Here Today... Gone To Hell!

Guns N' Roses => Dead Horse => Topic started by: Bostonrose on May 28, 2006, 09:18:26 PM



Title: Which is better>
Post by: Bostonrose on May 28, 2006, 09:18:26 PM
Listen to them both
then tell me Axl sounds beter than ever and the Finck can play better the Slash and that the new band can play better the old GNR

I dare you watch them both and still say it with a straight face

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4qq6y9xLBc



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5j2B2V7XYg


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: axlrosegnr on May 28, 2006, 09:19:52 PM
Give it a rest.....don't you get bored with this?  You're never gonna convince someone to change their minds....and we don't expect you to change your mind either


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: Jonathan on May 28, 2006, 09:20:33 PM
Can't you just give it up?


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: darknemus on May 28, 2006, 09:20:57 PM
I prefer my performers semi-sober, sorry.

Regardless - what's better doesn't matter..you won't see a reunion, period, until this chapter of Axl's life plays out.  So, basically, either get over it or just keep playing your old Illusion bootlegs and dwell in the past.

-darknemus


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: Bostonrose on May 28, 2006, 09:21:29 PM
semi sober?? I love how you new gnr fans? just trash the legacy that others helped build...like it means piss.
You're fooling yourself
Axl sounds like Mickey Mouse


I get so angry when people say Axl sounds better than ever....UGHHH


Anyway,

 I'll stop...

PS.

 ?I wonder what it's like for Robin to get up in front of tens of thousands of people and jam the fuck out of SOME ELSES song...


I digress, back to my cave....


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: Jonathan on May 28, 2006, 09:22:07 PM

back to my cave....

Thank you.


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: Steel_Angel on May 28, 2006, 09:25:23 PM
axl sounds better than ever? ?:hihi:


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: darknemus on May 28, 2006, 09:26:27 PM
semi sober?  I love how you new gnr fans  just trash the legacy that others helped build...like it means piss.

A. Considering my first exposure to Guns was a crappy taped copy of "Nice Boys" from Live Like a Suicide on the schoolbus when I was like, 11, I'd hardly consider myself a 'new fan'.

B. What the original guys did matters, very much so.. I'll never deny that.

C. What Axl's doing now matters more to me - sorry.  Call it a double standard but I have no issues w/ Axl with other musicians.  On the other hand, I don't like Slash w/ Weiland.  Its just a matter of personal preference.

D. The original guys are NO LONGER IN  THE PICTURE.  So dwelling on them or how much better things would be with them is pointless, in my opinion.

-darknemus


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: ShotgunBlues1978 on May 28, 2006, 09:30:19 PM
Listen to them both
then tell me Axl sounds beter than ever and the Finck can play better the Slash and that the new band can play better the old GNR

I dare you watch them both and still say it with a straight face

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4qq6y9xLBc



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5j2B2V7XYg

Why even bother with this?  There are precious few people who say Finck is better than Slash, I've hardly ever heard anyone say that.  Similar point, not many people say Axl sounds better than ever, but better than he did during a lot of the UYI shows, at least during the Hammerstein shows.  His voice sounded better at RIR on SCOM than it did at a lot of the UYI shows


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: axlrosegnr on May 28, 2006, 09:33:00 PM
I'm just going to copy and paste one of my posts from a previous thread, it gets old saying the same thing every time

"I'm 22 yrs old. I remember listening to Gn'R sonce I was 5. My first concert ever was Gn'R when I was 9 yrs old. I love the music the old band created, and always will. However, I could give two shits about Slash, Duff, ect. now, because they aren't in my favorite band anymore, and most likely never will be again. Now, I'm focused on Guns N' Roses, and right now Guns N' Roses is the band that took the stage last night. You can call me an Axl worshiper...in fact, i'll even agree with you on that one. I have the guy's face and name tattooed on my leg, so yeah, I'm an Axl follower. You guys keep comparing the old to the new. Why? There's no point to it. If you prefer the old, great, but stop slamming the new, your constant bitching about it isn't going to change things. Either take what your gettting and enjoy it, or, if it's not something you like, move on. No one cares that you miss the old band, and people that love this band now, are not going to change their minds and agree with you, nor do I expect anybody who doesn't like the mew band to suddenly agree with me. It's perfectly fine if you like the old band, just quit trying to bring this band, and their current fans down. I've seen the new band three times, and loved every second of it. I don't give a shit if it wasn't the greatest musical moment ever, but ya know what? It was to me."


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: jimmythegent on May 28, 2006, 09:33:52 PM
whats with all these lame comparisons of late?

It amazes me that some 'fans' are in constant need of validation in terms of constantly comparing these hired guys to the real Guns.

No amount of you pulling up old obscure bad ?clips and comparing it to 10 secs of coherent playing from the new guys in what was an otherwise poor performance, is going to convince anyone other than the most delluded of souls.

Newsflash. There is no comparing.

Do what I do, be a fan of Axl and his new musical endeavour - enjoy it and support it for what it is- the legend that is Axl Rose with a bunch of ?hired (admittedly talented) musicians


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: HoldenCaulfield on May 28, 2006, 09:35:11 PM
I won't dub one of those particular performances "better" than the other, but I'll say that I PREFER the current GNR's said performance. It's all subjective, which is something you don't seem to understand. I like the current band 10 times more than I ever did the old one. I just personally like Robin Finck more than Slash, his style and playing appeals to me more, and I think Axl is in fine form now. He's got a maturity to him that he didn't then, which don't get me wrong, he was awesome back then as well, a total live wire. I'll take the new band... ?:)


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: Lara on May 28, 2006, 09:35:53 PM
axl sounds better than ever   :hihi:

How come you get all the good avatars?   :P


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: destroier on May 28, 2006, 09:38:44 PM
I think the new band sounds better at times, worse at others. As for Axl, he just doesn't have it like he did.


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: Steel_Angel on May 28, 2006, 09:40:10 PM
axl sounds better than ever? ?:hihi:

How come you get all the good avatars?? ?:P
howcome u get all the bad ones?  :P jk

oh hey, stay on-topic u dont wanna get bad karma  :hihi:


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: Bill 213 on May 28, 2006, 09:42:49 PM
This topic and the other comparison topics are boring.  Poor message board is getting clustered with trash.  ::)


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: Lara on May 28, 2006, 09:49:03 PM
axl sounds better than ever   :hihi:

How come you get all the good avatars?   :P
howcome u get all the bad ones?  :P jk

oh hey, stay on-topic u dont wanna get bad karma  :hihi:

This topic is boring and pointless, anyway....  :-\


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: russtcb on May 28, 2006, 09:57:02 PM
Listen to them both
then tell me Axl sounds beter than ever and the Finck can play better the Slash and that the new band can play better the old GNR

I dare you watch them both and still say it with a straight face

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4qq6y9xLBc



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5j2B2V7XYg

Face completely straight:

"Axl sounds beter than ever and the Finck can play better the Slash and that the new band can play better the old GNR"



Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: Steel_Angel on May 28, 2006, 10:01:00 PM
howcome u get all the bad ones?? :P jk

oh hey, stay on-topic u dont wanna get bad karma? :hihi:

This topic is boring and pointless, anyway....? :-\
Quote
true dat..


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: 2NaFish on May 28, 2006, 10:04:43 PM
dood, how stupid are you. both are sweet child o mine.

better is a completely different song. duh.


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: ARC on May 28, 2006, 10:12:24 PM
Ritz 88' is better, obviously.

But dude, it ain't 1988 anymore...  : ok:


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: SWINGTRADER on May 28, 2006, 10:12:39 PM
nothing beats the 1988 ritz ?show ? NOTHING!! ? I know it and most of us know it, but why are you in here posting bullshit?? ? Axl is older, he ?doesn't have the same voice ?and has gained more weight ? , he will never be able to do what he did before . ?But he is still a very good performer ?and better than most of the kids ?that are out there today. ?His voice is still good enough to get it done, it's not as powerful as it used to be ?but it is still gfood enough to put on a good performance. ?The new band will also never be as good as the old band ?but it ?still has Axl . Slash ,Duff, Adler , Izzy and Axl will never get back together because they can't coexist(too much bad blood) . So please stop your fucking whining and go play with the metalsludge posters ?they are more receptive to what you are saying. ?I would also like to state that the Slash ?that performed at the ritz ?is also dead because he's not the same either. ?I have seen VR twice ?and Slash is not the same dude i remember seeing. He doesn't have the same showmanship and his solos are freakin average now. ?Axl and Izzy guided Slash on his solos. ?Axl and Izzy gave slash a foundation onto which to build on , ?VR is nothing but ordinary music ?that will never inspire Slash into making another memorable riff. ?

And for everybody that wants to say that Axl should not use the name and that he doesn't have the right to use it , Just remember this : ? ?Axl, Izzy , ?Ole Beich , ?Rob Gardner, and Tracii guns . ?When Izzy Stradlin left GNR in 1991 ?the only original member left ?was Axl Rose. ?Axl Rose has been the only original member of GNR since 1991. ? ? GNR was Axl and Izzy's baby ?. ? So please stop with the" it's not gnr without slash duff and matt". ?The fact that you even include that piece of crap Matt ?in the discussion ?is a disgrace in itself ?. ? ?


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: PDW on May 28, 2006, 10:18:15 PM
Listen to them both
then tell me Axl sounds beter than ever and the Finck can play better the Slash and that the new band can play better the old GNR

I dare you watch them both and still say it with a straight face

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4qq6y9xLBc



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5j2B2V7XYg

Face completely straight:

"Axl sounds beter than ever and the Finck can play better the Slash and that the new band can play better the old GNR"




I think it pretty much goes like this: nobody can play a Slash solo better than Slash, and nobody can play a Fink or Fortus solo better than Fink or Fortus. To tell you the truth, I kind of feel sorry for the new guitarists for having to play these legendary solos and take so much shit for not sounding just like Slash. I love the old band as much as anybody else, but for them to reunite now and do a tour would just be a trip down memory lane--albeit a fuckin' great trip.

But, man, GNR at the Ritz in '88. That's fuckin tough to beat!


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: gnrkid03 on May 28, 2006, 10:19:04 PM
The Ritz Nightrain was good for Axls singing, but Slash fucks up some notes big time in that.  I liked the RIR version a lot better.


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: saint seiya on May 28, 2006, 10:20:23 PM
slash is better but thats the past so get over it i guess...



Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: Krispy Kreme on May 28, 2006, 11:51:49 PM
The original is always better, which is not to say the imitation is not credible, or well done. But 20 years later, with new players, it  is an imitation.


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: ShotgunBlues1978 on May 28, 2006, 11:56:51 PM
Now for a more relevant question, what's better, a new GnR show or a Velvet Revolver show?  Velvet Revolver was very good live, but when it came to both energy, spectacle and performance they weren't nearly as good as the GnR at MSG 2002 or Hammerstein.  I'd rather see this new GnR playing 5 new songs and a bunch of classics than VR playing 10 new songs and 4 old ones, with no solos from Slash besides the ones in the songs


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: Minneapolisnewsman on May 29, 2006, 12:08:53 AM
Listen to them both
then tell me Axl sounds beter than ever and the Finck can play better the Slash and that the new band can play better the old GNR

I dare you watch them both and still say it with a straight face

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4qq6y9xLBc



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5j2B2V7XYg

What a fuckin joke.?

--two different types of venues, which translates into two very different audio recordings.
--He has always had a night off, and a night on.? Actually, if you go this this site, you can view a little better recording of Sweet Child @ this location:
http://music.aol.com/network_live/concert_videos/guns_n_roses/ondemand
 :yes:
--the sound was so fucked up last night, that at times the vocals and guitars were inaudible, hence Fincks whole solo in this second clip.? Moreover, Axl's microphone was dropping out completely last night.? How can you compare these yet, when all we have are limited three and four track internet feeds?? Wait until we get a DVD type live disc, which will be produced as MTV produced the clip from 88.? I do think GNR need's there sound team to step up, even if the board did catch on fire last night.
--Really, you should be banned.? Your obviously obsessed with the New GNR, or you are working for the VR/VR's lawyers web-team, or you are Scott Weiland.? Whomever you are, it is pretty sick to come to a GNR website, the past three day's and spend every second of your time spouting off negative drivel, with the knowledge that it will provoke a fight.? I feel for you, if you are not getting paid.?

BTW, there are about 50 streams/youtube downloads from 1990-1993 where Sweet Child was horrible. For every bad version, there is a great one!? It's live music, you know, unforseen things happen!


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: lookingforbigfoot on May 29, 2006, 02:10:24 AM
They're totally different performances...the old clip the mix was dead on - do the same mix & sound quality at this RIO show and it's a toss up - down to preference, not talent, they're just a little different..

Now, take a look at KOHD - I think that was a kick ass version at RIO - AXL was totally into it, banged every note head on - the band really hit a groove with it - way better than any illusion era performance of it, even the freddy mercury concert...

http://music.aol.com/network_live/concert_videos/guns_n_roses/ondemand

Check out KOHD and take note of axl's little vocal solo's - bang on - the rasp, clean, high, low, scream - he was in total control...he was on and he knew it, you can see it in his expression.


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: D on May 29, 2006, 02:20:02 AM
Listen to them both
then tell me Axl sounds beter than ever and the Finck can play better the Slash and that the new band can play better the old GNR

I dare you watch them both and still say it with a straight face

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4qq6y9xLBc



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5j2B2V7XYg


This is obviously a no brainer.

I dont think even the most loyal Axl fan could sit here and say the new band is greater than the old band.


What Finck has to do to be better than Slash:


Write 5 of the most memorable riffs and solos in rock N Roll History.
Become a ROCK God and Icon

Write 5 Riffs that stands the test of time.


Until he does this I dont wanna hear anyone say He is better or even on par with Slash.


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: ShotgunBlues1978 on May 29, 2006, 02:48:59 AM
Listen to them both
then tell me Axl sounds beter than ever and the Finck can play better the Slash and that the new band can play better the old GNR

I dare you watch them both and still say it with a straight face

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4qq6y9xLBc



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5j2B2V7XYg


This is obviously a no brainer.

I dont think even the most loyal Axl fan could sit here and say the new band is greater than the old band.


What Finck has to do to be better than Slash:


Write 5 of the most memorable riffs and solos in rock N Roll History.
Become a ROCK God and Icon

Write 5 Riffs that stands the test of time.


Until he does this I dont wanna hear anyone say He is better or even on par with Slash.

Besides a few individuals I don't think anyone has said Finck is better than Slash or even his equal.  From what I've seen almost everyone thinks otherwise.  But what Axl's new version of GnR is doing, both in new songs and in live performance is a step above what the rest of the band members have done since they left.  The VR shows were very good but they lacked the attitude and entertainment of the old GnR shows, and the new GnR shows.  Slash didn't even do any solos, cover solos or jams that were some of the best moments during the old days, their shows lacked the spontaneity and energy they used to have, and he doesn't have the same energy or presence he used to have on stage either but that's rarely mentioned.  Axl doesn't sprint around stage anymore and doesn't have the same energy or consistently gritty vocals , but he still comes close in commanding the crowd and stage presence


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: SLCPUNK on May 29, 2006, 02:50:32 AM



I get so angry when people say Axl sounds better than ever....UGHHH




Axl sounds better than ever..........and don't forget it.  ;D


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: Parabola on May 29, 2006, 01:47:18 PM
I'm so sick of the "i've been a fan since i was 5 bull shit" come on! look around do you know what 5 year old kids do on a daily basis ?


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: makane on May 29, 2006, 01:57:38 PM
Oh that Ritz gig is so kickass stuff. I'd give my left arm to see that live.


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: Bostonrose on May 29, 2006, 02:12:01 PM
I'm so sick of the "i've been a fan since i was 5 bull shit" come on! look around do you know what 5 year old kids do on a daily basis ?

Why does everyone trash the History of the band..
You fucking wankers act like Axl walked in one day with AFD under arm, handed Slash some sheet music and created the whole fucking thing..



Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: knut on May 29, 2006, 02:28:26 PM
I'm so sick of the "i've been a fan since i was 5 bull shit" come on! look around do you know what 5 year old kids do on a daily basis ?
Why does everyone trash the History of the band..
You fucking wankers act like Axl walked in one day with AFD under arm, handed Slash some sheet music and created the whole fucking thing..
He did.

This thread is stupid. You can make your point in the Nightrain-thread. It's the same thread.


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: ShotgunBlues1978 on May 29, 2006, 02:31:48 PM
Why does everyone trash the History of the band..
You fucking wankers act like Axl walked in one day with AFD under arm, handed Slash some sheet music and created the whole fucking thing..

Who is everyone?  There's almost nobody here that thinks the way you're pretending the entire board thinks.  In all the years I've been here I've seen maybe 2 or 3 people claim Finck is better than or even as good as Slash.  Most people think otherwise. 

There are a lot of us though who think what the new band is doing is better than what the former members have been up to since they quit, and that the new version of Guns N Roses performs better and makes better music than Velvet Revolver or Snakepit


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: ppbebe on May 29, 2006, 03:05:56 PM
If you seriously want a real objective answer about this, ask as many as non GNR fans without telling which is by whom.



Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: rubinone on May 29, 2006, 03:25:43 PM
Who gives a shit about old vs new....

I'm 30 and I was a fan back in the days and I'm still a fan and I'm sure that the two shows that I'm gonna go to will be better than most of the shitty wannabe bands out there!


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: Origen on May 29, 2006, 03:32:02 PM
I prefer my performers semi-sober, sorry.

You mustn't like Rock N Roll then considering most of all the great Rock N Roll bands were drunk while performing at some point.





Quote
Regardless - what's better doesn't matter..you won't see a reunion, period, until this chapter of Axl's life plays out.  So, basically, either get over it or just keep playing your old Illusion bootlegs and dwell in the past.

-darknemus
What is it Axl said, people think they know what's going on in the band but they really know shit.
You don't know what Axl is thinking or has planned.


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: Locomotive98 on May 30, 2006, 03:08:51 AM
I prefer my performers semi-sober, sorry.

-darknemus


So you prefer them drunk then? Either your sober or not and I think Axl had had a few cans at Rio judging by that singing. Or he'd just sucked off a porcupine.


Title: Re: Which is better>
Post by: NicoRourke on May 30, 2006, 04:05:30 AM

Dead Horse please ...

What the fuck is happening, since the Hammerstein shows it looks like fuel has been added on the "New Vs Old GN'R bullshit".