progression from anything on AFD-Illusions to Shackler's Revenge?

Appetite through Illusions fall under the common denominator of 'hard rock'....Shackler's Revenge, for example, is industrial metal.

And you're dismissing what he said in 2008!

Personally I call this Guns and the Illusions or previous lineups old Guns.

Same band name, different line ups. :)



/jarmo

GN?R evolved from AFD through the Illusions, before imploding.

Axl started a new band, made up of entirely different personnel(save for Dizzy) and gave it the same name.

The sound from Illusions to Chinese is not a natural evolution. Some may think it sounds like one in their heads, and that?s all well and good, but those albums were made by two separate bands.
One band can?t evolve the sound of an others.

Yeah, the logic is that since you changed the players, the sound can't have evolved.
Even though there's the one guy there who's been the constant through all the changes.

I just don't agree with that.





So you admit the fact that the constant who's been in the band since day one has evolved, you can see that. But you can't see that because he has evolved, it would affect the music he writes for the band called Guns N' Roses, and thus making the band's music evolve as a result....

The way you see it is that the chef in the kitchen went to Europe for a year to study cooking, but when he got back, he's still just making the same cheese burgers as he was cooking before the trip.... Even though the kitchen staff changed and they're introduced new ingredients for the items on the menu. They didn't evolve because people learned and experienced new things, they changed!  :P


 


/jarmo

Just an example.
Who brought Estranged to the band?
Did that sound like any of the songs on Appetite to you?

One person isn't necessarily solely responsible for an evolution in a band's sound, unless he's the sole song writer, but one person sure can influence it and push others in a certain direction.

If you honestly think the difference between AFD and UYI is mostly because of somebody else than Axl, that's fine. I don't agree....  :)

Or, same band name, different band?
He even used the term: "new group". New band. Same brand.
It signifies there was in deed, a separation and a difference pre and post 1995 structurally or internally.
One was a band of equal partners called Guns N' Roses. The partners changed slightly in this time period, but legally and in terms of it being a partnership, it was the same entity. Prior to 1995, Axl, Slash and Duff were equal shareholders in the enterprise known as "Guns N' Roses." To use business language, they were all Presidents of the same company.
Then in 1995, Axl withdrew from that legal framework and formed a new company with the same name - but a company at which he would be the sole shareholder/CEO.
From 1995 onward, it was a different legal entity, a different legal partnership consisting of one sole legal band member, and under him, contracted employees who could be hired or fired at said sole shareholder's discretion.

Who helped craft Estranged beyond a simple piano-only piece?
Yes, it did by virtue of the same guitar player and bassist playing on the songs. Slash's guitar tone is very unique and quite signature.

So, Coma, a piece Slash brought in mostly complete - that was Axl pushing the others in a certain direction?
Don't Damn Me, Civil War, Bad Apples, to name a few - songs composed entirely musically by Slash, Duff and Izzy in Chicago when Axl (by EVERY account) was absent - that was Axl pushing the others in a certain direction?

Even if your argument was true - that Axl was leading/guiding the others - Slash, Duff, Izzy - had signature elements to their own personal sound, which they brought with them to all the records they play on, both styles of playing and styles of writing which remained in place from album to album.

The people doing the "pigeonholing"

GN?R evolved from AFD through the Illusions, before imploding.

Axl started a new band, made up of entirely different personnel(save for Dizzy) and gave it the same name.

The sound from Illusions to Chinese is not a natural evolution. Some may think it sounds like one in their heads, and that?s all well and good, but those albums were made by two separate bands.
One band can?t evolve the sound of an others.

I don't understand why people are getting so up in arms over the fact that guns hasn't evovled.

I see a bunch of people who have a hard time giving Axl any credit..... Surprise!
The band changed, the sound didn't evolve, it's not the same band, it's not the same legal entity blah blah blah.

The band's sound evolved out of necessity. Certain people quit.
These things happen. It's been almost 20 years now....

Why didn't you answer my question?
Was it that difficult?

And those songs really sound a lot different from Appetite?

So answer this, who brought in piano to GN'R, a "guitar band"? Why was Dizzy added to the band?

Yeah, you don't really like giving Axl a whole lot of credit do you?

So if Axl was just guns n roses I would say you are right.  If Axl evolves then the whole band guns n roses evolves.  But to me the band guns n roses is way more than just one guy

Also Axl may have evolved.  But his position in the band was not always what it is today.  Up until 1995 he was a equal partner with a couple of other band members after that he has been his own boss.    

I think if Axl had been in total power pack in the 1980s and mid 90s the albums and music would of sounded totally different
for something to evolve it has to be something.  The musicians on CD (other than dizzy/Axl), never wrote a guns album before.   How could they evolve?   Slash evolved into buckethead some how?  It's just a different sound written by different players who are guns n roses.  Directed and produced in a way that Axl wanted.    now of the next album is by the same players and sounds different you can say it's a evolution

If there is different players that sound different on the next album.   Its not a evolution.  It's just a album that sounds different

Especially if for some reason we get a one off reunion album written by Axl duff and slash.   I guess the band would of evolved so much that it's starting right back from where it started

Axl stripped down guns and started something fresh.   It was great I love CD and the love concerts I have been to.  But it was no evolution.   It was a band on its own

Axl evolved, therefore GNR evolved. Pretty simple concept to grasp.

Goal posts shifted. Did I say Axl had no credit? No. I didn't. But, in a band, it's not just one guy's voice leading the way.
The credits are right there in the booklets. It's easy to see Guns N' Roses from 1985-1995 was not one guy directing everyone else. It was five/six guys lending their respective voices to craft a whole. Not one guy saying "this is how this song is going to be played, you will play your solo this way..."

The entire band sans one original member quit. And as such the sound completely changed. Not evolved. An evolution would be from Appetite to Illusions.


I did answer your question. You simply didn't like the answer.


Yes, Coma does. Locomotive, again another Chicago piece, does. Both are prog-metal pieces.


Axl added piano to a band which was already incorporated piano into its music since Lies (see OIAM). If you listen to the end of OIAM - an acoustic/electric song which closes out with some added piano for texture - and then play Civil War, an acoustic/electric song which uses piano for texture - you can see evolution. You can see continuity. I don't see any continuity from anything on past GN'R records that leads to Shackler's Revenge or If The World.

Dizzy was added because Axl liked the piano touches he added to certain songs that weren't written with piano in mind. But, even with the addition of piano, Guns N' Roses remained a riff/guitar based band. There are 4 songs out of 30 on the Illusions in which the piano is a prominent, driving force in the music.


I give Axl as much credit as the liner notes allow me to. He was 1/5th or 1/6th of a band of equals.

All Guns N' Roses' records prior to Chinese have the following commonalities:

-Guitar based sound
-Hard Rock influence/centerpiece of sound
-Vocals/songwriting by Axl
-Lead/rhythm guitar work/songwriting by Slash
-Bass work/songwriting by Duff
-Rhythm Guitar/Songwriting by Izzy
-Production by Mike Clink

CD only has one thing in common with the above factors.
Note too that all GN'R albums except for Chinese Democracy featured lyrical and melodic contributions by members other than Axl, whereas on CD, Axl is solely responsible for all lyrics and melodies.

If the band was called The Axl Rose band.  You would be right. 

But

Since the band is called Guns N Roses.  You are wrong.  The band is way bigger than just one guy

Goal posts shifted. Did I say Axl had no credit? No. I didn't. But, in a band, it's not just one guy's voice leading the way.
The credits are right there in the booklets. It's easy to see Guns N' Roses from 1985-1995 was not one guy directing everyone else. It was five/six guys lending their respective voices to craft a whole. Not one guy saying "this is how this song is going to be played, you will play your solo this way..."

I did answer your question. You simply didn't like the answer.

Yes, Coma does. Locomotive, again another Chicago piece, does. Both are prog-metal pieces.

Axl added piano to a band

I give Axl as much credit as the liner notes allow me to. He was 1/5th or 1/6th of a band of equals.

Newsflash: The liner notes on Appetite don't accurately reflect who was actually responsible for the songs.

Adler even got courtesy writing credit and didn't write a thing.

Since you REFUSE to answer questions I ask you, I gotta assume something right?

No, but one guy had ideas..... One guy wanted to add a keyboard player, one guy wanted to make big videos that would make an impact and be remembered for decades....

And the rest?

Thank you for your answer.

Funny that.
Even most casual rock music fans are able to give him more credit than you...  :hihi:

The bottom line is, if one of the main songwriters evolves in his craft, then chances are it will rub off on the band's output. The difference in the sound might be bigger if new people are brought in.
This could also be done by using a different producer for example.

Haha.
I think the real argument here is that some of you have a hard time giving Axl any credit for anything.

Yeah, but Axl was 1/5 of the band. Not more important than anybody else!
Even though the reason Sweet Child O' Mine was created was because of him. But, no. Not more important.

Definitely not.
The song writing credits say so.

End of sarcasm.


/jarmo

From 08-

Axl: "About following particular styles, yes I do feel there are parameters with GUNS as opposed to not being or in GUNS. 'Chinese Democracy' is, in my opinion, an evolution not necessarily how each from the past would but how the music and intent could and did.

Read more at http://www.blabbermouth.net/news/axl-rose-why-i-am-continung-to-use-name-guns-n-roses/#5Y1RT7s77M440mXx.99

Let's go by this very's sites credits then:

Welcome to the Jungle:
Music: Slash, Rose; Lyrics: Rose

It's So Easy:
Music: McKagan/Arkeen; Lyrics: McKagan, Arkeen

Nightrain:
Music: Stradlin, McKagan, Rose, Slash; Lyrics: McKagan, Rose

Out Ta Get Me:
Music: Slash, Rose, Stradlin; Lyrics: Rose, Stradlin

Mr. Brownstone:
Music: Stradlin, Slash; Lyrics: Stradlin

Paradise City:
Music: McKagan, Slash, Rose, Stradlin; Lyrics: Rose, McKagan

My Michelle:
Music: Rose, Stradlin; Lyrics: Stradlin

Think About You:
Music: Stradlin; Lyrics: Stradlin

Sweet Child O' Mine:
Music: Rose, Slash, Stradlin; Lyrics: Rose

You're Crazy:
Music: Slash, Stradlin, Rose; Lyrics: Rose, Stradlin

Anything Goes:
Music: Stradlin, Rose, Weber; Lyrics: Stradlin, Rose

Rocket Queen:
Music: Rose, Slash, Stradlin; Lyrics: Rose

From 08-

Axl: "About following particular styles, yes I do feel there are parameters with GUNS as opposed to not being or in GUNS. 'Chinese Democracy' is, in my opinion, an evolution not necessarily how each from the past would but how the music and intent could and did.

Read more at http://www.blabbermouth.net/news/axl-rose-why-i-am-continung-to-use-name-guns-n-roses/#5Y1RT7s77M440mXx.99

Axl's opinion is that his vocal performance sucked on Lies....Does that make it factually, objectively true? I would certainly disagree with Axl's opinion there...But maybe you do? Because Axl said so?

Not the key phrase, stuck in the middle there - "In my opinion..."
Axl's opinion is that his vocal performance sucked on Lies....Does that make it factually, objectively true? I would certainly disagree with Axl's opinion there...But maybe you do? Because Axl said so?

really? he said that? I adore his vocals on Lies  ;D

You are trying to devalue and discredit the main influence of the band , it is laughable.

Axl also said he was touched by the overwhelming support he received for blowing off the Hall Of Fame.

Unless he only polled his immediate household, that wasn't exactly a super accurate picture of the situation.

I don't think he is trying to devalue or discredit Axl. However he is trying to say he was not the MAIN influence in the band the way you like to believe.

You are defeating your own argument.

Those credits clearly show how integral, and how vital Axl's lyrics AND Melodies are and were to GNR.

You are trying to devalue and discredit the main influence of the band , it is laughable.

He was the main influence, you are undervaluing what he actually contributed, how he influenced the others and what he brought in.

Not true, he had a great deal of support and people that understood his decision.  
The minority was vocal, just like on the internet.

And the other guys had no ideas? No vision? Is that what you're saying?
So, one guy had an idea for videos...Cool. But as Axl himself admitted, his talent on the guitar (at least in the early 1990s) was pretty limited...So from whence came all that guitar and bass work which is also remembered decades later?

Garden of Eden - thrash metal
Pretty Tied Up - Funk Rock
Double Talkin' Jive - Punk Rock
Dust N' Bones - Classic Rock
14 Years - Classic Rock

Did the band become piano driven as a result, or did the piano only drive 4 songs out of 30?

Go outside of the GN'R forums and most people (on regular music forums) aren't very fond of Axl.

So, again, all that guitar work, those riffs, those solos - Axl's doing?
Or is songwriting a collaborative effort?

If we go by the site's credits, without other songwriting, we don't have the following songs:

It's So Easy:
Music: McKagan/Arkeen; Lyrics: McKagan, Arkeen

Mr. Brownstone:
Music: Stradlin, Slash; Lyrics: Stradlin

Think About You:
Music: Stradlin; Lyrics: Stradlin

We don't get lyrics on the following song without input beyond Axl:

You're Crazy:
Lyrics: Rose, Stradlin

Anything Goes:
Lyrics: Stradlin, Rose

Nightrain:
Music: Lyrics: McKagan, Rose

Paradise City:
Lyrics: Rose, McKagan

And on all other tracks, there are musical songwriting contributions by other members.
There is not one single song on Appetite that is credited to Rose alone. There are several credited to Izzy alone in full.
Without Izzy and Slash's lyrics and melodies, you don't get no Brownstone.

It was a band. Which means no one member is more important than the rest. Axl played his part and helped to craft the song...But so did all the other guys, especially Izzy and Slash.

I'm sure he had his supporters, but you can't know how many, and whether they were a minority or majority.  There were a large number who didn't support him, and the Hall of Fame audience booed him to the point where Billie Joe Armstrong had to halt them.

Not true, he had a great deal of support and people that understood his decision.

The minority was vocal, just like on the internet.

A lot of people know what an insider circle jerk the RRHOF is.

That's a matter of opinion, and that is why some people, me included, disagree with you.
We are not putting Axl down because we give credit to the other guys.

Whose lyrics made SCOM? Who brought in NR? Who brought in Estranged? There are too many items to mention, I suggest you do some research.

Yeah, its not nearly the objective and credible operation Axl's Online Defense Force is, I guess.

Axl's Online Defense Force : Circling The Wagons Since 1996!!

He did not receive wide support.  He was panned just about everywhere, up to and including being booed AT THE ACTUAL EVENT.

Just because Axl says it, it doesn't make it so.  It just means its something he said.

Whose guitar work gave us SCOM's iconic intro and solos? Whose strumming came up with the musical framework of the song to begin with?
Whose solos lifted NR to another level?
Whose soloing and guitar melodies lifted Estranged to another plane, to the point they were thanked personally for the "killer guitar melodies"?

Do you think NR would've been as much of a hit if it was just Axl and a piano for 9 minutes?

Again...band effort. Collaboration. Group effort....No member more important the next....

No, it is not opinion -it is very apparent if you are actually aware of the details.

Whose lyrics made SCOM? Who brought in NR? Who brought in Estranged? There are too many items to mention, I suggest you do some research.

Whose Lyrics? Are you kidding me ? Are you reducing SCOM to Axl's lyrics? SCOM owes as much to Axl's lyrics as much as it does Slash's incredible solos.

The booing was staged IMO.

You are wrong again.

The booing was staged IMO.

Try and keep up so I don't have to type this twice.

SCOM was a guitar exercise that likely would have stayed that way if left to Slash.

:nervous: :hihi: OH my god, sure lets just make Billy Joe Armstrong feel awkward as fuck just so we can all laugh at Axl.
 :confused:

Conspiracy theory much ?

Nope, there were a lot of events leading up to this that lead me to believe it was staged.

Jann Wenner didn't get his reunion show, the RRHOF is corrupt.

Sorry for having a little bit more of a life than you  :hihi:
That's just assuming, if Axl wasnt there, who's to say anybody else, Izzy for example wouldn't have picked up the song and added to it to make it succesful, even if different ? parallel galaxy talk isnt very good conversation talk though.

I heard that the sound guy at the VMAs in 2002 was a rogue Slash fan.

It all makes sense!

So now you go to personal insults about "not having a life"
Not surprised, looks bad on you.

Fact is , it was a guitar exercise and would have stayed that way if left up to Slash.

Slash came up with the riff when he was playing around on his guitar. He thought it was silly and wanted nothing to do with it, but Axl loved it and had him keep playing it. Izzy Stradlin added some chords, and the song came together. According to Duff McKagan's 2012 autobiography, Slash always considered it the worst Guns N' Roses song.

Oh, for the love of god...

Sure, sarcasm is a great defense when you are engaged in a battle of wits unarmed.

That's not what I said, I said I had a bit more of a life than you. WHich means you have a life, but I have little bit more of ? Ok?  I think you calling me a nerd is more a straightforward insult than my lil dig at you though.

However that's no fact. You don't know whether that Riff would have stayed like that. As a matter of fact, the way Slash remembers it on his book, He started doing the ''excercise'' and then (I think it was izzy and duff) joined and Axl was upstairs or in another room listening to their playing and wrote the lyrics, and it wasnt until the next day or so that he brought in the lyrics to the rest of the guys. So technically it was not Axl who said.. hey keep playing? it was the other guys hanging around with Slash in that specific moment.
So there goes your theory that it was just an exercise, the exercise became something with the other guys and Axl picked up on that organic something !
 

Emily, you are in full blown "Baghdad Bob" territory here this afternoon.  Mockery seemed the only reasonable response.

Axl had wide support?  The booing at the event was staged?  These are serious responses?

Why stop there?  Let's put our heads together and explain away every bad thing that has ever happened to the man.

Here, I'll start.  James Hetfield asked to be deliberately burned to make Axl take the stage before he was ready.

Now, you go.  

It's still an implied personal insult but if you can't control your nerd rage, I guess it is to be expected :D

Here's a quote from Slash

One afternoon, when the smoke was still clearing from the night before, Duff, Izzy and I were sitting around on the floor --- we didn?t have any furniture anymore --- and I was dicking around with that riff. In all honestly, I don?t really know where the riff came from but, all of a sudden, it started to sound really cool. Izzy started playing acoustic behind it and the chord changes started coming together. Axl was upstairs in his bedroom and he overheard it. A couple of days after we had put together our simple riff/chord structure, Axl said, ?Play that song you guys were playing the other day.? We were like, ?What song?? He goes, ?That one with that do do dodo do doo do do.? He had written a bunch of lyrics to it without us even knowing about it. It came together relatively quickly. We started rehearsing it and we wrote it from one end to the other that night [Classic Rock Revisited, September 2010]

I think you are the queen of implied personal insults in this forum. Nerd Rage? You see, you keep going.
Btw, that quoted text further proves my point. There was already something aside from the ''Exercise''. Axl said, ?Play that song "?. He didnt say do that exercise you were doing. He said play that song.

I like the notion that since Axl isn't a lead guitar player, he apparently can't give any kind of constructive criticism or input on how the guitar melody should go, or the sound of it.
Like humming a melody and having somebody repeat it on an instrument isn't possible.

The guy plays guitar on UYI!
But yet, the one who can't give him any credit, disregard all this...



/jarmo

Axl wrote 'em all, man. Those fucking hacks, Slash, Izzy, Duff? They were just riding his coattails man, his fucking coattails. Axl wrote every lick, riff, and solo man. It's been Axl's gig from the beginning man.

It was an Exercise Slash was playing. It may have continued to be an exercise if left up to Slash.

I think the 'Sweet Child O' Mine' influence pops up because it's a single-note style of mine, especially when I do this octave thing around a melody. I have to give Axl credit, because if he hadn't recognized it as being great, I wouldn't have used it, I thought it was a joke. It was just me doing a lick with chord changes underneath to gave it some movement. Then Axl came in and started singing it. I hated that song until after '88 or '89. We were touring with Aerosmith, and it was such a huge hit you couldn't ignore it [Velvet Revolver, Total Guitar #121 April 2004]

Axl wrote 'em all, man. Those fucking hacks, Slash, Izzy, Duff? They were just riding his coattails man, his fucking coattails. Axl wrote every lick, riff, and solo man. It's been Axl's gig from the beginning man.

It was an Exercise Slash was playing. It may have continued to be an exercise if left up to Slash.

I think the 'Sweet Child O' Mine' influence pops up because it's a single-note style of mine, especially when I do this octave thing around a melody. I have to give Axl credit, because if he hadn't recognized it as being great, I wouldn't have used it, I thought it was a joke. It was just me doing a lick with chord changes underneath to gave it some movement. Then Axl came in and started singing it. I hated that song until after '88 or '89. We were touring with Aerosmith, and it was such a huge hit you couldn't ignore it [Velvet Revolver, Total Guitar #121 April 2004]

Once again, you can't seem to come back with something of substance.

Why do you hate Axl?




/jarmo

Why do you hate Slash, Izzy and Duff?

Why do you hate Slash, Izzy and Duff?