Here Today... Gone To Hell!

if the others owned the name and axl wasn't in the band would you still feel as strong by calling it gnr without axl?? I only want your opinions being there is bands like van halen that had sucess without the same lead singer..

I know it's hypothetical but I wanted some insight.. No matter who owns the name it is technically gnr but would you view it yourself as gnr regardless of who owned it or who was missing....?

Even if the ex gnr members owned it I would not want gnr to continue..

No.

no way it's like the stone's without jagger

so as long as say plant is in zepplin you don't need page??

listen slash is amazing, but he's not fucking jimmy page.

to really answer this question, you have to look at from this standpoint: AXL ALWAYS WANTED TO KEEP GNR GOING. THE OLD MEMBERS LEFT THE BAND ONE BY ONE AND HE'S CONTINUED GOING, TRYING TO BUILD, THEN BEING FORCE TO REBUILD, the future of "GUNS N' ROSES", a name that obviously means more to Axl than you will ever understand, mike.

this isn't about a name, it's about an attitude and a way of life. Slash and Duff lost it when they left gnr, that's pretty clear from the music they've released. Let's wait and see before we decide whether or not axl should be using the name guns n' roses. but judging from the tracks we've heard, i say yes. and judging from VR, duff's solo works, snakepit, etc, i think no, slash and duff shouldn't be in a band called guns n' roses. funny though, cuz even though they are in this "mega" band now, i still always hear them on the radio say "Slash from guns n' roses"

gutair player's can be replaced i love page but look at what buckethead did he sound's great well sounded great

No. Jimmy Page was the frontman. Mr plant wasn't.

On topic,

I wouldn't mind.

I wouldn't care. I wouldn't care about that GN'R. I'd be fine with the old GN'R songs.

I wouldn't be at a GN'R board but at a board about Axl's new band whatever the name might be.

As far as the band makes kickass songs like IRS... :love:

the point wasn't can he be replaced. The point was does a band and it's members mean anything when keeping a name going?? No question in the past 20 years as a guitar player slash has been just about the best of his time and for every great gnr tune there is a great riff or solo behind it..

Is there any band out there that is sacred in regards to breaking up then continuing without the members..

Would it be the beatles if only paul was in the band?



what way of life is that?? The no album no tours way of life.. The band members we know nothing in regards to progress way of life..?

I can say your personal musical opionions are just that.. Plwenty of people loved snakepit or contraband.. The question wasn't their post gnr work it was their role in the band and if they had the right to the name ..

When I say I feel the band needs their real members to be gnr I hear well axl owns the name so it is gnr.. So i said if axl didn't own the name and it continued would it still be gnr.??

You hear slash from gnr.. You're kidding right, one of the biggest rock bands ever and he's still called slash from gnr.. Who would have thought it.. :rofl:

we always hear paul from wings :hihi:

Axl was in guns n roses before slash and duff even joined. Its that simple.

what does that mean?? You people all beat around the bush with no real answers.. Gnr that was signed and made afd is the people that made gnr.. Someone had to be in their first.. Gnr might had been hollywood rose and died out like most 80's bands..

I don't know why some people can't just answer the simple question??

I'm interested to know why you said this, although maybe outside of this thread!

no i wouldn't think of it as GNR.

i didn't know what to think with the new band but when i saw them it made me a believer and i think even though it isn't the original lineup anymore, to me they have the GNR spirit.

i thought they were great live too.. I was just trying to take some board logic and see if it swung both ways..

For me it's not about the people you sign up later it's about the people that made the name a household name and made the great songs from the singing to the guitar playing to the drumming..

I wouldn't consider it gnr this way or that way but I still love axl so I have an interest..

Any band that has break ups has mixed feelings between the fans,,

This is always a problem! Always.. ! Even if Slash had the name, people would complaine. Its also very individual, people who like Slash the most, is against Axl keeping the name, and the other way... So, the best way, is actually to change the name if anyone leave the band. Spec. if its some of the bands brains..

I feel that way for more then slash... I just feel if you lose each player that made your record setting debut album you should have respect for the band and what it represented and continue to create but leave that name until that special day or let it rest forever.. That's just my view regardless of who owns it..

Mike the thing you keep failing to grasp is that Axl is the lead singer. He attracted most of the attention back of the day. Of course Slash and company amde great music and deserve just as much credit. But Axl is more than just the music. He brings something else to the table. That is why there are passionate people here. On both sides of the fence. Axl is the talk. Whether its good or bad. Whethe ryou liek Slash or not. People defend Axl, people choose to rip into Axl. No1 here chooses to rip into Slash or defend him. Its more your with Axl or against.

As for the thread. Whether Axl was on the outside lookin in it would really matter. Just look at Vr. Who cares what its called. Vr is what GNr would have been without Axl. SOme descent stuff but nothing that puts it over the top. Thats whta Axl brings. Hes the intangible you need. As a poster has said...GNr is much more than a name to Axl. He was teh captain when it took off so he feels he should control the ship. He once said hes GNrs biggest fan.

If Axls intention were to ruin the gnr name or outdue the old band he would have released multiple albums by now. The guy just waits and waits. Until hes ready and feels that the material will represent the GNR  name well.

It would depend on how the break up happened.

If Axl left or was fired and they found a new singer, sure they could call it GN'R.


But now they left/were fired...



/jarmo

Personally I think it's irrelevant how the band breaks up.  If it isn't the original guys who made the band what it was, then it shouldn't be called GNR.  It doesn't matter if it's Axl Rose, or if it's Slash and Duff, or hell, if it's Izzy and Steven.

All the originals of any disbanded group should have enough respect for the fans not to tarnish the band's legacy by assuming control of the name without the others.

True.. Since Axl never left the band, he was left with the band name. And Dizzy, im pretty sure he is number two in the new linup. But like someone said earlier, Axl and Izzy was the two first members in GNR...

No, actually Axl owns the name and Dizzy is under contract to him, just like everyone else in Axl's band.  That's what Axl's January 1997 court stuff was all about, solely acquiring the GNR name.



And that isn't quite true....all five originals signed up to Geffen in 1986 and were given equal partnership in the name.  And the five of them created the music and defined the GNR name, therefore it became theirs.  Not Tracii Guns or anybody else's.

   Mike, I think I can answer this question.  Yes, if the name belonged to Slash/Duff/Matt/etc., they would be Guns N' Roses.  Younggunner is right, VR is what GNR would be without Axl, in my eyes not very good.  Like it or not, Axl was/is the enigmatic force that made/makes GNR what it is/isn't.  Wow, that's grammatically ironic, my use of the symbol "slash."    :hihi:
   Sit back and enjoy the ride...   :beer: 

 It could be argued that as much as Axl brought to the table he also brought alot of chaos. ?Of course that's probably why we love him/his work. ?But let's not forget a bit of history. ?His behaviour caused alot of negativity towards the band. ?Of course to the majority of them you could say who cares? ?But for GNR to end up as a cliche - band get's too big for it's boots - burns out - story. ? ? There are not many people that i have heard from who have worked or been around the band that have much good to say about Axl. ? ? You could say fuck them but respect is a valuable thing.

It could be argued that The old members were needed to keep that Illusions Tour going. ?I'm sure i don't need to bring to peoples attention to his approach to his fans and gigs. ?Ok he decides where he shows up and at what time.... but when you have 80,000+ people who have come to worship you, but are now - ?4 hours later, really pissed off and on verge of riots. ?And he strolls in and his reason is he was taking a shower. ?It's pure hilarious to us now lol. ?But to go through that kind of thing every night as Slash ect did, not knowing if the guy would even show - it's a crazy way to do things. ?You could say well it is rock n' roll and all that. And yeah fine, but don't try and paint it all as Black and White as some would like to believe.

I seem to see more open mindedness from people who really like VR - towards Axl. And a genuine hope that his work kicks ass. ?More so than the other way around. ?Which is curious. ?Almost like they have been arguing the same points for so long they're in automatic lol. I personally haven't heard anything from nu-GN'R'S material that could not have been off Illusions. Madagascar could sit easily next to Coma for example. ? ? Oh My God which I know is Navarro on the solo but that sounds like a Slash?sound.   

Back to topic, I think they should all grow up, kiss and make up before they are too bloody old. ?Even if they don't get back together, life is too short for all that shit. ?And they are on the wrong side of 40, i hope i have learnt alot more by that age.

Well the fact is the name belongs to axl as far as i know. And GnR was made famous by Axl,Slash duff and Izzy and steven. Someone said that VR is guns without Axl but GNR now is   what its like without the other members,going nowhere.   

I say it because Jimmy Page was the man who led the band.

I posted the following ages ago and I post it again thinking it might make some connection with the topic.

Once upon a time there was a British band called The Yardbirds. The band was successful but went through numerous member changes. In Late '68 when the last founding man quitted, the only man remained in the band other than a manager was The fourth guitarist who originally had joined the band as a relief of the bass. He was formerly an acknowledged studio musician and he called his close session mate to join the band and swiftly they found a vocalist and a drummer. The reassembled Yardbirds took over the contract and toured until a founding member staked his claim on the band name. The guitarist and the manager didn't have the right that they were compelled to change the name. Then under a new band name they went ahead with a big tour in US and then released their self titled debut album in '69. Late in the same year their self titled second album made No. 1 in UK n US.   
The rest is history?
History is made every minute.

While Mack's point being Axl's or Merck's serious attitude toward music bears comparison with that of Zeppelin, I suggested the forth guitarist of The Yard birds was the heart, soul and passion of the band in question, whatever the name was. It's an example of that The sound mind gets the sound body. He produced all of their albums. Check out credits on the records.

Still there are old school Yardbirds fans grunting about Jimmy Page, while the majority hasn't heard of a song off the band in which Zep had its origin. I was the latter until quite recently and am never the former obviously.

Had the forth guitarist of The Yardbirds owned the name, we would be calling The band known as Led Zeppelin the Yardbirds. :hihi:

I'm trying to follow the logic here.  It has to be the original members to be considered GNR?  Does that mean when Steven left and Matt took over, it wasn't really GNR?  Or when Izzy left, then was it no longer GNR?  How many original members does the band have to retain for it to really be GNR?

i think its the fact that guns disapeared with the line up of, axl, slash, duff and matt and maybe dizzy

then reapeard with a complete new line up 8 years later with a brand new line up, i think that the cause of the problem

loads of bands replaced members and kept goin and there was no fuss, but they replaced members one by one and didnt dissapear and kept doin gigs and releasing stuff, guns didnt do that, if they did then we mitent have this problem

My feelings exactly. I would probably follow that "other" version of Guns N' Roses, but from afar, kind of. Axl has always been the main attraction for me.

Yeah and the crap sounded like Hollywood Rose...

They definately couldn't go on as Guns N Roses without Axl...... It isn't often a band can get away with swapping out lead singers unless you are AC/DC or Van Halen.....

As for the musicians I guess it deoends on a band... I mean Guns were a true band and the 5 of them kicked ass... Once they added Dizzy and Izzy and Steven were gone it still wasn't the same... The Slash/Izzy combo was the the backbone of Gn'R's sound and it will never be the same without them...

I think Axl should put the name to rest and I would expect the others guys to do the same if they had the name and Axl was gone..

Also to whoever that was, Slash may not be Jimmy Page but he is just as important to Guns as Page was to Zeppelin..

And of slash and duff had the name the crap that is called snake pit, believe in me and contraband would have been the last 3 gnr albums.

Cool thread, Mike. :beer: Let's go back in time and visit an alternate GNR timeline. Illusions is released September 17, 1991. Lets say GNR get into a huge fight, and in October Axl is fired. If memory serves me correct, this would be before Izzy left and they had signed over the name to Axl. This would have been huge news, and Illusions would have started selling again like they did the first week of release. With Axl gone, Izzy wouldn't have left, at least not for awhile. Axl would have probably went into his cave, while GNR looks for a new singer. All videos, promotion, etc. for Illusions would stop. GNR would have found a new unknown singer to take Axl's place, and would quickly go to work on a new album. Dizzy would be fired also, and GNR would go back to doing AFD style material. Is this version of GNR really GNR? Yes it is. Would they be as successful without Axl? Probably not, especially in the face of grunge. Could they have been relevant to the music scene? Yes. Would they have continued making albums, even up to the present day? Definitely. Would Axl have continued his career without the GNR name and doing things solo? Well, considering that he's done nothing substantial using the GNR name, its safe to say he wouldn't have done anything solo either. Either way you look at it, Axl is M.I.A. with or without the GNR name, while everyone else associated with GNR keeps contributing to the world of music.

If Slash and Duff fired Axl before the release of the UYIs then Gnr would not have been as huge as they were in the 90s. Also the UYIs were have sucked with out Axls songs.

Read it again, Dave. The firing would take place after the Illusions release.

So if I'm understanding you, you are saying they needed Axl and his songs to be the huge success that they were.  But to continue existing, Axl would have to leave.  Then the music would have continued, but in some less successful, mediocre way?  So in this scenario, GNR exists but becomes some nostalgic 80's band that fades away like the rest?  Like Skid Row, Motley Crue, or Warrant?

Well Axls songs would stay  but the albums after UYI would still be the crappy snake pit albums, believe in me and contraband.

Dave, I strongly disagree. The primary songwriters of the albums you mentioned is Duff, Eric Dover, and Weiland. In this alternate version of GNR, Izzy would have been the main songwriter. Continuing GNR's success, but to a lesser extent.

I don't care what the band is called.  I will always follow Axl because he is the most contraversial, raw, unpredictable, and talented one out of the bunch.   

Perhaps it's not fair... but I cannot fathom a band called "Guns N' Roses" without W. Axl Rose as the lead singer.

Admittedly, GN'R is a little "akward" these days without Slash and Duff, but it is not unbearable or unfathomable (IMHO). : ok:

They would just change the name to guns without rose.

"Guns N' Roseless".

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Sorry...

I like that one better than mine.  :rofl:

personelly (sorry i havnt read all the posts in this topic yrt,yoo drunk) i was attracted to gnr at the age of about 9 by axls voice,not slashs guitar techniques.dont get me wrong coz im a big big big slash fan but gnr without axl would have never been the same.but axl with a half decent guitarist woul;d still be cool to me.to answer your question,if the name belonged to the ex gunners then the name GUNS N ROSES would be buried along with others like motley crue etc,but with axl updating there sound,GUNS N ROSES still has a BIGGGGGGGGGGGGG chance of survival.does ne1 agree ?

I guess there are two sides then: One that was attracted to the band by Axl's voice and a whole other bunch that liked the band because of Slash's playing (myself included).

back in the day...if Axl had quit and the other guys wanted to continue then fuckin' oath : ok: : ok:

Its the same reason why i think Axl is doin' the right thing :yes:

I think this is what most people feel.? Myself included.?

That still doesn't mean that this new solo project of Axl's is Guns N Roses.

Nor would I consider Slash/Duff and a new singer Guns N Roses.

Nor do I think they would even consider carrying on the name without Axl.  I think Slash and Duff have a keen sense of how Rock N Roll fans feel about such things.

dave I don't think you are capable of ever giving another ex gunner credit unless axl sang the songs.. If slash did silkworms or soemthing we would hear how much it sucked ass.. To act like you can't find one thing positive in snakepit or contraband is crazy..

You act like everything gnr did forever would be cutting edge or ground breaking.. Every band evenbtually puts out a dud or some type of lemon in comparison to their better material.. See some of axl's new material.. That is if we're comparing it to the older well known gnr music..

Somehow I think if axl sang something off snakepit or contraband people would say it was good.. I could put money on if axl did loving the alien, dlt or you got no rightr people would say it's really good

Sucks gnr had to break up because we could actually focus on music instead of taking sides..

just about all of gnr was on snakepit and members from other groups/// Sucks no one has talent unless axl is in the band :hihi:

I asked a very simple question would you still consider this gnr if the other's owned the name?? That has nothing to do with talent, it has nothing to do with what the band members have done since.. it's about ownership and how you feel..
I tend to think a name represents something epsecially when it is such a famous one... So when the band breaks up like it did wether slow or fast it's done and that should be cherished until the future when and if the band comes back together..

Not everyone was only drawn to guns because of axl.. Fuck I know so many people who loved guitar and were drawn for slash.. Sure axl is the most known just like any quaterback is, but without the guy blocking his ass off on the offensive line the quaterback would be saked.. Gnr was a guitar rock band with great vocals.. They went hand n hand like any great duo did..

creative difference is grounds for breakups and that is a major reason gnr broke up and has been broken up ...

No I dont think it would be GNR. You can't have guns n' roses without Axl. He was what made gnr great, his voice, attitute and stage presence is what gave guns that extra bite.

Or Axl without guns?

It could've been ok, if Izzy would've continued writing, since he was the main songwriter. don't still know if they should've used GN'R name? :-\
I believe there's no GN'R without izzy, slash duff or without Axl.

I know many people who are not particuarly into GN'R but know they hate Axl, but love Slash.? I'm not just saying that to make my point here. But when you go out to the rock clubs?or even at? Uni? or Work, and talk to different people who love their music.? His behaviour is something that turns alot of people off.? He has acted like a dickhead at times and people do remember that stuff. Let's not pretend if we met him we'd be garanteed a welcome reception lol.? I love Axl really do. But i don't really want to meet him. Because i know depending on his mood, I wouldn't know what response i would get.? And i wouldn't want to walk away thinking what an asshole after loving his work for half of my life you know?

Why can't people enjoy the solo projects/ex-members projects for what they are?? You know it's not going to be GN'R so get over it.? Izzy is/was probably the strongest individual songwriter of them all,? but his records won't be GN'R.? He doesn't sell like GN'R records would sell. So it's unfair to compare the two. Because it's very unlikely that without that name they will ever sell that kind of amount of records ever again.? But you forget they don't need too either. They have been there done it.? Aslong as they keep making new music that's what i want.

I can only talk from my point of view. But when i listen to those guys' work outside of GN'R. There are always moments where you hear their GN'R side and does make you think man.... if only all the GN'R gang had worked on that song.? If Axl was singing that or of that had Slash on there kicking ass, or if that had Izzy's writing to make it a bit stronger.? But it's still enjoyable, great music.? Axl has not done anything away from GN'R, so we can't yet hear if it lacks a certain something that would have benefited with the others input somewhere. Time may tell.

 They all added a very valuable ingredient to make a Guns record.? ?If you can't see that, then you have probably been stuck on here saying the same thing for 4 years lol.? The same arguments to the same people, it's old man.? VR is not trying to be Gun's, Izzy's not trying to be Axl and Axl surely isn't trying to be anybody else lol.? If he could i'm sure he would clone himself so he could be the whole band lol .

Someone said about Slash using a similar riff to Sweet child - because he couldn't think of new ideas....come on, can u actually rip yourself off? ...Maybe in America lol. ? But Check out Madagascar One of the first songs we hear after 10/6 or 5 years? (take your pick lol). And there's a very recognisable sample from Civil War -? Ok i know some cleaver sod is going to say 'well that wasn't techincally GN'R'.? But you play that line in a rock club and people would think of Civil War straight away.? 'Oh My God' sounds very much like Slash in the solo.? The point is if your listening for faults every time then you will find them but what's the point? What does it do?? Why does it matter? Nothing is perfect.

You cannot say if the ex-members had stayed, then it would have been a boring RN'R Snakepit,Vr or Neurotic Outsiders album.? Snakepit would have been 1/5th of an album with everybody else' input on top.? Think about it (and If Gilby was still on board too) We would have had a mash of the  1st Snakepit, Pawn Shop guitars, Neurotic outsiders... these were all the first post Guns releases.  With Axl in the mix and adding his talent with the best stuff off those albums, to me that sounds like a damn good album that never was.?

There's some great stuff. Even if you have hated singers or certain lyrics. Any idiot here saying that they wouldn't have wanted another GN'R album is totally lieing.? ?If Axl was singing that stuff, you would love it, be honest for once. Certain ppl here? would be biased.? You have missed on some good songs, great times at gigs ect. Just because you have been busy defending a man in his forties, who doesn't care less. The rest of us are actually enjoying it all as it comes.?

I agree with a lot of what you said.. A team they were who added something each to make a great alum/songs.

it just seems fashionable to like or dislike something because there is a lack of whoever their favorite is..

There were 2 front men in the beatles: Paul and John.  So it's not really a fair comparison.  However, if you ask if the beatles could have continued witout George and/or Ringo...I think the answer would be a resounding "Yes".  It would have been unfortunate, but, if John and Paul had continued on without them, they could have "pulled it off".

the beatles also broke up in a vastly different way.  And John was tragically killed.  Maybe not the best of analogies.  The Zepplin analogy earlier I thought was much better.

Bingo!

jarmo hit the nail firmly on the head.

It's as much about HOW the band broke up as it is about WHO is in it.

So, Metallica shouldn't me Metallica?

And "The Beach Boys" shouldn't be "The Beach Boys"?

And "Korn" shouldn't be "Korn"?

How many bands out there have changed from it's original membership, either by tragedy or by a band member leaving? Many of them.  Yet, they still call themselves by their original names.

I have to agree with you. I don't care what the others would do with the name, I would just be interested in what Axl's doing

The cure only has their lead singer left and is still called the cure.

IM not really sure in this hypothetical that Izzy woulda stayed in the band considering that slash hated playing on stage with him, and that is a fact, and he said it many times in the past. So you would be looking at um.yes VR version of GNR. In that senerio.

exactly.  Axl has always been the driving force behind GNR.

Mike, when are you going to let this go?   you've been on these message boards for years whining about the same shit.  this is stuff that happened almost a decade ago!  get over it man.

Jim, why do you say mike should stop "whining"? Because he doesn't have his head up Axl's ass? You 'Axl is God' people are funny. You constantly whine about the ex members, and when someone brings up something from a perspective that isn't Axl's, you start whining and start the usual insults. If you're gonna accuse someone of whining, first look in the mirror, and then go post in every single thread telling people to stop whining. Dont just single certain people out that dont think everything Axl says is the gospel.

It was a simple question man I asked how people would view gnr if the roles were reversed..  people need to understand each individual is what made gnr great, and each fan of gnr feels certain members shined more for their own personal taste..

people who are into certain instruments see bands for different reasons, not everything for each fan is just the lead singer.. A guitar player can love gnr for slash so they may feel he was the best guy in the beand.. Another person can be into say the rhcps and like bass and be into flea more the anythony.. Some love motley crue for tommy lee's drumming, or zepplin and the who for moon and bonham..

Each member of this forum has a view of what gnr is and everyone is entitled to their opinion..

For every great lyrical gnr song there is an equal riff and solo to go with it.. Even some gnr songs I am not in love with I can still find instrumentals I enjoy..

As for the whining thing jim, maybe if others didn't tell people how they should feel towards gnr or the name everyone could co exist and be happy.. Maybe jim if there was actual music, tours, single, albums, or anything that bands actually do there would be better stuff to concentrate on besides lawsuits or what axl's hair is going to look like if he ever makes it back..

Finally if you feel a simple question is whining then just chose to avoid the thread . No one is forcing you to read or reply.. I just can't sit around saying I am on my 36743892675893679386789327892 listen of the irs stolen demo..