Here Today... Gone To Hell! | Message Board


Guns N Roses
of all the message boards on the internet, this is one...

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
October 14, 2019, 02:56:08 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
1205997 Posts in 42507 Topics by 8838 Members
Latest Member: gnrlive1991
* Home Help Calendar Go to HTGTH Login Register
+  Here Today... Gone To Hell!
|-+  Guns N' Roses
| |-+  Guns N' Roses
| | |-+  Axl's "Dive in and find the monkey" comment
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] Go Down Print
Author Topic: Axl's "Dive in and find the monkey" comment  (Read 17016 times)
Rob
Legend
*****

Karma: 0
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1845


The dude abides.


« Reply #120 on: August 22, 2005, 04:12:42 PM »

If Axl were to put out an album that was full of songs that sounded like My World I'd buy 20 copies, go see him when he came around on tour promoting the album, and then proceed to chuck all 20 copies at him hoping that they'd at least take one of his eyes out or something.
Logged

Yowza!!!!!!!!!
ppbebe
Legend
*****

Karma: -1
Offline Offline

Posts: 10204


« Reply #121 on: August 22, 2005, 07:36:20 PM »

To enable the monkey to make more varied  and complicated sounds?

The monkey?  Huh

"Varied and complicated sounds" (such as...?) is work for the producer, engineer and Axl as the resident "varied and complicated sound" enthusiast.  I dont see why that would necessiate any extra work from anybody else in the band.

The Monkey line is a metaphor.
The Computer is not only use to the producers, engineers or manias. May not necessary but useful for musicians to write music. It's a versatile tool. We have plenty of knowledgeable people here who can explain it better than me.

Perhaps for the same reason the current members know how to use the computer apparently

On what did you base this?

A couple of Interviews. In One of these some musician claims that he introduced it to Axl, I think. I'm too lazy to go n find the articles now. Maybe later.

It still doesnt make sense.  Even if Slash sold himself out artistically and agreed to assist in making GNR Axls industrial experiment, I dont see what extra work is required of him.  To ask him to do what is essentially production work is not only ridiculous, but very unlikely to have ever happened.  So dont just give a blanket "He could have used more sounds," try giving specifics...What was the actual "hard work" Slash didnt want to do?


I understand you're fascinated with the industrial sound but
Modern tech is not only for it.
I could be more specific, if I had been there.
Just that  the article reads as if Slash wasn't really against Axl's whatever idea itself but the labour accompanied it.

I didnt ask for a source, because its not very relevant.  I know thats Axls allegation, and even if its true, Id still like to hear an explanation of what it means.  Who knows the context in which it was said?  But common sense tells me that Slashs main issue wasnt the work involved in achieving an industrial sound, but rather having no desire to even have such a sound.  So if he didnt want that sound in the first place, which I think we can all agree on, then the "work" involved in getting that sound is not relevant at all.  Understand?  Its really very simple.

Again, if someone says he doesn't want to work "that hard', those who're highly motivated to work 'that hard' may well tell him "come on, don't be lazy!". Don't you think so?

See the above paragraph.  Im leery of Axls allegation 1.) Because of the logic reasons I outlined above and 2.) Other goofy statements Axl has made in regards to this issue such as being mainly interested in making a Slash record and Slash supposedly scrapping anything that "worked."  If somebody can make any sense out of that, Id love to hear it, because to me it seems Axls saying that Slash would come up with really great riffs and then stop and say "No, too good.  This works too well, we cant use it."   Huh
Huh
Perdon? I can't make sense out of your 2,). Who was interested in making a Slash record and who said "No, too good.  This works too well, we cant use it."?

So if youre going to abandon common sense and logic just to hang on to one vague, unsubstantiated quote from Axl, feel free (I certainly wouldnt be surprised).  But I just cant take that argument seriously.

Here obviously I'm not discussing Slash's main issue in the conflict.
My point is that according to this article, it's not that unfair of Axl to say slash was too lazy to learn the new technology.
My common sense says when the point at issue is someone's wording, the allegation of the man himself is the most relevant to the matter.
It's vague, unsubstantiated, maybe, but so is the comment in question. Do we really know the context of anything?
At least the quote is more appropriate to refer than the speculations based on the reputations.
Logged
ppbebe
Legend
*****

Karma: -1
Offline Offline

Posts: 10204


« Reply #122 on: August 22, 2005, 07:45:07 PM »

And although I'm not a U2 expert but for me their old and new sounds isn't as different as old GN'R and Nu-GN'R. BTW I wish you had more example for such a change...


How about The Beatles?




/jarmo

idea

David Bowie!

The Clash!
Logged
Pandora
Collector extraordinaire
Legend
*****

Karma: 0
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 2385



WWW
« Reply #123 on: August 23, 2005, 06:14:58 AM »

Other goofy statements Axl has made in regards to this issue such as being mainly interested in making a Slash record and Slash supposedly scrapping anything that "worked."  If somebody can make any sense out of that, Id love to hear it, because to me it seems Axls saying that Slash would come up with really great riffs and then stop and say "No, too good.  This works too well, we cant use it."   Huh


The way I see it, maybe Slash feared something would be too catchy or too commercial. Like in, not "it works" for the record, but "it works" in the sense that it could sell a lot. I don't think Slash was too happy with their more mainstream hits like SCOM or November rain, so maybe he was trying to go back a little more underground, more to the roots or something.
It's actually very bizarre how bands from certain circles strive not to write a catchy song, like it's some sort of crime, or like you're selling your soul. Maybe that's it : Slash didn't want to write another riff a la Sweet Child  Huh
« Last Edit: August 23, 2005, 06:16:37 AM by Pandora » Logged

Got my attitude and my shiny shoes.....
Booker Floyd
Groupie
Legend
*****

Karma: -1
Offline Offline

Posts: 2307



« Reply #124 on: August 23, 2005, 07:05:44 AM »

 

Quote
The way I see it, maybe Slash feared something would be too catchy or too commercial. Like in, not "it works" for the record, but "it works" in the sense that it could sell a lot. I don't think Slash was too happy with their more mainstream hits like SCOM or November rain, so maybe he was trying to go back a little more underground, more to the roots or something.
It's actually very bizarre how bands from certain circles strive not to write a catchy song, like it's some sort of crime, or like you're selling your soul. Maybe that's it : Slash didn't want to write another riff a la Sweet Child


I highly doubt this.   

"In other words, ?Whoa, wait a minute. That actually might be successful, we can?t do that.? People like to call me paranoid. It has nothing to do with paranoia; it was to do with reality." - Axl Rose

Even Axl understands on some level how paranoid that sounds, even if its an immediate denial.  I think it does sound paranoid.  What was Slash composing and playing that sounded too likely to be successful?  I dont understand?  Was it a riff, or a solo?  Something ballad-like, like say..."Back & Forth Again?"  I think Axls reaching on that one, and poorly explaining the idea at the very least.

« Last Edit: August 23, 2005, 07:31:21 AM by Pandora » Logged
Pandora
Collector extraordinaire
Legend
*****

Karma: 0
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 2385



WWW
« Reply #125 on: August 23, 2005, 07:31:36 AM »

 

Quote
The way I see it, maybe Slash feared something would be too catchy or too commercial. Like in, not "it works" for the record, but "it works" in the sense that it could sell a lot. I don't think Slash was too happy with their more mainstream hits like SCOM or November rain, so maybe he was trying to go back a little more underground, more to the roots or something.
It's actually very bizarre how bands from certain circles strive not to write a catchy song, like it's some sort of crime, or like you're selling your soul. Maybe that's it : Slash didn't want to write another riff a la Sweet Child


I highly doubt this.   

"In other words, ?Whoa, wait a minute. That actually might be successful, we can?t do that.? People like to call me paranoid. It has nothing to do with paranoia; it was to do with reality." - Axl Rose

Even Axl understands on some level how paranoid that sounds, even if its an immediate denial.  I think it does sound paranoid.  What was Slash composing and playing that sounded too likely to be successful?  I dont understand?  Was it a riff, or a solo?  Something ballad-like, like say..."Back & Forth Again?"  I think Axls reaching on that one, and poorly explaining the idea at the very least.


Doesn't sound paranoid at all to me. Just remember that SCOM features the band's most famous riff, and Slash has always admitted to hating it. And he came up with it, didn't he? Now, imagine he was coming up with a similar catchy riff in the timeframe in question, and decided to dismiss it because he didn't want to write another mainstream hit, something, once again, he has admitted he wasn't confortable with. Please tell me how that is far-fetched.
Logged

Got my attitude and my shiny shoes.....
Booker Floyd
Groupie
Legend
*****

Karma: -1
Offline Offline

Posts: 2307



« Reply #126 on: August 23, 2005, 07:54:01 AM »

Doesn't sound paranoid at all to me. Just remember that SCOM features the band's most famous riff, and Slash has always admitted to hating it.

Yes, he admitted to hating it at that particular time, but has he ever attribute that distaste to sounding like it would be successful?  If so, then Im definitely interested in seeing the quote.  But I from what I recall, he just hated the riff in general.

Now, imagine he was coming up with a similar catchy riff in the timeframe in question, and decided to dismiss it because he didn't want to write another mainstream hit, something, once again, he has admitted he wasn't confortable with. Please tell me how that is far-fetched.

Until I see evidence that Slash objected to "Sweet Child O' Mine" on the basis of how successful he thought it would, Im going to assume the obvious (and what I believe Slash has confirmed): that he just didnt like the riff.  The paranoia comes when one presumes deep-seeded ulterior motives over a mere preference of taste.  And if Slash did bluntly say what Axl interpretively quoted (which I again doubt), then it he failed to mention it and the notion reamains, as I said, poorly explained.
Logged
Pandora
Collector extraordinaire
Legend
*****

Karma: 0
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 2385



WWW
« Reply #127 on: August 23, 2005, 08:07:45 AM »

Doesn't sound paranoid at all to me. Just remember that SCOM features the band's most famous riff, and Slash has always admitted to hating it.

Yes, he admitted to hating it at that particular time, but has he ever attribute that distaste to sounding like it would be successful?  If so, then Im definitely interested in seeing the quote.  But I from what I recall, he just hated the riff in general.




You know, I have read a great number of GN'R articles, and I think it's fairly possible Slash said something to the effect  that he thought the riff was too catchy. In all honesty, I can't tell for sure off the top of my head, and unfortunately, I don't have enough time on my hands to plough through over a hundred magazines. Maybe someone will remember better than me.

That doesn't discredit the rest of my theory though. I wouldn't be surprised if Slash had dismissed ideas he thought had too much commercial potential, while Axl thought there was nothing wrong with that. Of course, it then all comes down to a difference of opinion. Again.
Logged

Got my attitude and my shiny shoes.....
madagas
Guest
« Reply #128 on: August 23, 2005, 08:10:55 AM »

still going about something as simple as different tastes in music...you people are like the Everready bunny. Roll Eyes No need to worry because those two guys will NEVER EVER EVER play together again. no no
« Last Edit: August 23, 2005, 08:49:42 AM by madagas » Logged
Rob
Legend
*****

Karma: 0
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1845


The dude abides.


« Reply #129 on: August 23, 2005, 01:52:43 PM »

If Slash didn't want to write anythng too catchy, then how do you explain the riff for Fall To Pieces.  That's an extremely catchy, poppy riff...not that that's a bad thing.  In fact I think it sounds a lot like the SCOM riff.  You never hear Slash bad mouth that song.  Actually the band has kinda embraced that song.  Of course this is years after he last tried to write with Axl, so Slash's mind-set may be much different now.  I don't think Slash has anything against catchy riffs, I just think he dislikes the SCOM riff.
Logged

Yowza!!!!!!!!!
jimmythegent
Legend
*****

Karma: 0
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1722


Live!! From Burning Hills, Wellington...


« Reply #130 on: September 12, 2005, 06:00:26 PM »

So did we figure this riddle out? Are we in agreement with chineseblues that he was referring to a game children play at McDonalds?
Logged

"Dive in and find the monkey!"
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.8 | SMF © 2006-2008, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.053 seconds with 18 queries.