You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: Questions
Communist China wrote:^ Buzz, where's your proof that people weren't disinterested in new material live in 90 and 91?
People who bought tickets to those shows went to hear the new material that had been hyped for two years. Its why GNR was able to get away with playing setlists comprised of a ton of unheard songs. Had it backfired, the band would have just switched to an AFD heavy setlist and continued the tour. There never was a backlash to it because its what people wanted.
When I bought tickets, I didn't give two shits about Jungle. I wanted to know what November Rain, Estranged, Dust N Bones,etc. sounded like.
Exactly James. They would have played almost all AFD and mixed in a new song here and there had it not been received well. People wanted to know what the band they love came up with. MTV was there covering it. Magazines talked it up like crazy. Slash was on covers of guitar magazines, Axl and Slash on other music magazines. There was way more interest in the band and what they were doing than this band will ever see.
This time around, nobody cares what the new guys came up with. It's all about hearing AFD and the other songs they love. they want Axl. they want the songs they fell in love with 15-20 years ago - nothing more. There is no attachment to the other guys on a large scale. It's Axl and his band - that's how they are always referred to these days.
- monkeychow
- Rep: 661
Re: Questions
It's really interesting the range of opinions on here.
I was facinated to hear people saying the old band were sloppy, cos it was that sleaazy, bluesy, sloppiness that really made the style I thought. And i'm also interested that people see the new band as polished...as when i've seen them it seemed that they missed the beginning phrases of a lot of the solo sections of a song - almost like everyone was waiting to see if anyone else started playing the solo, and then there was the overwhelming nature of the rhythm guitar now theres 2 people playing it at any one time.
I really like the new band playing the new songs though, like IRS is awesome live...and I'd love to hear TWAT more often...and maddy is cool as well. I think the new songs really suit the different style of the new band much better.
Re: Questions
Buzz, again, I went to 7 UYI shows. 2 in Noblesville, Indiana-MAY 1991; one in LA; one in Chapel Hill, NC; 2 in Birmingham, AL, one in Columbia Sc ....the old band was incredible, no doubt. But, the new band is pretty damn good. They are different animals.:headbang:
no use debating this anymore as we simply don't see eye to eye on much of anything regarding the new band...
Re: Questions
It's really interesting the range of opinions on here.
I was facinated to hear people saying the old band were sloppy, cos it was that sleaazy, bluesy, sloppiness that really made the style I thought. And i'm also interested that people see the new band as polished...as when i've seen them it seemed that they missed the beginning phrases of a lot of the solo sections of a song - almost like everyone was waiting to see if anyone else started playing the solo, and then there was the overwhelming nature of the rhythm guitar now theres 2 people playing it at any one time.
I really like the new band playing the new songs though, like IRS is awesome live...and I'd love to hear TWAT more often...and maddy is cool as well. I think the new songs really suit the different style of the new band much better.
From what I've heard, I like the new band playing their songs (for the most part). Those songs fit their style far more than the AFD/UYI material does. I think the new band, minus Axl but with a good lead singer, could stand on their own (at a much smaller level) because they wouldn't be pretending to be something they aren't. Their downfall is pretending to be a band that reached such a high level that they could never live up to what that band did. Anybody could be standing behind Axl right now and nothing would be different unless it was Slash, Duff and Izzy. Read the interest in CD thread - a lot of truth and reality in that thread.
Re: Questions
no use debating this anymore as we simply don't see eye to eye on much of anything really...
We can agree on this. You won't change my mind and I'm not going to change yours. Time will though. Sooner or later you'll see it for what it is. I respect you enough to know you'll get it eventually.
Re: Questions
Random rant here:
I'm sure it come across as though I am happy about where we are and where it looks like we're going as far as GnR goes. I'm not. We all lose in this scenario. Nobody is happy and I don't think anybody is ever going to be happy about it. CD may never come out. A reunion seems farther away than ever. The new band has dropped off the radar completely. No news from Guns N' Roses even through the usual channels of Beta, Del, etc. No management almost a year after Merck was fired. VR is at the very least doing something, but not much and who knows for how much longer. Album sales for VR and Baz featuring Axl are both weak even by today's standards. It's amazing how the tide has turned since the beginning of 2006 when Axl was getting ready to tour and VR were very successful with Contraband.
- Jimmy Zig Zag Bobiadis
- Rep: 25
Re: Questions
These guys stand no chance when compared to the Original band live and you only hurt your credibility and theirs by saying otherwise.
I disagree, they hold their own. And even if that was the case, does it really matter now? I don't get the point in staying bitter all these years later.
Re: Questions
i think monkeychow said it best on the first page, the problem is if there's no axl on stage nobody can take his place and make people look at the said person in the band. axl is the rock legend and the other guys are only some musicians in the eyes of the large audience. they don't have a resume that's strong and people don't know them enough so they won't give them a chance. sure, i know the bands they all played in, but i'm not the ordinary rock fan.
when the old band was on stage people were like oh, there's axl; oh, there's slash; oh there's duff; oh there's izzy. now they're more like oh, there's axl; oh, there's some dude with long hair and a beard that i've never seen in my life, where's axl? bucket had that touch when he was on board i think but the rest of the people? not to dish robin (it was just an example) but people need to know this band. they need to associate this band with an album and at least a video to meet the new guys. and if the music is good they'll get support.
look at the bootlegs, out of a 2 hour show, how many minutes do you see pitman or frank? 1 minute together when axl walks by their spot. when axl is on stage everybody looks at him. hell, there was a nov rain on a bootleg when i wanted to see richard doing the solo and the camera was on axl sitting at the piano.
anyway, i've seen the new band live only once and i enjoyed the show because i knew what i was going to get. and i saw axl upclose and it was the best rock show i've seen. it was great seeing all the guys and i hope they get the album out sometime in my lifetime. but if there's a reunion i won't lose sleep over it given the current situation we're in.
- Jimmy Zig Zag Bobiadis
- Rep: 25
Re: Questions
dude a reunion would be so fucking lame. that lineup lived its life.. and seeing them get back together would totally cheapen their legacy. some things are better left in the past and besides, the band is fine as it is now and doesn't need some guys who walked out on it years ago.
