Here Today... Gone To Hell!

...And I just wanted to express my surprise and satisfaction over how well everything has gone so far... ;D

Its especially nice to look back at all of the posts from a year ago that were certain VR would fail - "Weiland will fuck everything up, they will never finish their tour," they said.  Countless posts doubting VRs future.  Many posts downright predicting doom for the band.  Some of those posts were even mine. 

But look at what theyve accomplished in such a short period of time...

A platinum #1 album
A hit single that topped both major rock charts; another currently doing well
Two videos
Tons of interviews and press
Kerrang! Best New Artist award winner
Several B-Side recordings
Work on a new album
Three performances with Izzy Stradlin
Over 50 performances (mostly sold-out and with startlingly few cancellations)

50-plus performances under their belt in less than one year...thats with a [formerly] heroin-addicted lead singer.  With a singer under probation, attending court appearences, and battling heroin addiction, theyve completed American and European tours.  And theyre about to undertake an even bigger tour almost immediately after.  Thats pretty remarkable if you ask me.  After all of the doubting and damning posts of the past year, I think now is a good time to reflect on all thats been achieved since then. 

 :beer:

 :beer:

good job

This band has gone much further than I ever imagined; now I have faith for long term commitment.  I remember when Scott was sent to lockdown rehab for 6 months, I thought it was falling apart.  I actually thought that could bring Axl and Slash back together, but I'm dreaming.  50 shows is more than twice the total amount by Guns N' Roses since 1993.  Wow.

its just the begining. This is what iv'e expected was gonna happen when I heard scott was joining, yet more than I expected when I first heard duff, matt and slash played together for randy castillo

dont jinx em dude!

like ive been sayin, scott has done great but it could all be fucked up tomorrow! so im keepin my fingers crossed!

I believe my prediction back in May was like "2 weeks on the road and Weiland will screw up".

4 months later I'm still eating crow...

Maybe I am expecting a little too much, but I'm waitign for an all out Arena tour with another good band opening. I think they sound great and are excellent and making rock interesting again. I seen them in a small theatre but I want them to be filling an arena. Once they finished up there Arena tour this fall and I get to see 10,000 screaming fans fill an arena and chant for the rock gods that they are then I will believe they have reached what I expected, and they deserve.

GnR needed a hell of a lot of time and effort til they could headline arenas... and although I love VR, the music scene doesn't act kindly to these musoz.... wait til after the second album... they will then judge where there are arena sized crowds who are interested in seeing VR.

Remember, its a big and risky job organising arenas... these days, its the realms of S Club and Westife who fill arenas.. not quality rock bands.

Remember that during the last GnR tour, many of the venues were not sold anywhere near capacity... now, that's not because Axl is crap... that's because pulling large crowds to see a rock act isn't as easy as it use to be!

So, I reckon an arena tour after the second album.

Well done to VR  !!!  :peace:  :beer:  : ok:

This is a direction (arenas) I hope to God they don't take.  Arena rock is so passe', no vibe, no sweat, no feel whatsoever.

Leave the arena rock shows to the Aerosmith's of the world...

If it's beneficial financially, they probably will :-\


It's not that bad. A huge crowd, it'll be good for rock in some ways. A little flair (that existed in times passe) is not necessarily a horrible thing.

Seeing them in an arena is gonna be such a departure from the 5 times ive already seen them, but I can't think its a bad thing to play to the masses

Wow, if you considered VR an underdog then GNR shouldnt even be considered  on the map.

VR have had a successful run. But why is that surprising? Theyve done the press thing, put out an album, sold records based on for the most part the past, done a club tour....Yea the wildcard was weiland, but not to the effect your making it seem. JOurnalists mentioned it because there gay and they think their tough. But I dont think the world was waiting for Scott to go back to drugs again.

Ill keep this post in mind when GNR reaches the pinnacle of the rock world....they have a lot more at stake, a lot more question marks, a lot more doubters/haters, the list goes on and on...so if they do in fact reach the top.....it will be a biggie victory to say the least....


$$$ Talks....

YG-

Regardless of the fact they were comprised of members of popular bands, mentioning Velvet Revolver doesn't quite conjure the name recognition Guns N' Roses does. Axl knows this, and that is why he kept the name rather than start a new band name of his own. Guns N' Roses has a built in name recognition, and it will be much easier for them to get off the ground than it was for VR. People knew about VR somewhat in the beginning, but if you're in a record store and you see a new GNR CD being advertised you know immediately who that is, the casual observer may see a VR CD and walk right by not realizing who it was.

I know you are trying to paint GNR out to be in dire straits now so that when they release a CD and are back on top you can say I told you so, but no one is buying it becuase we all expect GNR to do exactly what you're thinking they will. Success is not the issue, its whethere or not they will actually ever release an album.

I will withhold comparisons until VR has released about 5 more albums to tie them up with GNR. Because like it or not, it took GNR 17 years to build this type of name noteriety, VR is still in its infancy stage. That name GNR alone makes this not a fair fight, because you know as well as I do a new GNR cd moves 500,000 copies its first week where the Axl Rose solo band under a new name doesn't come close even if the music were the exact same. From a marketing standpoint name recognition is everything, and obviously Axl knows that better than anyone or he wouldn't be so anal about the name.

Sure they were...they absolutely were.  Its always assumed that an addict will relapse.  Im positive that anybody who thought "Scott will kick heroin easily...its smooth sailing from here" less than a year ago was in the minority.  Just read the posts from that time.  Many people predicted that the tour wouldnt even get off the ground anytime soon, much less get canceled early.  He had been arrested, placed under probation and in rehab with tons of restrictions (affecting recording and such)...and had to quit heroin on top of that.  Not to mention hes an unstable person to begin with. 



All things that were done with Snakepit...Loaded...etc.  And within a closer proximity to Guns' peak.  Its been years since those projects...the GNR guys (STP as well) got colder with each year, and now its 2004 and theyre hotter than theyve been in over 10 years.  Its not often such comebacks occur.  But thats beside the point...The point is, its surprising to me that theyve accomplished so much (especially the touring aspect) 1) Within the short time period theyve existed as a band and 2) With Scotts problems...Which you seem to be downplaying.  I personally didnt see them successfully completing a tour.  Axl couldnt do it, and he didnt even have the heavy baggage Scott does.



Not sure what GNR had to do with htis post...but youre right.

They also have a lot more going for them, most of which - theyre "Guns N' Roses".  That name will ensure much of their success.  So while you understandably credit VRs GNR past to success, it doesnt compare to actually being "GNR".  So just as I wouldnt underestimate Scotts problems, I wouldnt underestimate how important that name is.  And Axl has the mystery...While the ex-Guns put out projects to relatively chilly reception over the years and had to work their way back - as a brand new entity.  Success was hardly guaranteed. 


If we were talking about "The Axl Rose Band," Id definitely agree with you.  "Guns N' Roses" is going to do just fine.

Naupis' post is right-on... : ok:

It's easier to become popular in your new band when your previous one is kinda considered cool again and people are aware that they existed.

Yes, I'm talking about the Greatest Hits album. Suddenly there's an interest in GN'R again that wasn't there a few years ago and when people find out what band some of the ex-members are in, they're gonna check them out.




/jarmo

Yeah, but VRs momentum was strong before Greatest Hits was released.  I think they were conducive to each other...

It definately will.NO doubt,it helps.BUt according to many of you around here, "GNR's name is tarnished". You cant have it both ways. It teither has value or not. IMO, it still does. ANd it will definately help in intiall sales. BUt ultimately the music will decide whether the majority accept them and the band they are under. That is why the whole "GNR still have the name" can only go so far.

When every radio dj or article says now heres slash,etc from gnr, weiland, stp, before or after a vr song, I think people have gotten the connection.

Yes, he does. BUt thats something that has devolped over time, through the yrs and rumors. It wasnt just given to him.

And the same cant be said with new gnr? cmon booker. You know as well as I, that new gnr have a lot to prove and build themselves back up. They arent going to start at the top they have to work up.

No, but when djs or articles constintly remind everyone of thier past, it certainlty doesnt put them that far behind.

Of course a new fan is not going to know about vr's past. And the same can be said for new gnr. A new fan will not know the past. so? to the new fan, both bands are on an even ground.

Im painting reality. Scoot over to the GNR board and see if thats packed with optimism. GNR have benn indire straights. BUt thats the ting...if they do well its b ecause of the name, if they bomb its because of what I have stated. TThey cant win either way.BUt to say they are not an underdog is absurd.

You absolutely can.

In the personal opinion of many, the GNR name is tarnished, and theres many that dont believe its GNR at all.? However, those people can still have enough sense to realize that the "Guns N' Roses" name will sell regardless.? Theres no conflict there.? One is an opinion, the other is simply informed speculation.


Right...

Like I said, it doesnt compare to actually being "GNR".? The connection is different from present inclusion...Is there any doubt that Contraband would have sold significantly more under "Guns N' Roses" than the brand new, unfamiliar "Velvet Revolver"?? Thats the point.


I didnt say it was??


No, theyll start at the top - at least on the charts (because Im not really talking about critics).? Theyll have to fight to maintain the position, but theyre assured it initially.? And like I said, thats because of the name and mystique.? The VR guys came back from years of relatively unsuccessful efforts...which I imagine is more difficult than having that anticipation Axl has from not putting out anything.


Well every other GNR-related project proves that its not that simple...


Even a new fan knows GNRs hits...But the audience segment youve brought up (fans who know absolutely nothing about either band) is so insignificant that Im puzzled as to why you brought it up at all...


Its because theres nothing.? When (if) there is something, outlooks will change dont you think?

I already said that initially, no matter what you think of gnr, the name itself will provide its initial boost. Its the fact that after that initial run ends, its up to the music for the band/nam eto be carried. Not the GNR name.

Ive been syaing the same thing.

And im talking about the critics. Becaus ethey are the ones who have painted this tarnished picture of GNR/axl. So for GNr to overcome that, they have to PROVE the critics wrong. The GNR/RnR/and any new comer fan will be there from the start. But after that GNR's music will then have to overcome the doubters/haters, which in point is 100x greater than any type of heat VR have gotten.

Booker, GNr are you telling me Vr has/had will have more pressure than GNR?

thos eprojects werent really menat for the mainstream. Old gnr side projects were not promoted liek VR.

Theres a lot more people that dont know about the gnr history than you think. Musically and from 94-on.

Absolutely but theres pessimism there because of all the negative stuff thats been written. Not just the inactivity. Once the ball gets rolling, the fans will get pumped but the critics will still be on the same gloomy side.

The only thing GNR has is the name. Thats the only positive they have for them right now. Initially it will help a lot. But after that its all on the music.

The odds are against GNR and heres why:
not the original band
animosity towards Axl
Inactivity in 10 yrs
cancelled tours
the delays
rumors
and most importantly..and the thing that probably gets most overlooked:
The fact that the members in this band arent all stars. They are basically unknown to the mainstream and havnt been in major bands musically. This band has to come togetehr musically and meet or surpass the olds success in terms of music.

To me that is a lot more pressure and they are more of the underdog than VR. For those who say otherwise, no matter your stance on new gnr are not being fair.

its funny cause i was going to make a thread about somehting liek this a few weeks ago.Something like DO you consider gnr an underdog etc....

Wow being popular on MTV is great, they are right up there with nickel back, good charlotte and jet.  : ok:

News flash, the VR album fell pretty fast off the charts, and if im not mistaken the GHs album which that awful tracklisting has been higher on the charts for a longer period of time than contrband.

BTW Weiland has failed a few times, but the judges keep giving him another chance.
He should  have been in jail a few times for breaking his probation but of coarse he is famous and like OJ he is let off with a slap on the wrist.

Oh yeah, OJ and Weiland, great analogy!  : ok:

Yes, being popular on MTV is great, just as great as say, the big Kurt Loder interview that you envisage Axl doing if and when CD finally appears? What about Axl's "new" band performing as MTV darlings a couple of years ago? If you have such a low opinion of MTV endorsed music, surely you would express the same sarcastic opinion of new GNR as you did for VR above... I'm sure you'll change your tune if and when a "new" GNR video receives regular MTV rotation.

As for Greatest Hits being higher on the charts, well of course... the music there was a result of the fine chemistry of the original songwriting force of Axl, Izzy and Slash; something that will never be repeated, by VR or by Axl's new band. It is a credit to every member of the original line-up that the greatest hits has sold so well, particularly with such a poor tracklisting.

But regardless of that, chart positions don't matter, do they Dave? Its all about the music  : ok:

The only time chart postion will matter on this board if contrabands charts higher than CD and if contraband sells more albums than CD. 

And if gnr ever had a video on mtv, i wouldnt watch mtv to see it.
MTV is awful now.  As for Loder, I said that is what axl should do if he wants to tell his side of the story since slash talked on mtv for BTM.

As for  your comment about fine chemstry with the new gnr, that remains to be seen until CD drops and we see how their work is, but judging from the few songs we have heard thus far, its going to be much better than contraband and it will be just as good as the stuff on AFD.

its still kind of interesting that VR weren't on the VMA's, with their record so hot etc u would think they wouldve performed, i guess there cd didnt come out in time to be considered for any awards though.

too bad a few jack offs had to ruin your post.

There is nothing wrong with arena shows if they are done right...Ever been to an AC/DC show?  There is plenty of sweat if the band is good enough. Not huge arenas either, I am talkin like 10,000 capacity. I would like to see bigger shows, not huge and bloated (see UYI's tour) but more time for jamming out, maybe a guitar solo. I have seen STP in arenas and I know Scott can pull it off. I actually think he is better that way.

And leave Aerosmith out of it  ;)  I love those guys even though they have done alot of shady things in recent times. They still put on a hell of a show and can keep 15,000 people rocking (minus a few cheesy, time to get a berr songs) a.ka Jaded, Cryin, Miss a thing.