Here Today... Gone To Hell!

Triple post, im sorry.


but as a offtopic sidenote i think not enough fans know that gnr (with axl,slash,dizzy,duff,matt,paul,izzy) had writen a record in 96 and had started to record the album that was planned to be released in 97. that went down when slash quit which led guns to start from zero which became chinese democracy.

so thats one of the reasons why i find axl in a rollercoaster picture awesome.

i should shut up now.

I think "written a record" is a HUGE leap, no?

Were their vocals?  Were there any arrangements to speak of?  Or was it riffs and jamming?

This.  Both Axl & Slash have confirmed as much.  I'm sure there were some cool riffs that would have morphed into full blown songs, given the chance, but that's it.  Axl said it was during those sessions that Slash brought in the "Fall to Pieces" riff, but once Axl wanted to work on it, Slash lost interest.

What throws me off is in the Slash interview where he states that they were currently working on mostly Axl's stuff.   What songs were those??

Wow.  This is my second banishment, just today.

Anyone have any threads they want moved?  Just PM me and ask me to chime in.  That should do it.

Poor you!
In a topic about pictures, you go and find the one post that's not about pictures, that was posted weeks ago, and reply.


So go ahead, discuss the topic at hand.
You're welcome. :)



/jarmo

Why I'm even bothering to respond to this, I don't even know, but I responded to the last post in the thread, Colombo.  Yes, there had not been a new post in the thread in over 2 weeks.

But hey, last thing you want is traffic, right?  Best to quash these pesky conversations people keep trying to have.  A message board is no place for such things, I say.

Once again, to point out how wrong you are sometimes. Not that you'd admit to being wrong Mr "I'll be the first to admit I was wrong"....

Your reply:


The post above your reply (ON TOPIC):


Now, check the times and tell me AGAIN that no new posts were made in the last two weeks.
You're welcome.

What's that? You were wrong? Noooo..... Impossible. That never happens because you'd be the first to admit you were wrong.



/jarmo

Jarmo, let me break it down for you.

You have 26 threads on your first page.  A mere 5 of them have posts from today.  5.  And the ones that don't have a post from today, haven't one in several days.  And it gets worse as you go down the page.

Down the page, is where I found this one about the pics.  And I was only searching down the page because there is no traffic here.  Yes, a thread on your first page had not seen action in 2 weeks.  Awesome, right?

So I responded to the last post made, WHICH WAS TWO WEEKS AGO.  I didn't go digging anything up.  Its just that this is such a ghost town, no one had been here to post anything.

I hardly posted some out of line thing either.  In fact, having just checked it out, the last few posts before mine that just HAD to be moved don't have pics either.  The horror!!

Let's say what it is.  Its selective enforcement by you because I give you a hard time sometimes.  Its cool, its your board, not mine.  But cut the shit, hmmm?

Haha.
You amuse me.
Please check the times again and explain to me how the times point to the fact that the last on topic post was made roughly 1:20 before your off topic reply...

If anybody needs to cut something it's you.
Poor you, aren't you getting enough attention here?  :-\


And also, what about that album? Don't care to discuss it anymore?




/jarmo

At the time I posted it I thought it was the last post there. 

If your big "gotcha" is that it was the second to last post there and not the last one, so haha, well...good on you.  That sure changes everything I typed in my last post about the lack of any conversation around here. 

GAME : CHANGED

Somebody was wrong, but somebody has a problem admitting it and tries to make jokes about it instead.

Business as usual.  :hihi:




/jarmo

So I'm right?

Your big "gotcha" is that I claimed I was responding to the last post, when I was actually responding to the second to last post.  Well, I guess I've been had.

And everything else I said, no comment?  I mean you are here all puffing out your chest, it seems.  Seems you want to chat, so let's chat.  No comment that you can empty a fucking gun at this place in the middle of any given day and not hit anybody?  You can't go 5 threads without coming upon a thread that doesn't have a response since last Friday?

Nothing on that?  Was I also "wrong" about that?

It's difficult to explain common sense to someone who's not familiar with the concept.

I'm not interested in the same discussions in every topic, no matter how popular they seem to you.
If a topic is about PICTURES, you should stick to that.

I'm sorry for offending you by taking out the posts about the "lost album". I find that that discussion has no place among pictures, for those who are into looking at, pictures, in a topic about, pictures!
Does not make sense? Ok.

Also, if a topic is about something else and you want to discuss what year you prefer to another year, chances are that will get taken out. Simple.


Maybe the issue is the fact that you haven't been around a lot, so you come in and think you can do as you wish when in reality we operate in certain ways and we have done so for quite some time.

In short, stay on topic.  : ok:


Maybe you love to discuss the topics that have been around since the dawn of the GN'R online message boards, but respect the fact that not everybody shares your enthusiasm for them.  :peace:



/jarmo

Anything?

We've already moved away from the obvious mass of people in the big room.  Its just you and I talking now.

No comment?

Jeez you must be bored.

I've explained myself, I'm not gonna change the policy to bend over for people who want to discuss the same things over and over all in the name of hits.
Simple.

Some like it, some don't.



/jarmo

Well, that's three cracks you've had to answer the same question.  You clearly don't want to, for obvious reasons.  And that's OK.

I know your rules and do try and follow them.  I will continue to do so.

Just as I will continue to expect you to fuck with my shit because I get on your nerves.  As I said, its your board. 

If you could ask a simple question without smart ass remarks, maybe you'd get an answer sooner.

It's about R-E-S-P-E-C-T....




/jarmo

Hey...give a little get a little, brother.

Anyway, this conversation has just about run its course, I think.  Don't worry, there will be other fights.

Do you think it was recorded in late 1993? It was released in December 1994.




/jarmo

December 1994: Symptahy For The Devil
February 1995: Snakepit, which included songs that were Slash's idea of the next GN'R record.





/jarmo

I rather like their cover of 'Sympathy'. 

But hearing the backstory about how it affected the band should bum out any fan.  What the hell Axl was thinking, I'll never know.  Erasing Slash's rhythm parts without telling him, and then having his buddy Paul (who Slash wanted nothing to do with) put his parts in was a horrendous decision.  Total slap in the face.

As for these supposed sessions that may have produced a new GNR record, as others have already said, it wasn't like we were talking finished songs here.  Getting Axl to lay down vocals seems to be like pulling teeth.  For all the tweaking and changes Axl did on the songs on 'Chinese', never did he record new vocals.  Those vocal tracks on 'I.R.S.' and 'Catcher' never changed.  And they were done, when, 1999?

The band had no second guitar player. They were supposed to be a one guitar band because Slash wanted it that way?

http://www.heretodaygonetohell.com/articles/showarticle.php?articleid=82




Also, why was Slash playing Izzy's parts on the Use Your Illusion albums? If you attack someone for doubling your guitar parts, why did he do the same on those albums?

http://www.heretodaygonetohell.com/articles/showarticle.php?articleid=16





/jarmo

In Slash's book he says it was recorded sometime in 1994. It was one of the final attempts to work together as a group before he left.

The reason to sneak back in under cover of night to secretly erase his parts and put Paul's over Slash's is obvious.  Its because he knows Slash would tell him no fucking way.  Not necessarily that it couldn't be another guy, but Slash was clear he wanted nothing to do with this particular guy.

Doing it the way Axl did it was completely unprofessional.  But that's just in a business sense.  On a personal level, you don't have the stones to go to Slash man to man and suggest this?

Apparently not.  You do it on your own, tell no one, and then let Slash find out when he hears it once released and let the chips fall where they may.

Axl fucked this one up.  I know that tends to be verboten around here, but any objective analysis of the situation will conclude Axl went about this the wrong way.

If this was just another day in the life of you or me and you don't want to work with somebody. It's fine. But what's your alternative? What's your suggestion? How are you gonna fix it?

We never heard anything about that. What was Slash's "plan"? All we heard was how horrible things were and he left.

There's a problem that you don't like, but you offer no possible solutions. And then you spend years complaining about how unfair it was?




/jarmo

Its pretty simple, Jarmo.

If you have another theory as to why Axl felt he had to do this in secret and not tell anyone else, I'd love to hear it.  You already know my stance, which you apparently reject.  So let's hear why Axl did it that way, as you see it.

Along similar lines, if you have another theory as to doing it the way Axl did it is acceptable, I'd love to hear that too.  Again, my theory that you reject is that this was neither professional from a business standpoint, not appropriate from a personal level towards a fellow bandmate of equal stature.  So let's also hear how what Axl did is OK, as you see it.

I have been neither nasty in this post, nor a smartass, which are the reasons you usually give to duck my questions.  Please extend me the courtesy of answering me.

Do you see why there's some issues with just believing somebody is unhappy about a situation yet hasn't been able to offer any kind of ideas of how he wanted things to go from there?

I'm not sure if things were done in "secret". If I post something here while you're away, am I doing it in secret? Not really.


The theory I have is that Axl did what he thought needed to be done since nobody else seemed to be into doing anything.



/jarmo

I think Slash laid down both tracks and the song was done.

I also know that Slash wanted nothing to do with Paul and made that known.  Its literally the exact reason Axl did this behind his back, because he knew he'd never go for it.

As for bringing in another guy, why did it have to be Paul?  Was that going to be productive?  Forcing a guy on the others that they don't want in their band?


They were absolutely done in secret.  This is not even up for debate.

At no point did Axl inform anyone what he was doing.  That is the very definition of secret.



And you find this appropriate?

At that time in the band, Axl, Slash, and Duff are all on equal footing in the band hierarchy.  But Axl deciding to do something on his own, not have the courtesy to even tell them about it...that's no big deal.  That's ridiculous, come on.

Axl did what he wanted to do, others opinions be damned. 

Well, one of the explanations "why him?" is because nobody else had any other suggestions! If you read the Axl quote, you already know this.

And regarding Slash playing both tracks, what for? As I said, if GN'R up until that point was a two guitar band, why was it right for Slash to make it a one guitar band? Did he tell this to Axl? That his idea of GN'R is to have him play all guitars on studio material and then maybe get somebody to play the songs live? Was that the big plan?

If that's the case, how professional is that? Why would that be his call?





And how do you know this as a fact?



/jarmo

Yep.  It was Paul's involvement in the recording that caused Slash to storm off and record the first Snakepit album, unbeknownst to Axl, which would then be released that very Spring.  Bit of an overeaction, I'd say, and fucked up any real chance of another Axl/Slash album materializing. 

Slash taking his ball and going home, when Axl only wanted to develop the tracks further, was what really ended that era IMO.  Even Slash said in his book that Axl called him and wanted to start developing them, Slash just said "They're gone, dude."  What the fuck?!

No, nor has anyone ever suggested it.

As I recall, that track was done separately.  This was not Lennon & McCartney sitting at the piano banging out a tune.  The band did their parts and Axl did his.  It was not done together all one day in the studio.



This was one song for a soundtrack.  Never, ever, ever has it been suggested that Slash playing on both tracks was anything but a way to get this one track done.  At no time was it decided or ever discussed this would be the way GNR would function going forward.

If Axl had some big problem with Slash doing both parts, the professional way to deal with it discuss it as a band and make the decision as a band how to resolve it.  The completely unprofessional way to do it is to know your stated choice for a second guitar player won't be the choice of the others, so rather than do it openly and above board, you sneak in and do it yourself and don't tell anyone.

In no rational universe is this acceptable.

Even take your own little site here.  I see you have fellow moderators listed.  Suppose one of them came to you with an idea that you weren't really onboard with.  They make their case, you aren't hearing it.

Then, you log on one day and see that they went ahead and did it themselves.  When you ask them about it, they tell you that since you were dragging your feet, they did what they felt was in the best interest of the board.  They had a suggestion and you didn't, so really...this is on you.

If I'm to believe what you are telling me today, your reaction should not only be immediate acceptance of what was done, you'd also have to really put the blame on yourself because it was your own delay in making a decision that forced their hand.

I ask you quite simply...would that be your reaction?  In case its unclear, I doubt that's how you (or anyone) would react to such a thing.



Because it was widely reported and disputed by no one.  Paul's stuff got on there somehow, and it wasn't magic fairys in the night.

It sure didn't help.

But look at things from Slash's perspective.  He brings what wound up being Snakepit's album and Axl is not really enthused about what he's hearing.

You then hear the 'Sympathy' single once its already released, and you discover that your fellow band mate has removed some of your work without telling you, if favor of another guy you have already said you weren't interested in working with.

Would you be terribly amused by you so called friend and so called business partner's actions?  Its hardly inconceivable that you are going to be unhappy.

You're quick to look at it from Slash's perspective and understanding.  ;)

He had songs, didn't want to work on them as a band, took off and recorded them himself. You attack Axl for not being professional and whatnot, but Slash can do what he wants?




Sure, they can record their parts separately. But at what point was it ok for Slash to be the only guitar player on the track?
Since he didn't approve of the other guitar player.




Axl needs to get everything approved by the rest of the band in your opinion, but Slash can record all guitar parts on his own. And that's no big deal.







Good analogy, except you forgot the part where people suggest things and I say "no" without offering anything back. No other options, no feedback. Just "no" .
Also, if this other person thought it was his/her right to do as they wish without consulting me.

If you can't see why that could be frustrating to somebody, then I can't help you.








Widely reported?  :rofl:
At one point it was widely reported that the earth is flat. Doesn't make it a fact! ;)


Let me ask you this then. If somebody doesn't like something that was done, how do you paint a picture that makes you look like a victim. Do you say "Oh, I knew what they were doing" or "it was done without me knowing, I had no idea! It was a secret!"?

Also, how come the guy who wanted control of GN'R (Slash) didn't have any idea this was going on or was gonna happen? Surely he must have known when Axl was gonna be in the studio. Axl's not some superhero who can just appear in the studio without anybody knowing that he'll be there.

Suddenly Slash has no idea what's going on in the studio where his band is recording a new song?

Isn't it naive to assume the guitar player doesn't know what's going on? Unless it fits your picture of the universe. He's a poor victim and evil Axl just secretly recorded the stuff.
Maybe the fact is that he knew, but he didn't want to deal with it? Maybe he had a chance to be there, but he didn't care to?

For a guy who presents songs to GN'R and then just takes off, he doesn't seem so innocent.




/jarmo

I actually didn't know some of Slash's work was cut in favor of Paul's.  I knew that they added in Paul's "answers" to Slash during the solo, but that's all I was aware of.  I agree that Axl should have let Slash know, but did Slash really need to take all of his ideas for the next album and turn them into Snakepit, in turn, without Axl's knowledge?  I would say no.

If Axl flat out rejected the material, that would be a different story.  The truth is that he liked parts, but wanted to develop it further.  Slash even confirmed as much.  Kind of seems like cutting off your nose to spite your face to me.  Slash wanted the songs to be what they were, that pissed him off, and Paul Tobias's inclusion on Sympathy was likely the straw that broke the camel's back.  The rest is history.

So, Axl should've been upfront about Paul's inclusion on Sympathy, and perhaps Slash shouldnt have been so quick to go forward with the Snakepit project.

I call things as I see them.  If roles were reversed on this, I'd be calling out Slash.

It's the action itself that was wrong, not who did it.  



I said Axl was unprofessional for what he did with the 'Sympathy' single, because he was.

Slash, I have no doubt was a bit salty at Axl at the time he did the Snakepit album.  But, Axl said he wasn't interested, so its not like it was totally out of the blue.  He has no real way to forecast that after some time and out of nowhere Axl is going to suddenly be interested.

But, full disclosure, having heard that first Snakepit album...frankly, Axl was right to not be impressed.



Sitting down together and settling on a new band member would have been the best case scenario, obviously.

But I will never accept that a double tracked Slash is not a better option than the bullshit Axl pulled, which is what you are trying to sell here.  

Slash was double tracked on 'Locomotive', a song most of us love.  Its not like this was without precedent.  And, for the I don't know many times its been said by now, nothing Slash did was a secret no one knew about until release.  Its a ridiculous comparison you are attempting to make here.



Slash never hid what he did.  Axl wound up with a final track to fuck with, did he not?  Where was the secrecy?

Its a poor analogy.



So you, in fact, dispute that Axl put Paul on there without telling the others.  That's what you are going with.  Slash actually was told ahead of time and this was all done openly.  Just so we are clear, this is what you are telling me.

We both know that is flat out inaccurate.  You may have to pretend otherwise for your own not exactly secret reasons, but I (nor anyone else) should not be required to share your delusion.



And here we are again.  None of this is accurate.  Axl erased Slash's stuff and put Paul's stuff on there without telling anyone.  End of story.  That is what happened.

I'm damn sure not going to waste any time with a lot of passive aggressive "isn't it funny how..." type comments in hopes of distracting from the basic facts of the matter.

I also don't subscribe to the mindset I need to shut down all common sense and rational thinking because otherwise, god forbid, I have to say something bad about Axl.  Axl was in the wrong here, the end.  I have no problem saying it out loud.  You are either completely incapable or simply unwilling to make that same concession.

All fair, I think.

But in the Jarmoverse, we don't make that concession I bolded.  Axl did absolutely nothing wrong (and, really, was actually a hero in all this if you think about it) and Slash has some god damn balls doing what he did.  Can't trust that guy Slash.  What a dick.

I feel the way you have put it here makes more sense than the conversation I am having with the Big Chief.

Yeah, I obviously don't subscribe to that kind of strange absolutism.  Even Axl said he may not get everything right with Guns, but he's the only one trying to keep it alive and going.  For the most part, I've always agreed with his assessment there.

I think Slash honest to God did not think Guns N' Roses would continue without him and called Axl's bluff by walking.  In the end, Axl didn't blink, Slash did. 

So, when Axl's response was more or less "Don't let the door hit you on the way out." It took everyone off guard, even Duff and Matt, who stuck around for bit.  They always thought eventually Slash would return to the fold, when Axl had no intentions of allowing that to happen.  When they saw that wasn't going to happen, especially after Robin was hired, they both walked.

Not sure I can go that far.

Taking 10 fucking years to do an album doesn't seem to meet that standard.  I speak in more specifics about the years 2003-2005.  We are talking over 1,000 days there.  A long god damn time doing nothing.



Now this, I can agree with.  This was always my impression too.  That the others likely figured this was just a bump in the road.

I see what you're saying.  I do have sympathy for the 2000-02 era when Roy Thomas Baker, at the behest of the label, had them re-record every Goddamn thing to make it sound better.  But why after those sessions, it took another 5 damn years to cook the album I will never understand.

I thought the leaks were a good thing at the time, because they represented hope when things looked bleak.

Yes, there is an actual album coming.  Yes, these are songs they have done.  That sort of thing.

But then to hear the finished product after listening to the leaks all that time, there was a feeling of...wait, this took several entire years extra time?

Agreed.  Anything that could be deemed an imperfection in the leaks is nothing that professional mastering couldn't fix.

I know you're unconvinced that whatever else is "in the can" has vocals and whatnot, but my personal belief is that tracks like "The General, Atlas, Soul Monster, Seven, Thyme, etc" certainly exist with finished vocals, but are in the same state as the 2006-07 leaks: Finished, but not mastered, and thus are open to eternal tweaking and fussing, which knowing Axl, can go on forever....and a day.  ;)

Oh, I certainly have questions about vocals being done.  Absolutely.

But you might be more right than I am.  That they may be at the same stage of the leaks we got in 2007 of the title track, 'Madagascar' and 'Street Of Dreams'.

This give me an idea for a thread.  My first one here.  That I'm just going to put in this folder and spare Jarmo having to move it, haha.

I do, if only because people have discussed listening to "demos" of The General, Atlas Shrugged, Silkworms...And Axl discussed laying down vocals for Soul Monster/Leave Me Alone, not to mention Marco Beltrami talking about working on both that track & Seven, that latter of two he even called his favorite out of the batch of songs he worked on. 

So Slash recording all those guitar parts on the Illusions instead of Izzy was wrong?





I thought professional "real" bands release music.  Wasn't that your definition? :hihi:
Maybe the song wouldn't been out if he didn't get it to the point where he thought it was good enough?





Yet another thing where things can be said in a way to paint one person as a victim.
"I'm not interested in recording those songs just like that. They need work". Now let me take out part of that sentence and you have "I'm not interested".
Suddenly it sounds colder than it was.



Because you prefer his way!
Maybe it's ok for you if he got his way, as long as Axl didn't? Maybe this is your order of business: Democractic band decision > Slash decision > Axl decision.




The guy plays guitar parts instead of having Izzy featured more prominently on the album. Then when a similar thing is done to him, he gets upset....




Izzy: On the last record I wasn't around for the mixes, and when they finished them you really don't hear my guitar at all. It was just a big Les Paul through a Marshall sound on most of the songs.

Whose sound is that? Did the other guitar player tell Izzy to check out those mixes? If he didn't, isn't that hiding? 






I'm telling you that I have  hard time believing that the guitar player in the band, who was pretty involved in the band's business, had no idea Axl was taking Paul into the studio in secret to record guitar parts and Slash had no idea this happened/was going on.






What is your source?






So in your common sense and rational thinking ways, Slash, one of three guys in the GN'R partnership, has no idea about what his band is doing at the time?
He even admitted going to the studio one day when he knew Axl would be there. Yet, he couldn't figure out what day they were gonna be there to record guitar parts and he only finds out when he gets the recorded finalized song.

How is that possible?

Maybe he didn't care about the song until after when he realized he can use it to paint himself as the victim?

Some of you think Axl approves every tweet posted on the GN'R twitter and every GN'R Facebook status update. And then you think it's completely normal and not fat fetched that the main guitar player of a band has no idea that the band's singer is in a recording studio secretly masterminding the recording of guitars tracks that will be used in addition to the guitar player's guitar parts....



/jarmo

Sorry for jumping in but it seems to me that way before everybody left, Axl was already functioning Guns as a big corporation.Which it was and still is.

When everybody else was sex drugs and rock n roll,

Slash in his book wrote that he and the whole band should have been more responsible and not naive about the size of Guns in the Illusions tour,
Axl was professional in every aspect.

Did he sneak into the studio and do it on the downlow with no one else's knowledge?

Because, if not, its not really an accurate comparison.



Real bands write, record, and release music.

Unprofessional people treat their fellow bandmates like employees without an equal say and do things behind their back against their wishes and expect them to roll with it.




This is just you making this into an Axl vs. Slash thing for you own reasons, none of which interest me.

The fact remains that what Axl did was wrong.  Calling Slash means names in 2014 to prove your "loyalty" does not change what Axl did in 1994.  And never will.




And if Slash did this without Izzy's knowledge (or anyone else's) this might be valid.

But, he didn't.  So it's not.




No. 




First, smart move backing off your earlier proclamations, which were obviously preposterous.

I guess that leaves you with only "it seems hard to believe..." type stuff, if it spares you having to say anything bad about Axl. 




Perhaps I spoke too soon.  You seem to back into "that never happened" mode.

So much for that last passage. 




No.

Axl did a bad thing but you are going to be god damned if you are going to say that publically, so you keep introducing new threads and strained comparisons to other things if it spares you having to say it.

Not sure taking the stage 3 hours late, incurring overtime fines, and leaving your crew to have to work ridiculous hours to tear down your stage is the epitome of professional behavior.

Slash also said in his book that one of the main reasons he quit was these things. 

It's comparable.

If Axl can do things in "secret" as you claim, why can't Slash while Izzy isn't present?







Because this has been "widely reported" as facts.






No, that's me trying to get some clarity from you.

In this case, Axl got Paul to record since nobody else was offering any ideas besides "let's get Gilby back".
In your idea, it would've been better if Slash could do what he wanted.

Is it better to have Slash do things his way than have things Axl's way?







How come Izzy only found out after the albums were mixed? Why is that the point where he finds out all his parts are low in the mix? I mean honest Slash wasn't trying to hide anything... So what's the reason?






If you can find out that something is gonna happen, yet do nothing about it, then play the victim card about it, it kinda invalidates your whole point. Any person with common sense would say "Well, why didn't you do anything?". Your answer is: it was done in secret.

It's GN'R in a studio, Slash wasn't going to get into NORAD!


If the guy can find out what day Axl will be down at the studio, you don't think he can find out what other stuff is going on at the studio? In secret... Right.


Why would somebody let that happen? Because he realized it's not his band after all? Because he doesn't care?


Hey, just as favor for you, I'll put another thought out there for you to ignore. Maybe Axl did this to light a fire under Slash's ass. Maybe he needed to be motivated. Maybe since Slash's best idea on who to get to play guitar in GN'R was "Gilby!", Axl had to show him they needed someone else and that he was serious about it.




/jarmo

We are not moving this conversation forward, Jarmo.   And I'm not going to retype my answers to your same exact, just slightly rephrased questions.  Just look up.

You are content to go through a hell of a lot of contortions to avoid having to say that sandbagging your own bandmates isn't cool.  Which is hardly some radical concept.

"Yeah, that wasn't cool."  That's all that had to be said.

Then we could have started burying Slash.

 :hihi:

You're saying "that happened, it wasn't cool".
I'm saying "I'm not sure that happened, maybe this happened instead".

For people who believe that all those things Axl's been accused of doing actually happened exactly the way they were described, it's easy to say "bad Axl!".


I don't buy the secrecy you describe. If Slash manages to find out what day Axl's at the studio, I find it hard to believe he couldn't find out what else was going on there. There's telephones.
Or he could teleport himself there since it's all happening in secret in some parallel universe where things are secret and mysterious. ;)


You're saying it was bad of Axl to take charge and do things his way while the others were being idle and doing nothing about it.
Ironic isn't it?



/jarmo

Thank God we have Axl, really.

Slash and Axl both stated publicly somewhere back then that they had problems with Izzy not showing up for recording sessions, as well as refusing to record guitar parts more than one time for each track.  I believe Axl's comment was "we'd ask Izzy to record the guitar part again, and Izzy would say 'why, I just did it'."

So no, that's not comparable, since (according to Slash and Axl both), the problem here was with Izzy's behavior.

Ok for the record I love and dig all eras of GN'R. But Jarmo why would it have been a bad idea to rehire Gilby? I never got why Axl sacked him with no consultation from the rest of the band. I've read Axl didn't think he'd be able to write with Gilby. Really? Have you heard Gilby's albums? Ok so Gilby doesn't try to reinvent the wheel. But his solo albums, plus Col Parker and Kills For Thrills albums are filled with great hooks and songs. He's got a ragged but great voice. Plays a mean guitar and not at all bad on lead either.

That's not even going into who he's toured with, produced, records he played on. In comparison what exactly has Paul done that's set the rock world on fire? I know he co wrote Back Off Bitch, played additional guitar on a Stones cover and co wrote and played some guitar on CD. And played what three live shows with Guns.

Now hey I love Axl and the present band. I've never viewed the gradual break up of classic Guns as black and white. I'm sure both Axl and Slash made their mistakes. And Jarmo I respect your loyalty to Axl. But I can see why Slash wanted gilby over Paul.

If you stop working with somebody, in this case Gilby, there's probably a reason. Right?

So why is the best option then to re-hire that person? Of course it's the easiest option.




That's true.

I don't think Izzy's all innocent in it. His behavior probably caused some of it along with the fact hat Slash probably wouldn't exactly say no to getting more of his work featured on the albums.

The main point was that in both cases the people involved claim they only realized what had been done when they heard the final track(s). In the Izzy case, it wasn't apparently done in secret while in the other case it was some kind of secret conspiracy.
I don't believe it.


Regarding the aborted album. There were probably lots of song ideas, but no interest from Slash to work on them further. Then he took off on tour with his own band leaving Duff and Matt to continue working with Axl.
In 1996 it was apparent this band wasn't gonna make another record any time soon.

 



/jarmo

Correct.  That was a collaborative decision.  There were no secrets there.

Look, let's just bottom line this.  There is only one reason Axl would feel he had to do this without telling the others in the band.  And it sure as shit ain't that the phone lines were down that day.  It was an end around to get what he wanted over the already stated objection of the others.  Not telling anyone was no accident or wacky misunderstanding.

Paul's biggest qualification was being Axl's friend.  Let's just say what it is.

He had already worked with Axl in the past. He was available. He plays guitar.

Eventually he got song writing credits on songs such as There Was A Time, Catcher In The Rye, I.R.S. and Prostitute. Songs that probably could've worked quite well even if they had been recorded by one of the old line ups. Meaning, they're not the "industrial" kind of songs that people thought Axl was only working on, or a big departure from previous material.



/jarmo

Paul is a great writer, and I am hoping beyond hope that he'll show up in the credits of the next album, as he wrote some of my very favorite tracks on Chinese, particularly TWAT & IRS.

That said, I can see why Slash had an aversion to working with him.  He basically personified Slash's beef with Axl, as he was brought in without Slash's approval, while Slash was perfectly content having Gilby serve as his rhythm guitarist.  In other words, even after reading Slash's book, it seems like Slash had his mind made up about Paul before they even stepped in a room together to try to write some music, particularly after the Sympathy For The Devil incident.  Not exactly Paul's fault.  He was just doing what his buddy Axl asked IMO.

True.  But three things strike me.

1) Let's make you Paul.  You see that your inclusion is not exactly welcomed with open arms.  You don't talk to Axl about that?

2) Slash says he wants Gilby.  Axl is not onboard.  Axl says he wants Paul.  Slash is not onboard.  Isn't the common sense thing to remove both guys from the equation?  Logically, if you pick either man, you know one person will be unhappy.  Jarmo likes to tell us over and over again that it was wrong for Slash to try and force Gilby on Axl...but Axl forcing Paul on Slash is cool.  What's the difference?

3) Your theory about Paul being the personification of things going to shit between Axl and Slash is valid, I think.  But I think Paul loses whatever innocent bystander role in this power struggle when we have Matt Sorum telling us that Paul is in the studio running Slash down.  I think once you start doing that, you are not an innocent bystander.  You are a person with a partisan agenda.

As for Paul's work on CD, yeah, it was good.  But I often see things ina  cost benefit analysis way.  Was what he brought to the table THAT amazing that it was worth all the other bullshit?  Honestly, I'd say no.  In other words, I'm not sure he was the dealbreaker that he has pretty much wound up being.  A big reason the band broke up and we wound up waiting 15 years for an album was Axl's insistence Paul be in the fold.  Worth it?

No matter how you spin it, Slash AND Duff were not happy with this guy being forced on them, regardless if Gilby was the right guy..he probably wasn't... but it was very clear Slash and Duff were not happy with Paul, that alone... so why go there?

and the same thing goes for Slash regarding Gilby...if Axl didnt want him, he should have been more accepting of that and decide together who would be a good person to work with, but BOTH of them tried to force the issue and not come to any common ground on this or any other issue for that amtter

in any line of work, if ur boss or whoever brings in somebody to work along side of you who you dont vibe with... ur not gunna produce to the best of ur ability...

its my belief... that if it wasnt this... it would have been something else... it wasnt sympathy of the devil, or slash snakepit , or one guys unwillingness to work more, those just happened to be the side stories at the time... they were just tired of each other...big egos, and it festered year after year of stubbornness

the end result... almost 20 years of no communication  

all great points...

you know whats funny...if Paul huge sat down at my desk right now..i probably wouldnt have any clue as to who he is... there are not a lot of pics of him out there

I think Slash's reaction to Paul's initial inclusion (forced or not) had more to do with Axl & Slash's relationship than it did with Paul himself.  Again, I agree that Axl should have been more democratic about Paul's inclusion, but in the end that's gotta be on Axl, not Paul.

The Paul slagging Slash thing happened in June of 1997, which was literally the day Matt was fired.  If you go on youtube, while Slash was on tour with Snakepit in '95, whenever he was asked about GNR he would bring Paul up saying, verbatim, "I hate that guy." before going into a tirade about him and Axl.  If you're Paul, who's just trying to help at Axl's behest, that can't be fun to hear on MTV.  Add a couple more years of behind to scenes drama, leading to Slash's departure in late '96, we really have to put into context exactly what Paul was saying and why when Matt went off on him.  Matt didn't bother to go into details, only that Paul & Axl were dissing Slash.

Edit: And I feel like Matt told that story to anyone who would listen in the early 00's, likely to gain favor with Slash, who basically held the rest of Matt's career in the palm of his hand with "The Project" that was then being put together that would later become VR.  Other than the roaring (albeit brief) success he achieved as Baron Von Storm, we ain't heard shit from Matt since VR broke up in early '08, which kind of proves that without some association to a real live Gunner(s), it's all quiet on the western front for Mr. Sorum.

Oh, no doubt. 

I'm just thinking if I'm Paul, you have to feel the chilly reception in the room.  I'm likely pulling my buddy Axl aside at that point and asking him if he truly thinks this might work.  Or give me some assurances he'll smooth it over.


Yeah, fair point.

This and the next question about slash sets the record pretty much straight.

Well, you're diminishing his contribution.

He was there pretty much from 1994 to 2002. He co-wrote several tracks. Guitar players came and went and came back. Paul stayed, probably until his job was done.
So was it amazing that he was there keeping the band "alive" and "active"? Yes it was.


Regarding the whole idea about why not Gilby. Maybe Axl thought Paul was a better fit. And that whatever reason(s) Slash had for hating the guy were just Slash being Slash and weren't good enough reasons? In addition, the alternatives weren't better.

If you're the boss in your own mind and somebody else tells you "work with this guy", you'll say "no".

Also, was it a coincidence that Gilby was part of Snakepit?





/jarmo

you cant have it both ways with this.... whether slash was justified in hating him is not the point...

he didnt want him, and axl didnt want gilby, the reasons behind it are irrelevant

if they were working in a functional manner they would have worked it out making a decision best for all

but its hard to make those kind of decisions when people are never in the same room at the same time to talk things out, again all involved were guilty of that as well

Hahaha.  Yeah, good luck with all that.



Yep.

Do you believe in this?

Imagine your better half tells you that you're going on holidays to Alaska. Then you suggest going to Hawaii instead. She says "no, Alaska!" and you tell her you think Hawaii is better because you can't stand the cold. Is it automatically ok for her to say "no" because it was your idea? And that you need to come up with a new idea, which probably isn't as good as your original idea?

So you end up in Iowa instead..... ;)


Slash probably thought Axl was in his band, when in reality he had joined Axl and Izzy's band...



/jarmo

Knock it off, Jarmo.

In 1994, Axl, Slash, and Duff were all on equal footing in the band.

In mafia terms, they were the made guys.

Exept that axl owned the rights to the band in 1994 slash, duff and the others were paid By the band=axl

Yeah, due to that half ass contract he forced them to sign under duress / didn't force them to sign under duress / no contract was ever signed, what are you talking about?

Gotta love GNR history.  Its all dependent on who you like in the present, it seems.

Slash probably thought Axl was in his band, when in reality he had joined Axl and Izzy's band...




/jarmo
[/quote]

lol you make me laugh... i respect ur opinion and ur loyalty to "gnr" but quotes like this one just make me scratch my head

why some people cant step out and see things rationally and not take sides like this is high school ...

you make a great attorney... but come on...its just like Axl getting mad at Slash for trying "to take over the band" ..... yeah and what did you want to do Axl?

give me a break... we can admit Slash's fault in everything...but you cant do the same with Axl

and since he claims he never wanted the guys to leave "his" band... why did he force them in to becoming hired hands? wait i know the answer... because he knew what it took to make the band go forward....

i know ur his buddy... but maybe just maybe axl has made a mistake here and there down the line in regards to how he conducted business...you can always argue till ur blue in the face that he did what he felt is right... and yes thats a great last resort


and lastly, the fact that you don't show the same hatred for Duff and izzy who have done and said the same shit about axl over the years, just proves that you don't form any opinion that goes against Axls ways of thinking

since he doesn't hate them... you don't either (at least this is what you portray on this site)

he hates slash... so then you do too... even tho i venture to guess you never met the man

i know ive gone off the rails here a little bit....my overall point is still the same... i know slash handled things badly in those last years,and i also think hes said some foolish things in the press since then, anybody with some common sense can see that, but its pretty easy to see Axl's fault too , they are guilty of alot of the same things



saying that Slash joined their band completely undermines what he and Duff did to create GNR

It certainly is filled with drama and perfect for message boards.....

But I have never met any of these people, don't know them personally... so I don't take sides in their bitchy drama....
Im just a fan of the output, I don't understand why fans, people etc take sides in their stupid 20 year fight

There was a contract about the name and what happens if axl quits, slash quits, duff quits. that kind of stuff whish lasted from October 1992 until October 1995 where a new different one was made.

I don't have a scintilla of doubt in my mind that if hell froze over and Axl patched it up with Slash, all these alleged Slash haters would fall right back in line.

And if you have any doubt, as you said, look at Izzy and Duff.  They did some time as persona non grata with a certain segment of the GNR fan community.  Which went right out the fucking window once Axl had them on stage with him.

I don't disagree with ur premise

but wouldn't some kind of compromise be better so you dont end up in iowa?

not a knock on Iowa... never been there  :)

yup yup and more yup

Are you denying the fact that Slash joined Guns N' Roses in 1985? I'm not saying he didn't have a part in making GN'R what it became. But, it wasn't his band. Road Crew was his band. Snakepit was his band.
GN'R started with another guitar player. He joined an existing band, although mostly unknown and young band, still an existing band.

But if in your mind the others joined you, it's easy to get the wrong idea along the way.  :)


And no, I'm not discrediting anybody's work in GN'R. Just stating a fact. It's not an opinion. A fact. If you don't believe me, go check the book Slash's friend made about those days. He joined two bands with Axl in them, Hollywood Rose and then later GN'R... :)

That's today's history lesson. ;)




Haters?

Funny you have to throw that out there. You're quick to point out anything you seem wrong with Axl and GN'R, but if somebody points out that they don't agree with the "widely reported" stories from Slash, they're haters? What does it make you then? ;)




Well the point was that you'll end up in Iowa because you have to give up the two alternatives based on the fact that they were made by the two parties disagreeing. So you need a third option, which might be be worse than the Hawaii one.

Iowa was just an example of something less exotic than Hawaii. ;)





/jarmo

What I'm saying, in case it was somehow unclear, is that you will think whatever Axl thinks.  And not just you, but the entire segment of fans that think and talk like you do.

I will once again turn to the examples of Izzy and Duff.  Izzy was a fucking traitor that left the band in the lurch.  Duff quit, so fuck him.  That was the opinion for a time.

Is that the current opinion of both men?  Nope.  And why?  Because Axl changed his stance, and you and the others fell in line.

I don't see him doing it with Slash, but I don't believe for one second Axl would patch it up with Slash and you, or anyone else, would continue to piss on the guy.

But take a step back from the legalese for a moment.

Do you think the general public at the time saw GNR as Axl's band with a bunch of hired hands?  Be honest.

And just on a human level, should Axl be thinking of these guys and treating these guys like hired help session musicians?  Does that seem logical to you?

Depends.

Will it makes his solo work as amazing as his GN'R work? No.
Will it undo all the things he did/said? No.

You know damn well all the fans talking shit about Axl would change their tone. Including you.


Just because Duff and Izzy are friendlier with Axl nowadays doesn't mean I think all their music suddenly is amazing.... Believe I Me didn't turn into a masterpiece overnight because of Duff being on stage at the O2 in 2010. ;)




/jarmo

I would absolutely commend him for being a grown-up about it.

I have mixed feelings on the break-up.  Obviously, wish it didn't go that way.  But I accept that is the reality of the situation, that it did all go to hell.  And because of that, I do not champion reunion efforts, and actually openly mock those that do.  I don't like that things went to hell, but they did.  I can deal with it.  Friends have falling outs, way of the world.

Having said that, Axl could be a wee bit more mature about it all.  I think that's fair to say.  If you don't like the guy, you don't like the guy.  I don't have a problem with that.  But the over the top nature of comments like "a cancer best removed" and "one of us will die before speaking" is a bit much.

I don't expect Axl to reunite the band and I don't expect him to want to be besties with Slash again.  I do think he could have gone to the HOF and would have been commended for doing so.  And the "overwhelming positive reaction" statement he released after not showing up was so comically out of touch, it defies belief.

I have to say, when I read Axl's "positive reaction" letter, I couldn't help but think "Uhh...have Beta & Fernando been forging positive articles for Axl?"  :hihi:

Maybe part of the reason why he said those things is as simple as, some people are fucking stubborn. They don't seem to get it.
So you have to go over the top to paint the picture when a "no" isn't enough.

Or he just doesn't give a shit what people think and he says what he thinks!  ;D




/jarmo

And I do get that.

It was PAINFUL watching all those years as all these people put all their eggs in the Hall Of Fame basket.  That was where the magical reunion occurs right out of the Hollywood script.

Please.  That was never going to happen.

Oh, totally.  I got a huge kick out of all the fans who were like "Fuck this.  Fuck Axl. I'm done!" when his HOF letter went out.  Really?  You've been hanging around the forums for 10 years expecting this to be your big payoff?  Really??

Absoltuely right.  it was so transparent.

And you can also add all the people that "weren't getting their hopes up"...yet went fucking ballistic when Axl announced he wasn't going.

Guess what?  You had been getting your hopes up, folks.

Since we are talking about the HOF

what is the difference between the HOF and the Golden Awards?

absolutely nothing... they are both about"making money" and promoting their museum and in this case magazine

just shows you Axls opposition had nothing to do with "how the HOF works", he was just never going to be in the same room with Slash and or perform with him, thats all it was

with that being said... i think its great that he is doing it, and hopefully it goes very smoothly...it is great promotion and if he is going to push thru with new material its a great way to showcase it

Correct.

Talking about how it was all some big stand against the process is just Axl zealots trying to church it up.

Yeah... there is no difference in the type of honors between the two functions

whatever tho ... I enjoyed seeing Slash Duff and Steven jam at the HOF, wish Izzy had also, i always found it interesting he didnt go considering he tried convincing Axl to go (allegedly)

back to the 96 album... regardless of who the second guitar player was... or "whose songs" they were working on... Axl never wrote a lyric till after they were gone... so the 96 album was never going to happen...

and i believe the lack of lyrics have been confirmed by all parties

Your assumption that if you boycott one award show, you need to boycott them all makes no sense.
Did you know GN'R is scheduled to perform at the Golden Gods Awards? They're actually not telling Axl who he should play with! Not trying to sell more expensive tickets for the magical reunion show. Not that it makes any difference to you.


By the way, KISS are doing the same thing.



Correct me if I'm wrong in assuming that usually you don't write lyrics to a song until there's a song to write lyrics to. Unless you write lyrics first, in that case it would be a poem.

So if you wanted Axl to write lyrics, he would have to sing a melody to go with those lyrics, meaning he would be writing most of the song.... This I Love could be an example of him writing the song and lyrics.

---

Labeling fans as zealots, nice touch there. Show some respect for fans of the band.




/jarmo

I never suggested they need to boycott one or the other , again im in favor of him doing this and rocking out

just pointing out the reasoning he gave for not attending the HOF was somewhat disingenuous ... it had nothing to do with how he didn't understand what the HOF was about or against them using GNR for promoting their product, and by him attending another award show who has the same goal in making money somewhat proves to that

he didn't mention Slash's name once in his letter... but Slash was ALL of what his no show was about , no matter how much you scream no he wasn't , thats my strong belief


the hall was honoring gnr's past, not present

this award show is different , we all get that

as for Kiss, im not very familiar with their history, but from what I read the Hall wasnt trying to force them in to any kind of performance, more so Paul and Gene were struggling with what is best

I play the cards I'm dealt, brother.  You want a different assessment, deal me some different cards.

Correct me if I'm wrong in assuming that usually you don't write lyrics to a song until there's a song to write lyrics to. Unless you write lyrics first, in that case it would be a poem.

So if you wanted Axl to write lyrics, he would have to sing a melody to go with those lyrics, meaning he would be writing most of the song.... This I Love could be an example of him writing the song and lyrics.

---

/jarmo
[/quote]

i have never written a song ha...

i wasn't being critical of Axl not doing so either... just stating the obvious that they were no where near an album without any lyric ideas....

obviously later on he has stated writing lyrics at that time was difficult for him

"Somewhat" disingenuous?  Nah, very little "somewhat" about it.

Axl could have shown up 10 minutes before their time came.  Even could have waited backstage if it meant not having to sit with that awful Slash.  Saunter out on stage, wave to the crowd, thanks for everything, then right out the door and out of there.

Axl didn't go because Axl didn't want to go.  It was not a crusade for justice or some big statement on the selection process.  That's spin.

Yeah I agree...

Nobody knows how the Hall Of Fame works! This guy gets in, that guy doesn't etc.

They shit on the fact that Axl didn't bury GN'R in 1996 when Slash decided to quit. He kept going and released the album that these same people probably didn't think was gonna come out.

It's like saying to an athlete who makes a comeback after an injury that he/she should've just quit. Instead of doing what they believe in and enjoy doing.



Your strong belief is just something you made up. Not based on you knowing something the rest of us don't know. You want it to be so because it makes sense to you. Your idea is that Axl doesn't want to be in the same room as Slash, so that's the only viable reason for you. No matter that it might not even be true.




This is where you're mistaken. If you don't have the decency to show some respect to the fans who post here, you need go elsewhere.
You're talking about GN'R fans. I don't give a fuck if you don't agree with them, but you don't disrespect GN'R fans here just because they choose to believe in Axl.

Simple as that.

This is the thing that people like yourself never get. They start insulting other fans and then wonder why I'm not being nice to them. Duh!



/jarmo

It's likely true.

And there is damn sure more available proof that I'm right than wrong.  A guy tells you :

- the guy is a cancer
- he will be dead in a box before talking to him
- the only way he anticipates running into him is an "ambush" organized by a third party that would not go well

Those are direct quotes from the man himself.

So yeah, not too worried I have the wrong read he doesn't want to hang out with him.  And I sure as shit don't look at those quotes and deduce he probably has no problem being in his presence.  That's preposterous.




OK, I'll give you a quick example of what I am talking about here.  Let's kick it around.

There was not an "overwhelming positive reaction" to Axl not going to the HOF.  That is 100% false.  Yet Axl chose to say there was.  Its not reality, however.

So if you are a person that parrots that "overwhelming positive reaction" line, its because Axl told you so.  And its not real.

At that point, the deduction is such a person would rather deny real world facts and accept a false premise. 

No?  If that is wrong, how is it wrong?  Perfectly willing to hear you out.  I never turn down a dialogue.

And, just as an aside, I have 2 posts upthread mocking the reunion people, right? 

Both in terms about how their hopes were unrealistic and how they were full of it claiming they didn't get their hopes up that whole time.

Was I "respecting" those fans?  Or is it all good in the hood taking a shot at that segment of the operation?

He might have X reasons why he didn't go, you pick out the one that makes sense to you to be the only reason. No matter what he said!
So it doesn't matter what he says, you've made up your mind already.





So this gives you the right to label fans in a negative way?
You think it's ok?

Are you aware that you're on a message board where we have certain rules, and by insulting other fans (who are members of this board), you're breaking the rules.
Like I said, it doesn't matter what you believe or who you associate yourself with, you do not insult, attack or otherwise disrespect other fans. Not here.

You can make a list of things you don't agree with until your fingers go numb, I don't care. YOU DO NOT INSULT OTHER FANS here.
You don't make the rules because you can make lists of things you don't agree with.


Just a little reality check for you. What reaction was Axl talking about? The one "widely reported"? Is it possible he actually got cards, e-mails, faxes, phone calls of support that none of us saw? No, of course not. That would make no sense!

Somebody thanks people for their support and you need to belittle it because you didn't see the messages. So they can't exist!


Imagine, the guy has a phone!





Those people are not why this board exists. They'll feel more welcome on the rest of the Internet.




/jarmo

In a sense, I suppose you are right.

I never for one second expected him to attend.  And yeah, that is was why I thought that.  I won't sit here and bullshit you.




Well, I'm obviously only commenting on the reaction 99.99% of the world did see, which was most assuredly not "overwhelmingly positive."

Could your scenario be true?  Yeah, I guess.  But its sure was not what I was talking about.




Yeah, pretty much what I figured.

But I was only trying to illustrate I am not some sleeper agent here to mess with you.  On several issues, we are actually very much in agreement.

Just reminding people of the rules we have.

This site's always been for present GN'R fans, not people who will only be GN'R fans under certain conditions that they've decided upon.

You can have different preferences/tastes, but don't disrespect other fans of the (current) band just because you don't agree with them.




/jarmo

I certainly meant no direct specific disrespect, as I use that word both in real life conversation and on several message boards about all sorts of topics.  I will refrain from using it around here in the future.

I've always sort of gone against the grain around here anyway with some of my opinions, but you have never really given me shit about it.  I do appreciate you letting me speak rather freely despite us rarely having the same views on things, and I have told you that directly.  That is sincere.

I will make a better effort in this particular area, however.  My bad.

Correction: Believe in me IS a masterpiece!  :yes:

I'm late commenting on this, but yes, I suppose Axl could've received private emails that praised him for not going to the Hall of Fame.  But I was listening to the live feed that night (as well as watched the HBO broadcast) and the audience booed Axl out of the building (so to speak) when he was announced -- despite the fact that Billie Joe didn't even mention him by name!  The negative response was intense that Armstrong had to literally tell the audience to "shut the fuck up" to stop it.

In Axl's defense, he stated that he didn't watch the Hall of Fame broadcast, so he may not have known at the time how badly he got roasted by the Cleveland crowd.  On the other hand, it is generally misleading for someone to suggest that the response was "overwhelmingly positive" without having checked all the facts himself.  Axl had to realize there were other forums out there for people to express their sentiments other than whatever personal emails he received.

Yes it is ! Agree.But it would be even better if it had Axl's contribution even on 1 track.But that's a whole topic of discussion.  :)

Everything would be better with Axl's contribution  : ok:

Fact.But why no Axl on any song ? He was on Gilby's album but not on Duff's ?  ???
I remember being confused at that time.And still am.
Oh well....It's all in the past.

KISS ended up doing what i would have liked to have seen from GNR... just get on the stage and accept the award together for the fans who have been there since the beginning...didn't have to play , didn't have to hug, none of that

Well, they are robbing themselves of an "overwhelming positive response" they'd have gotten for not showing up.

people see things the way they want to see them... you know that

...in the simplest terms.  And the most convenient definitions.

But each of us is a brain, an athlete, a basket case, a princess, and a criminal.

Actually, Peter and Gene hugged.

Only bumping this thread because it seems like the best place to pose this question...

Now that Duff and Axl appear to be pretty tight again... I just would love to know why he forgives him for telling the same lies about the name of the band

Axl in his revolver interview stated that him and Duff finish each others memories about stuff that they each dont remember ...so its obvious they talk about the past and don't just gloss right over it .

I know I would pay a small fortune to be a fly on the wall when they talk about stuff lol

I wonder if they have discussed trying to write together... I can dream right?

I've wondered this too.

But Axl has a list of Slash centric grievances, both real and perceived, that he has just built up in his mind as colossal offenses.

I don't think the legacy of the name is the only subject of disagreement between Axl and Slash...There's a reason Duff stayed in Guns longer than Slash in the 90's I guess. We'll probably never get the full story, but the gap between Slash and Axl must have been much wider than that of Axl and Duff already from the beginning of the end of old Guns. Plus, Slash have said a lot of bullshit in media through the years. Duff haven't been nearly as bad. You can see that in their biographies too, if I don't remember it wrong. Plus, Duff seems like a an authentic type of guy.

This is going to sound a little goofy to some.

But I've never really been able to reconcile how Axl can be SO pissed at Slash, but never go into specifics.  And, to be honest, I wonder if he actually laid it all out, word for word, that he fears people would say "wow...seriously?  that's your big beef, for 20 fucking years?"

You don't get more over the top than saying one of you will be dead in a box before you speak again.  So the natural reaction is to assume it must just be a terribly unsalvageable situation.  But if you really pressed him on it, I wonder what you'd get out of him?

Ideally in my book, the lineup of Axl, Slash, Izzy, Duff and Steven or Matt wouldn?t have disbanded as abruptly as it did.
But obviously it happened, a long time ago. As unfortunate as that was/is to the majority of GN?R fans, I?m not longing for a half assed reunion.

I think that ship sailed long, long ago. It would be one thing if it was the whole lineup, because their chemistry was at one point undeniable, and unmatched.
But just having Duff back in the fold? or Izzy? Nah, I?d rather Axl get off his ass and create something outside of the GN?R umbrella.

GN?R as they stand today(and since he left, and probably a few years before that) is a waste of Duff?s time.

Plus, we have to keep "The General" in Guns, and I would love a new Loaded album...A half-ass reunion would maybe destroy the legacy of Guns n' Roses. Just think about how much the current line-up have prooved. No, whatever happened there i the mid-nineties, turned out good...

I'm in complete agreement with you... I have always wished they called this band Axl and the motherfuckers!!!

make the songs Axl wants, play them, sprinkle in some classics and hit the road

and I do agree about Duff not wanting GNR in its current form

I just find their newfound relationship interesting as a long time fan of them both and wonder what they talk about as far as the past

im not sure why we are talking about a reunion... I'm just curious about the dynamic of the relationship between Axl and Duff in 2014, because Duff has corroborated some of the stories that angers Axl... I'm not hoping for a full reunion because they are buddies again

but a half ass'ed reunion would destroy the legacy of Guns N Roses?

you lost me there...

the 13 songs we've gotten over 20 plus years did what for the legacy?

I wish people would just take the current form of GNR for what it is... a talented group of guys who play GNR songs... they dont write, record or do anything relevant , in comparison to GNR pre 1993... there is no comparison... that band made music ... this one...very rarely does

Well, it doesn't really tell us much, but its a start to try and understand it.

I always thought that Slash fucked Axl's girlfriend or something...it would make more sense ha

I don't think Duff would ever attempt to evenpush the two of them in to talking again.... but like i said, just curious as to what they talk about...

You guys have missed an awful lot.  Axl has actually been very specific about his grievances with Slash.  He has lashed out multiple times in different words about Slash allegedly "lying" about Axl finagling the GNR name away from the other original members.  Check the "Axl answers our questions -- in one thread" section on this very website and you'll find a lot of Axl's comments.  Given the number of comments Axl has made about that issue, it's obvious that is what eats him up the most about Slash.

Marc Canter -- best friend of both Axl and Slash, and author of that authentic GNR book Reckless Road -- went on record backing up this claim.  He stated that Axl would've asked Slash to play on a few Chinese Democracy songs if Slash had been willing to apologize for "lying" about Axl forcing them to sign over the name.

Of course, Slash won't apologize, because in Slash's mind, he doesn't believe he lied.  He believes (and I understand this) that it doesn't matter if Axl's people were the ones who implied Axl wouldn't go on tour/stage/whatever.  Slash doesn't separate Axl's people from Axl himself.  In Slash's mind, Doug Goldstein's words were Axl's words.

Either way, Axl has outlined that as the major reason Slash and he won't reconcile.  As Axl recently said:

"Unless certain people start telling the truth, there can't even be a conversation, let alone a reunion."

Yeah, I'm sure there are other reasons too, but there you go with what is obviously the primary reason.

Im pretty sure we know all this stuff.......ha

Any questions we might have is why he has forgiven Duff and Izzy for having said some of those same things...

It could very well just be he thinks Slash is scum of the earth, and maybe he is, who knows

Then why are people on this thread expressing such cluelessness on why Axl despises Slash?


Yeah, Izzy once called Axl a "fucking redneck hayseed trailer trash son of a bitch", and also once compared Axl to Hitler.  Duff also claimed Axl forced the GNR name issue, but went into details, stating that it was management who implied Axl wouldn't go onstage, rather than Slash saying it was Axl himself.

Perhaps Axl can forgive Izzy because he is his "bro" from Indiana and they BOTH have said nasty things about each other in the way of plain insults (rather than accusations).  Perhaps Axl can forgive Duff because Duff hasn't mentioned the "GNR name enforcement" as many times as Slash has.  Duff generally avoids those issues.  Axl stated before something like "saying I forced the name issue worked out pretty well for Slash".  He obviously blames Slash much more for the issue, believing Slash has perhaps harmed his public image in severity over the years by repeating that story.

Personally, I don't think it has hurt Axl any more than his own behavior (no-shows, riots, late starts, etc) but that's obviously how Axl feels.

Spite.

But, Bridge, it simply WAS Axl's intention to secure the name to him alone. it was HIS 1st move to trick out the name.
regardless the exact circumstances that is what has some evilness in it and what pissed others off.

Axl absolutely knew what he was doing. 

But Slash and Duff were fucking morons to even entertain it.  I really can't pity them, despite liking both guys very much.  Just so dumb.

You shouldn't be saying "But, Bridge...".  You should be saying "But, Axl..." because the circumstances I described exist in Axl's brain, not in mine.  Your comments are largely irrelevant to the subject I was addressing.   The subject at hand was why Axl was so pissed off at Slash to the point of never forgiving him, since others around here were claiming that Axl has never once given any reason.

As I pointed out, that wasn't true, and the answer (derived from Axl's own repeated comments, not from my opinions) is that Axl is upset because he feels there IS a difference between the name being signed over and Slash's story of the name being blackmailed over, and Axl feels Slash has played that against him in ways that were pernicious to him.

Whether I agree with Axl, or whether Axl is justified in feeling that way (which are the side subjects that YOU broached) are completely different matters.

you described the circumstances YOU think exist in Axl's brain, thats why i've mentioned YOUR nickname.
"largely irrelevant" and "completely different matters" aint working here well, its the same basic subject still, the GN'R brand name which was Axl's intention to secure for himself in the 1st place. all the rest is a follow up.