Here Today... Gone To Hell!

http://www.rollingstone.com/rockdaily/index.php/2007/07/23/the-next-cover-of-rolling-ston-or-at-least-part-of-it/

http://www.rollingstone.com/rockdaily/index.php/2007/07/24/guess-the-next-rolling-stone-cover-the-second-clue/

Rolling Stone is giving away who is on their next cover in incremental clues which I've posted above.  A bunch of the posters there are swearing this is the old Guns lineup, possibly something commemorating AFD.  Personally I'm a little skeptical of that.  What do you think?

Also, I realize it says "smashing" in the first picture probably for Smashing Pumpkins but RS never puts the cover artists' name above theirs.  Plus that would be a little obvious.

Looks like Alice Cooper to me

now even rolling stone magazine is playing games with us :hihi:

We have to consider that RS wouldn't put on a cover artists or a subject with no relevance nowadays.
Yes, it could be the AFD line up, regarding the 20th anniversary of the album (but then the story would be on the style of that Classic Rock Magazine story).
If it is GNR related, I'd think they would make a "two for the price of one" thing: put VR on the cover, talk about VR's new album + a "where did they go" story, about the end of "old" GNR, a timeline of facts of the "shadowed" years, the New GNR, the 2007 tour, etc...

: : Vicente : :

Why would RS go about it this way, unless it was something very different or very exciting.

I don't get the 1st clip of the hair, but the 2nd clip could most definitely be Axl

Maybe it's a cover showing many variations of Axl? and it's all about Chinese D'?

Looking forward to it

I guess it could be Velvet Revolver.  It would be a little fucked up of RS to put old Guns on the cover the month VR releases their new album.

Looks like a copy of the GN'R rolling stone cover from yrs ago....

Am I missing something?

Exactly.

The hand with the glove could be Duff's.
The first mop of hair I don't get. But in the first clip it seems to show a part of Slash's top hat.

Anyway, we'll have to wait and see...

: : Vicente : :

The mop of hair could be Duff, Steven, or even Slash.  They always have a bright light which makes the hair look blonde or gray when it isn't.

could this be the pic it was gnr on the cover in 1988

http://www.rollingstone.com/photos/gallery/5392230/1988_rolling_stone_covers/photo/22/large/u2

yeah and slash had the glove  :drool:

I don't think they would rerun the same cover.  Could be another pic from that same photo shoot?

if it were the old gnr on the cover i would imagine that someone on this board would have located that picture of guns n roses and posted it here by now......

I'm thinking an old picture of Axl with teased hair on the left, and a new picture of Axl on the right.

Or Axl on the left and Slash on the right.

I have a hard time seeing Gn'R....hopefully I'm wrong but it could be Aerosmith!

or the same picture took 20 years after  :drool:

REUNION MOFO   :nervous:


joking  ;D it should be non-GNR-relating

Some posters at RS are saying that has to be a female leg in the pic with the glove.  This is killing me now :confused:

maybe the female of Contraband cover with gnr old line up ?  :confused:

do they do this everytime?? let people guess what's the cover gonna be?

The last thing GNR needs right now is a RS cover with an old line-up on it and article that Axl most likely refused to participate in that would correspondingly probably not be the most flattering towards him.

I think Axl will get his own cover once "Chinese Democracy" is released and he agrees to do an in-depth interview.

But who knows when that will happen.

I'll tell more: once CD is released and if Axl agrees to do an interview, RS will be suckin' it up and ass kissing everyone in the GNR camp. It's just the way they are...

: : Vicente : :

Here's a question - if they offer Axl the cover, should he refuse unless the whole current lineup gets on the cover as well?

Nice pull southsider... I think you hit it

I think he should. Although they'd look very small in the cover, with eight of them in it, hehe...

: : Vicente : :

It IS the old line up ... but it's NOT that pic

"GUNS N' ROSES 'APPETITE' TURNS 20"

I hear ya.  Was it just a coincidence that Axl didn't turn that account of his version of how and why the original GN'R broke up and then they ran a very negative article towards him in its place?  I don't think so.

Ali

there's a big "S" left from the hand...
as in roseS...

the pic could be some of the old ones, especially since it's 20 years of AFD....

we'll see soon.
I bet that either case, there's nothing about Chinese Democracy in there... so why the hell bother anymore.

Has this been confirmed?  I don't see it on their site as being confirmed?

Ali

I have it in my hands  ;)

Can you scan it?

Any new interviews with Axl or Slash?

Rock on girl!

Any chance you could possibly scan something in or give us some tidbits as to what is covered in there?  :)

Ali

No way is it GNR. The hair in the first clue is gray. No one in GNR past or present has a head of hair that shade of gray.

 -=iZzbO=-

the hairs not grey...its the lighting and white backround giving the illusion
id say it looks like adlers hair for sure

Did you not see the post where GypsySoul said she has it in her hands?

Ali

(http://www.thetabworld.com/kuvat/bands/533_bio.gif)

wtf! thats not the pic

wtf! not that 1 either  :hihi:

Its Adler new Band ?"Adler's Big titS".

I'm am so owned. It's GNR!

http://www.rollingstone.com/rockdaily/index.php/2007/07/25/the-next-rolling-stone-cover-revealed/

I was close... Same photo shoot...

Very cool.

  Maybe some Release News?...ah fuck I doubt it.

we suck on this one  :-[

(http://i.realone.com/assets/rn/img/2/0/7/7/15667702.jpg)

I wonder if the article will be just a retrospective or if they got any of the guys to give some quotes or contribute to the article at all. It is safe to assume Axl didn't, but I wonder if the other 4 might have talked about the album at all. Has anyone gotten a chance to read it who has the magazine already?

This actually could be a good thing - promotion wise for Axl

another pic from the same photoshoot? ;D
(http://i116.photobucket.com/albums/o26/cheapjonday/gunsnroses0071.jpg)

How does this do anything positive for Axl and the direction he is heading? Flashing pictures of the old band on the cover and calling them Guns N' Roses undermines and hurts him, and is in no way helpful.

It says Guns N' Roses on the cover and his picture is on it.  How is that hurtful in any way?

Ali

It's harmful because that's not Guns N' Roses anymore.

I don't agree.  I think people will see the cover and be "Appetite was great.  What about that new album?"

Ali

Although, I love the photo and I think they look really beautiful. That cover don?t make me happy I would prefer to see a new photo of Axl or the current lineup of GNR.

I sense the emergence of the ol' "old vs. new" argumentent erupting here anytime soon.  Why don't we just take it for what it's worth: a celebration of the 20th Anniversary of one of the greatest rock records of all time!  Nuff Said!

I should re-phrase - ?If Axl is going to use the next couple of months to actually promote the release of Chinese Democracy - then having this picture on the cover of the most famous Rock & Roll magazine a month or two BEFORE the actual promotion, could be a good thing - yes

** And I don't care what's on the cover, who's being interviewed, - I will bet you my bank account that there is a mention of Chinese Democracy within this article - good or bad - it will be there

It creates confusion as Jarmo has said. He saw GNR last week in Japan, and it was not the line-up that is on that cover. Covers like that only serve to stoke nostalgia in people and remind them that GNR now is not the line-up that recorded the greatest album in rock history. It makes Axl's job to sell the new line-up that much harder when a major publication keeps throwing stuff like this in his face.

I don't think it creates any confusion unless you have been living under a rock.  Everyone who follows rock in the least knows that lineup isn't together anymore.  I think Axl may be able to get on the cover again, but not until the album is set for release or has been already released.

Ali

Whew, I'm glad this turned out to be something.  Now I don't feel like a schmuck for starting a thread about it.

You're the one creating confusion.

The cover is celebrating 20 years since the release of Appetite For Destruction.

Guns N' Roses played a bunch of those songs at the shows I saw in Japan, and the fans fucking loved the shows.




/jarmo

This is the double edged sword of keeping the GnR name.  This news article doesn't change anything

Anyone else notice how fuckin' cool Izzy looks in that pic :beer:

You spent a whole thread talking about how Slash/Duff/Izzy and Steven are creating confusion among GNR fans and the public because the media is billing it as a GNR reunion minus Axl, and now you are arguing that Axl appearing on the cover of a major rock publication with 4 guys not in GNR calling them GNR doesn't do the same? Celebrating Appetite is one thing, but plastering old photos on the cover and calling it GNR when that is not the case can't be seen favorably among GNR fans.

I don't really care...

But why are people working themselves up so much? It's a magazine cover!

It won't have any impact whatsoever.

It's about Appetite For Desturction, an album that was released 20 years ago.

I don't think they are being labeled as GN'R of today.  I think it is a retrospective on GN'R's Appetite For Destruction album.

Ali

Please pay attention!

There cannot be a Guns N' Roses reunion minus Axl because Guns N' Roses is Axl, Tommy, Dizzy, Robin, Richard, Ron, Chris and Frank.

Are you saying Tommy, Dizzy, Robin, Richard, Ron, Chris and Frank are playing a show?

The cover and article is about an era in the band's history. It's not about promoting some club show by using other people's names to sell more tickets.



/jarmo

It's so clear, I can't understand all the confusion...

Does anyone know if rolling stone usually goes through all the theatrics it did with this cover?  I mean they have revealed pieces of it for the past few days... is this normal for rolling stone?  Do they do it every month?

First time I've seen them do it and I follow it pretty close.

The current incarnation of GN'R couldn't reunite because they're ... current. That wouldn't be a reunion, that would be them playing a gig. To say that a potential reunion of Slash, Duff, Izzy, and Steven is a reunion of 4/5ths of the Appetite era Guns, the "classic" lineup, which is how it's been bandied about most everywhere, is accurate. This Rolling Stone cover will make it that much more impossible to promote the "new" band as Guns N' Roses because to Joe Public, the Guns are alive and well and if they roll out on tour or release their damn album, there they are on the cover of Rolling Stone. You know, Guns N' Roses. Axl, Slash....

Ladies...

Can we stop arguing please? Guns N' Roses is on the cover of the new RS...How cool is that? It's good for BOTH the current lineup as well as Velvet Revolver. People will see the new RS, remember that album and perhaps say "hmm, maybe I should see what Slash and Duff are up to."

The cover might inspire also people to re-purchase AFD and check out the new CD when it arrives.

1)  I don't know why, but I still think it's really cool that GNR got the Rollingstone cover (Even with the current state of the magazine and it's lack of credibility in recent years).  Fuck all those people who act like this is some kind of bad thing.  Be happy that one of your favorite bands got the cover!! 20 years later!!

2)  I hope this kicks Axl's ass into gear (assuming it already wasn't) concerning the release of Chinese Democracy.  I mean being on the cover of Rollingstone would be a great platform to start promoting the album and give a release date. 

3)  I think/hope this cover leads to some real ACTION.  Not just the touring.  Which is cool in its own way, but pretty pointless in  a way and it keeps them from moving forward in terms of new music and relevance.  I respect the current band, etc but nothing matters without new music.

Great points.  I also think it's cool they put the whole original band on the cover and not just an Axl pic or Axl n' Slash cover.  All those guys contributed to the greatness of AFD.

the only thing thats gonna kick axls arse into gear is axl and only axl
regardless of what anniversary it is,  what year it is etc etc, the release of chinese democracy has no relevance to the past and in my opinion it deserves to get released with no connection to anything apart from the release of chinese democracy. it shouldnt get released because its the 20 anniversary, or its the month illusions came out, or its this or that.

So can we infer from your comment regarding the current members of Guns n' Roses that Brain is officially out of the band?  At least we could put one topic to bed.

Absoluty True !!!

 :beer:

HBK *

He's Izzy, he always looks cool.

I came here to find scans of this amazing thing but i can't believe ppl are complaining about even this.No this is not a promotion of the new gn'r, it has nothing to do with the new gn'r or axl releasing Chidem.

It might help advertise what the orijinal members are doing today (like mentioning ChiDem and Libertad) but thats not what it's meant to do.Don't worry you'll get your ChiDem cover once it's released.And people will go ''o yeah, this was the band i saw last year, duh''.

This is a celebration of the original GN'R, which we all know and love.I can't understand why some ppl here are trying to bury this legend which btw got us hooked up to this at the first place, just so the general public can recognise the new gn'r as a real band.That is not up to RS or any mag.It's up to the group releasing and playing their own material.

Great to see the original 5 on the cover.  Guns N' Roses is just a name, so it doesn't matter what you refer them as.   These 5 people on the cover made the best rock I have ever heard.

Hahaha thats funny.

Guns n Roses = Axl Rose

no, Guns N' Roses is Axl Rose, Tommy, Finck, Fortus, BBF, Frank, Dizzy and Chris. :hihi:

ZING!

Guns N' Roses is a band, good work figuring that one out... :P

and I figured that alone. Some people apparently can't... :hihi:

(http://i58.photobucket.com/albums/g274/Chicky_Licky/lol.png)

I think this is cool that its GNR's first Rolling Stone album cover in 16 years (September 1991 and not including the Axl Rose spread in 1992).

Guns break and Roses wither, but Guns N' Roses music lasts forever!
 : ok:
Mark N' Roses

:rofl: what's that? :drool:

amen to that!  : ok:

it is just a name.

i love skid row, and thoroughly enjoy seeing bach perform skid row songs with a bunch of hired guns. doesn't matter what you call them. and i wouldn't pay a nickle to see the band currently touring under the "skid row" name.

same as Pink Floyd isnt the same without Roger Waters.

good they'll be on RS cover. 8)

Sorry, off-topic but...
when did Axl say he doesnt make music for his fans or who hear him, but he just makes music for himself?

I love that Rolling Stone is commemorating the 20th anniversary of 'Appetite', but it does make me long for the days when GN'R was Axl, Slash, Izzy, Duff, and Steven.

I assume that it's the same with:

AC/DC, Rolling Stones, Mot?rhead, Metallica, Pink Floyd, Megadeth....

Give it a rest. It's the cover of a magazine, just enjoy it instead of bitching about it!

As someone already stated - It's a name. A goddamn name.

:confused:

This is just fucking silly and childish that some of you are complaining about the cover... It is a cover celebrating Appetite for Destruction, which, if I can remember right, was made by Axl, Slash, Izzy, Duff and Steven, who appear on the cover. Now tell me... what?s wrong with that? Should they put the new GN`R and then the title of "Appetite for Destruction: 20 years Anniversary"? How logical would be that? Cmon.. give it a rest and enjoy that Guns are once again on the cover of one of the most important music magazines of the world.

When does it hit the stands?? 

By the end of this month, I suppose.

So Brain is out indefinitely?

I forgot to list him since I was just listing the guys who played in Japan a couple of days ago.



/jarmo

That's awesome.  I just recently bought the edition of Classic Rock Magazine devoted to the AFD anniversary.  Now I've got this to look forward too.  Sweet! 

And seriously people, how can anyone see this as a bad thing?  Ridiculous logic you're trying to use, take a break, re-evaluate things, and hopefully then you'll see the light.

Good call.  I started reading this thread and was like, "yeah right, another baseless bullshit post".  Boy was I wrong.  Nice one man.  Gold star for you.

I listened to AFD today with a bunch of friends at work


Fuck what an amazing album it still is and will always be.

Fuckin timeless.

I bet Slash and Duff told rolling stone to do this cause they are obsessed with him..... :rofl:

How dare you - HOW dare you piss all over the great history ?and deny what these guys worked their asses off for (and by these guys I mean Axl, Izzy, Slash, Duff and Steven) ?You talk like the new guys own ALL of this now - AFD, the name - everything and that is simply not true. Are you really that arrogant? ?Look I like the new guys and I know you dont want to cause any problems between you and the bands management but sometimes Jarmo I really think you dont deserve to run this site. ?Because you constantly try to belittle what those original members contributed and meant to this band. ?Slash Duff etc werent just 'part' of the gnr history - they were the success. ?YOu want a metaphor for the way you talk - its like the old guys made peanuts and new guys are making steak sandwhiches to you. ?Geez have a little respect. ::)


P.S.  Saying this line over and over again aint going to make it true.  You may try to define what GNR is - but the true gnr lies in the hearts of the fans.  :peace:

Perhaps you would be more comfortable posting on a site that simply dedicates itself to GN'R circa 1988......Alot has happened since then......... 
                                                                                                                                                                   
Perhaps you might like the analogy that the peanuts made by Slash/Duff have now been fed to the cow that has produced some very tasty steak. Or Slash/Duff can be seen as the outer wrapping of the said steak sandwhich. You tend to throw the wrappings away.........Sometimes I don't even eat the bread in the steak sandwhich - it is the meaty filling that I am after.........

Or, look at it this way....fans of AFD are simply making Slash/Duff accountable for their actions in the past........they are big boys, they can take it.........

theres no need to talk about this, its repetitive. But Jarmo's denial of the originals band talent is pretty sad. Hes a kiss ass but if he werent , he wouldnt get a shitload of goodies.

If you go to the "About" section on this website - you will read what Jarmo has to say about AFD.  ::)

I am interested to see how you came up with the figure of 98%. Did you do the maths?

Yes.   : ok:

98% may be extreme but alot of shit is talked about the original members and alot of them take for granted what they brought to the table....  AFD was/is a classic because of the band.  not just Axl.

Yeah, will definitely be interesting to see what explanation we will get for how it is possible to induct Izzy/Slash/Duff/Axl and Adler into the rock hall as GNR when it will be an entirely different line-up in 2012. I can already see the "how can they induct GNR into the hall of fame with that line-up when I just saw them live last week and none of those 4 were in the band" type arguments like those we have gotten about other incidents recently involving those 4 names. If that situation was supposedly creating confusion one can only shudder to think of the chaos it will cause with them being inducted to the rock hall.

Look Im a huge fan of the new guys - anyne who knows me knows Im a huge fan of Robin Finck - but Im not so blindly pigheaded to think that Robin and the guys deserve any credit to this bands success - YET.  When they release CD then they can have it.

Yes, they deserve credit - they did a fantastic job at the concerts!

Really its about time the new GNR released their album.

You can make all the excuses in the world, but the facts are very simple, under the old GNR they released three albums, one EP, lots of singles, great videos and a cover album. They toured the world and caused a whole load of excitement for MILLIONS of fans worldwide over.

I'm well up for hearing what the new guys have to offer. Going by the leaks I don't think we will be disappointed. But if Axl wants to be considered with integrtity its about time to stop screwing around and produce something. And that means not just more concerts, as fun and professional as they might be.

I've started to reach the end point with this whole saga, and unfortunately whilst I want to hear the new band I can't just help the old might actually be a better idea.

So a GN'R reunion would be Axl, Tommy, Dizzy, Robin, Richard, Ron, Chris, Frank AND Brain? I don't think they (Frank and Brain) ever even performed live together!?! ?:hihi: Would be interesting to see the 9 members on stage together.

Nah, I don't agree, a "reunion" is about ex-members, not current members. How can people who are together "reunite"? They have to split up first.

It's a nice cover, I'll get my copy of Rolling Stone. It's good to see that this Rock 'n' Roll magazine celebrates the 20th birthday of the greatest rock album ever made!

Did you spend 11 years on this site? What right do you have to decide who deserves to run a site I created almost eleven years ago?

What makes you that important?



Obviously your reading comprehension got lost somewhere because what I said makes sense to every normal person. A band that exists can't reunite.

I never said anything negative about the former members contributions in the band. It's people like you and others like you who think I did because of your unwillingness to move on.

On the other hand, many of you have very little respect for people who are actually part of the band and have been since day one. But you don't have a problem with that for some reason.



/jarmo

I think when people say "Guns N' Roses reunion" they mean "Axl / Slash / Izzy / Duff / Steven reunion".

For people (not fans) GN'R is these guys, simply because the new line-up hasn't released anything. And it's sad for Tommy, Robin etc... who are in the band since... almost ten years ?

Credit where credit is due, they did release Oh My God for the End of Days soundtrack.

Oh fuck off you irritating scab.  Go troll somewhere else.

I didn't realize you shouldn't be allowed to have someting you worked hard on for over 10 years.  :o   shame on jarmo for making such a kickass website.

It's pretty disrespectful that you fail to even acknowledge the forming band. It cannot be denied that if it wasn't for Slash, Duff, Izzy, Steven, you wouldn't have created this site, because GN'R would have been nothing like the size they became.

Is it just me or is there anyone else who is failing to understand what all the excitement is about another magazine doing a retrospective article on GNR?? ????

All he's saying is "Guns N' Roses" are on tour right now(with above mentioned members)... Theres no reunion to be had....

If you say "The orginal GNR" reunion, thats different, with different people...

In no way has anybody given the current line up credit for an album none of them(besides axl), had anything to do with...

And the off-topic goes on... ?If everybody's talking, I'll say a few words too:
If there's a 1% chance for the original GN'R to get together again, throw this whole new band out and DO IT! What did new GN'R do to deserve so much credit? Almost NOTHING. All this years and there's not even a single out, only 3 or 4 demos that we can really call songs, which took a decade and a half and an army in the making. 32 new songs? The person who said this is the same one who said "it's definitely this year", and that was the begining of 2006. Nobody can assume those rumors as strong truth. But does this forum owe its very existence to the old band? Not a sign of a doubt about it...

Old GN'R are still A LOT more GN'R than those guys who claim it now. When they become capable of taking all the old songs out of the setlist, that's when this discussion may start to make some sense. : ok:

What the hell's with all the commotion? Its a cover and article talking about 'Appetite', an album that was released by the original lineup 20 years ago, and nothing else. Where would the logic be in printing a picture of the lineup of GnR as they are now when they aren't the band, minus Axl, who actually made that record 20 years ago.

All this talk about it hurting the new lineup is total bullshit. Its commemerating a 20 year old album. Its not saying that this is GnR now.

Well since Axl's NOT part of it, that's not happening either.





And where did I do that?

Show me the fucking proof or shut the fuck up.

You people are quick to point fingers with no proof whatsoever.





/jarmo

i dont think its guns in any form.

id say its cooper

Never said he was, or it was....

It looks like some people wish to give new band the credits for AFD too. Completely absurd.
P.S.: What makes Axl alone so much more GN'R than other four original members? (new members didn't write any part of the story 'till now...)

Looks like some people can't read. Absurd considering this is a message board which requires reading and writing skills.



/jarmo

I really hope that IF one day GUNS N ROSES dis-unite and go separate ways they will re-unite again after some time for a special ocassion... It would be great to see a big re-unite concert with AXL on vocals, ROBIN on guitar, RICHARD on guitar, RON on guitar, TOMMY on bass, CHRIS on synth, DIZZY on synth and FRANK on drums...

Ok. I can't read and write. Now that's true, because you want it. I had enough of this already. Good bye. Hope we get some good news next days, from the new or the old band. That would end these empty discussions...

 : ok: bye

Great.  : ok:

I've had enough of liars and people who put words in my mouth for this morning.

People who, when asked for proof, run away and hide.




/jarmo

Like it or not Axl IS the brains behind the whole operation.

Just the fact that he IS in GN'R and the others are NOT anymore? :hihi:

This is really getting out of hand. ?It's amazing that such a great thing can turn into such a vicious argument. ?I don't think anyone ever said anything about giving the new band credit for AFD. ?The guys had nothing to do with the creation of that album. ?They've done a stellar job playing the songs in concerts but it ends there. ?The old band did some fantastic things, they were the most dangerous band in the world at their height. ?I don't think ANYONE is trying to take that away from them. ?The new band has been an ongoing process and I hope that someday they can reach the heights of the old band. ?They're not there yet, but from the material we've heard they've certainly got the potential in my opinion.

As someone said earlier in this thread, this is an article about one of the greatest albums ever that was released 20 years ago. ?For that reason the bulk of the article will be about the band back in those days. ?I'm sure it'll give some updates on what those members are up to today (VR and GNR). ?That's all there is to it.

Just relax. I wasn't referring to you when I said the AFD thing. You are the site/forum owner, but you shouldn't get all comments as if they were directed at you. Now I'm really going... Bye.

Axl should try to prevent this cover to be released. That's not what GN'R needs right now. They are playing their asses of all over the world and that fucking RS magazine pops up with an old old old old old pic of a lineup that's long gone.

Fuck that.

I bet they wanted to do an interview with Axl and if they had gotten it, wouldn't have any problems with a picture of the new band on the cover...

But Axl declined...

I agree and disagree with that at the same time.

On one hand I think it's cool that RS is celebrating the anniversary of AFD and theres just no way they could do that with a picture of anyone other then the people that recorded it.

However I totally agree with the fact that these current members work their asses off to keep it going and this type of thing has to suck for them.

Hey.... maybe if some promotion for the album starts we can get a similar cover with the current lineup celebrating Chinese Democracy?

this would be an ideal time for chinese democracy to drop.   like it or not, this inappropiate RS cover is going to promote GnR nostalgia to the masses, therefore general interest in GnR is going to go up.   and this is GnR's perfect opportunity to capitalize on that.   Hopefully the album is in those stages where they can anounce a date.

Exactly. That is why there is a new GNR today.

I don't know boys and girls, it seems rather difficult to worry about the careers of those who haven't done much on their own.  Touring as much as they have is great, but as some have mentioned so far, until they release something new, there isn't much credit to be given. 

It's doubtful that anyone on the editorial staff of Rolling Stone cares how this cover and story will affect Axl and the new band's career.  Moreover, why should they really?  They're job is to sell magazines.  Appetite is still one of the biggest albums of all time.  And I'll say it again, what does anyone in the new band, with the exception of Axl, have anything to do with why Appetite is still regarded as one of the greatest albums?  It's not inappropriate at all.  Inappropriate would have been to put up a picture of the new band to celebrate Appetite's 20th anniversary.

And what could Axl do to suppress the magazine?  There's absolutely nothing he can do.  If he couldn't put a stop to Greatest Hits, he surely is powerless when it comes to a magazine.

Let's just celebrate how our favourite band, even in their original formation, is on the cover of Rolling Stone magazine again.  At least the publication is paying tribute to one of the great rock albums of the last 30 years.

When Axl and the band decides to release Chinese Democracy, then they can do something different; then it can be the new band's day. 

Cheers,

Andrew

Yeh, but if Rolling Stone want a magazine that is relevant to the times, then they should tune in to what is going on today. Lazy journalism!

Which would be??

A tour thats happened in 2002, 2006, and this year again, an album thats not out yet?

Theres no news to report on GNR right now.. Yes they're playing great shows, to great crowds.. But i'll take a story on a album thats 20 years old any day... It means the album is still relevant to this day... Plus its GREAT, FREE promotion for Guns N' Roses!!

Yep, I'd talk about the touring for a start....

You seem to be missing the point. They are celebrating 20 years. (THE NEW BAND HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH IT!!!!!!!!!!!)
Tune in to what is going on today? With gnr? not really anything relevant. Sure, they play the old songs really well. Then again, so does alot of cover bands every Friday and Saturday night at your local bar. They just dont have axl singing. When the album comes out, and there is something important to say, than I am sure mags will write about it.

No I'm not missing the point, I am going beyond the point.

Or maybe Rolling Stone wanted to put a band on the cover (old or new) that would move issues off the news stand and Hinder just didn't seem to be that band. 

Didn't Duran Duran put an album out 20 years ago!

Oh come on now.

Look. Whenever landmark albums hit a new anniversary, music magazines do this. Pet Sounds, Dark Side of the Moon, Led Zeppelin IV, London Calling, Nevermind... it happens for all of them.

If something like this hadn't happened there wouldn't have been about 5 threads whining about how Rolling Stone sucks, is out of date, doesn't know what they're doing and so on and so on.

To me, the question isn't whether or not putting GNR on the cover to celebrate the landmark of AFD hitting 20. The question is whether or not they went about it the right way.

Hence, my comment about "tuning in to what is going on today".

Today?... nothing's going on today.

? I guess it would be better to forget about AFD then.


Oh yeah RS really fucked up bigtime!? I can't believe 8 pages of bitching in celebration of the major reason we all love this band.

I think they should have had Axl, Slash, Izzy, Duff, Steven, Matt, Dizzy,Del, Gilby, Roberta, Tracy, Teddy, Paul, Dave Navarro, Zakk, Robin, Tommy, Bucket, Brain, Frank, Bumble, Pitman, and Richard....(I'm sure I forgot a few ohter people)

now that would be a cover!? ?

Cheers

How can some people keep on ignoring the politics of it all!

Do you vote at elections?

Me, I think they should have done a triple-gatefold cover that opened up, one celebrating the 20th Anniversary of AFD, the second cover featuring the current GnR, and the third a shot of Velvet Revolver...

It is celabration of one of the greatest albums of all-time.  That is it.  The 5 people on that album are Axl, Steven, Slash, Duff and Izzy.  Someday, the new GNR may be on the cover, but possibly not until they officially release some new recordings.  It is up to the editors of the mag.  People love Appetite.  The songs are really good you know?

It is a great honor for Guns N Roses to get this magazine cover. ?Alot of you are failing to see that. ?Another thing that alot of you are not understanding is that as of right now in the minds of the media Guns N Roses are Axl, Slash, Duff, Izzy, Steven or Matt, and Dizzy. ?If you go to a cd store and buy any of Guns N Roses cd's you are not going to find one without that line-up on it...besides TSI which also has Gilby. ?The bottom line is even though the new Guns line-up has been pretty stable over the past 10 years the media always refers to it as some kind of revolving door of musicians or "hired guns." ?Once "Chinese Democracy" comes out it will finally be OFFICIAL that the old line-up is no longer Guns N Roses, because you will be able to purchase music under the GNR name that does not include Slash, Duff, Izzy, Steven or Matt.....then and only then will the press finally give this line-up the respect they deserve.and they do deserve it, I have seen them 6 times and every time has been amazing..until then expect more magazine covers with outake shots of the AFD line-up....

yes it is a great honor to get the cover and yes AFD is a great album worth a 20 year celebration.  That is no question.

But putting the AFD lineup on the cover and stamping it as "Guns N' Roses" is completely fucked up and undermining what Axl is trying to do with the album.   If they wanted to keep it in good taste, the cover should have just been a shot of Axl, or the album cover.

So to debate that point; how would you have handled it?

If you were going to celebrate the anniversary of AFD in your rock magazine who would you put on the cover?

Oh, I don't know! Tracii Gunns and Axl maybe! Or, perhaps I would have a balanced article about it inside the mag - the cover photo is not the right way to go about it.

Oh ok... so you're saying to skip the cover altogether. Just having an article about the album and then talk about whats happening now?

Yeah, that'd be cool too.

FYI all,

Izzy has said (and this is on his fan site and RS.com) that he MAY drop by to see Steven Adler's show on the 28th.

So, even Izzy isn't definite.

Ali

ill bet ya its just steven...hell be lucky if the rest of Adler's Appetite shows up......(watch i say this and the whole band actually does show up including Axl... :rofl:

Lol.....good one....Here I am watching a Scrubs re-run and BAM, Dr. Cox is droppin' jokes both on the TV and on the computer.

It's real hard to believe!!! Definately!!! It's real hard to believe that some people here are bitching about the new band It's not on the cover of RS. What the new band did to be on the cover of Rolling Fuckin' Stone Magazine? Officially and absolutely nothing!!! Ok they toured recentely... But these tours are pretty much based on Appetite For Destruction. That's the main reason for the cover. Appetite For Destuction. And this album was written for the original line up. Doesn't matter what the Axl's fanatics think. It's pretty simple to me and the majority of people that are not blindly in love with Axl or don't visit foruns every fuckin' day. And for this majority of people the real band will always be the original line up or the 1991 line up. And this , Axl's ass lickers, this is something you will never change,

Do you really think if one day Chinese Democracy comes out and it becomes a real classic, who you'll think It'll be on the cover of Rolling Stone? The new band? Of Course not, will be just Axl and the headline will probably be "The Genious behind Chinese Democracy". It won't have any Dizzy or Tommy picutres. ?If someday CD comes out and becomes part of history It'll be like Pet Sounds. Who talks about Pet Sounds talks about Brian Wilson. ?And there's not puttin' the new band down. There are some great guys over there.. Like Robin, Richard, Frank. But Robin was some day out and came back. Tommy toured solo. For more that you try, It's hard for anyone that follows the music industry and don't listen exclusively to Guns N' Roses see these news gunners as band members and not some hired musicians.

But the fact today is . Old Band released 5 albuns, 4 of them were major hits. They toured around the world and Sold Out Stadiums all around. In 8 years they've made 5 albuns. They are part of Rock N' Roll history. The new band have nothing officially released, toured 2 times, these tours were pretty much based on the old band music, one of these tours were cancelled, the second one is goin' well selling out arenas . They're strugglin' to release an album for the last 8 years at least.

I think It's pretty clear to me and to anyone that has a free judgement why the old band is on the cover of Rolling Stone magazine.

Axl's ass lickers! How judgemental are you!

These suit really fits you, doesn't it?

While somewhat crude, this guy makes a lot of sense.

You have no idea who I am, newbie......

Wrong, CD is already a part of history!  But yeah the cover is to celebrate AFD.  I think the AFD cover should be on the front page.

without Appetite what would the new band play during the concerts  :rofl:

Front page of what? This website?

Why?

 :nervous:

Rolling Stone...you know the basis of this threa...

he`s about as long a member of this forum as you are dude : ok:

Touche !


btw man, dont go making threat on the internet, you did the same in a thread that got deleted just the other day, if nothing it is just a very, very sad thing to do. if you wanna make threats, do so in the real world...we'll see how far you get.

on topic...

i cant believe this thread has gone on so long!

the magazine is celebrating 20 years of AFD, there was also a thread on this forum dedicated to the same topic.
i dont mind that it has the old line up on the front cover at all. after all it is celebrating AFD, so it is fitting that those whop created AFD be on the cover.

i dont think matt sorum will be sitting around cursing the fact that steven and not him on the cover!? because he didnt record or creat AFD.....

i dont think this will harm the band at all, ther will be a reference to the band in the magazine about the tour and what next for them etc.

if anything its a bit of free publicity.

people just need to chill.....its a magazine

I think that the issue should celebrate not only the album itself, but the people who made the album, no matter where they are today, and should include the current Guns, VR, etc.

you have spent over 18 days here in 3 months and have a daily post average a little over 23... doesn't mean you're anything more than a person with a little more time on their hands than some other G&R fans

no need to call people newbies cuz your post count far exceeds what it should

nice to see gnr getting another rolling stone cover!

I'm a huge fan of Guns N Roses (past and present) , but I didn't know there were so many DOUCHE BAG FANS!!!

For those who say this is bad or somehow disrespecting what Axl's trying to do now, GET A FUCKING CLUE!!

Look at the facts: ?Appetite for Destruction made GNR famous and successful. ?The original 5 guys made that album. In most media circles it's still by far the reason that GNR is still relevant. ?Axl hasn't released a original album in 16 years. ?He tours around under the GNR name and the majority of the songs played are off of AFD.

Axl once said that he "Wanted to destroy (or some similar word) Appetite for Destruction"

Well he's not doing a very good job of it by not releasing new material in 16 years and continuing to have Chinese Demcracy tours be filled up with songs off of Appetite for Destruction. ?

I really hope Axl will release Chinese Democracy soon and get some respect, but unlike some of you people on this site, I dont' think Axl should automatically get that respect. ? If he wants respect and if he doesn't want an old picture of the original band on the cover... He should release some new F'ing music. ?End of story.

I think the majority of people on this board understand this. I even think the new gnr understand. This is one of the greatest albums of all time and the people on that cover (AND ONLY THOSE PEOPLE) have anything to do with it. There are only a few idiots on these boards that think GNR started in 2002 with axl and some new employees covering all the music (from the guys on that cover).

i think he said he wanted to bury it.. that was when he promoted UYI i think.. right me if i'm wrong.. and that's 16 years ago..

do you still think the way you did 16 years ago, do you act, live and talk like you did 16 years ago? were you born 16 years ago?

yeah damn axl for playing the songs most part of the crowds love and know.. fuck him ::)

wtf is that about getting automatically respect? :confused:

Axl Rose should get respect because he's Axl Rose..

I think everyone here respects the musicians that made those records... I think the members now should get respect because they have been the band for many years like dizzy, robin and tommy..those three have my respect hands down.

This version of G&R don't have the publics respect because there is nothing to respect them for, there is no material for them to be judged. Many here I believe are just tired of hearing about what GnR was and want to enjoy what G&R is..but maybe thats just me

What the hell point are you trying to make??? I've seen that lame ass argument used numerous times on this site. ?What I was trying to say was that this cover is a good thing, regardless of whether Axl likes it or not. ?What really made me mad was people trying to say this was bad and somehow disrespectful to those currently in "GNR." ?

I wouldn't think it would be too disrespectful to them, seeing as how they basically (in a sense) ?do a tribute to those songs during every concert they perform. ?The bottom line is: This cover is great for the memory of the original GNR and shows that people still think the album in newsworthy 20 years later. ?If Axl or a few of you "fans" want to distance yourself from that era of actually releasing albums....Then I would suggest actually releasing Chinese Democracy.? ?That's all.

I can't figure out why this thread is still open.

Well, for what it's worth, I'm actually looking forward to getting my new Rolling Stone in the mail for the first time in a long time...  :beer:

 

I can't figure out why a grown man would name his username the way you did

You fail, because I'm 14, and plus, if you automatically think homosexuality was my motive for naming my name so, there's a problem with you.

Fail on both accounts.

This is a huge honour - being on the Rolling Stone cover is considered the holy grail for most performers/bands.  For the original GNR line up to achieve this honour some twenty years on and considering they are no longer together is nothing short of amazing.

This kind of acknowledgement is only reserved for the legends who have contributed a piece of art which is considered timeless.

As a fan I couldn't be prouder and when it's all said and done no matter who your favourite GNR line up is - I think the only thing that's important is to give the respect to Appetite and everyone involved in the making of this masterpiece.

I still remember the 1st time I heard the album as a 13 year old - rightly or wrongly I've been comparing music to this gem ever since.

I think its pretty cool the Orignal band got the cover of Rolling Stone. Appetite is surely one of the best albums ever made and for its 20th anniversary the least these guys should get is cover of a magazine.

Now if we could just get some news on the new album/U.S. Tour dates! ?: ok: ?:smoking:

Daviebuckethead I think I called you a 'young man' in the thread that got deleted the other day. There was a link to leak in that thread - you saw nothing wrong with it and you were way out of line. If you think the words 'young man' are threatening, you need to get a life!

You in fact have directly tried to threaten me with your "we'll see how far you get"........... :rant:

And yes, me saying you have no idea who I am is just that - you have no idea who I am. I'm not that petty to bring my high post count into it - it's got nothing to do with it.

Believe me, I am not here to "lick Axl's ass" as it was so crudly put - he and I are way past that stage...... ::)

That is the samrtest thing that I have heard in a long time!!? : ok:

when is this mag comeing out???


Peace

Just bought this tonight at the airport on the way home from DC
Loved it

in which day and month the album was released?

also the photo has been never used before? its of the same session of the other classic one, but was this one shown before?

July 21st, 1987.

Don't know about the photo shoot question, though.

Yeah and you constantly undermine what those original guys did for this band.  Newsflash mate you wouldnt even know about your "Greatest Rockn Roll Band of 2007" if it werent for those guys.

I love the way AdZ gets right to the point!

YOu fuck off.

Oh wait I BET this post will be deleted now because I told a brown nosing two faced moderator where to go. ?See its ok for HIM to talk disrespectfully to me because Im just part of the 'little people'.

not true, i just do not really care about taking trips back to 1987, I'd prefer to live in 2007 and I'm only concerned with what the current lineup is doing.   Fuck a reunion.

Good call. I feel the exact same way. I can't tell you how many forums I go to that I don't even post in anymore because thats all the threads are filled with.

My stance stays the same; I'd rather see GNR today, with people who want to be a part of it today.

I have seen the current line-up on several occasions. I was also very fortunate enough to have seen the AFD line-up a few times. You really shouldn't compare. They are two completely separate incarnations.

Rolling Stone Magazine is simply re-living the amazing achievement of one the most iconic albums in the last twenty years. There is nothing sinister to that. The fact that the cover includes the members who recorded the Album is in no way disrespectful to the current line-up.

There are a lot of people bitching about the current line-up not getting credit etc.  Unfortunately these are probably the ones armed with a copy of AFD that ask the current line-up to sign and don't see how stupid that is.

I know this really isn't on topic, but I'd like to point out how true what you're saying is. I have AFD, Lies and both Illusions on vinyl in my living room (I'm hoping CD gets released on vinyl so I can add that too). When I went to see GNR at the Palace in November of last year people would ask if I was going to take any of my albums to have signed and I can't imagine why they would expect me to ask Robin or Richard to sign albums they didn't play on.

Exactly dude... I saw a Tommy solo show.. I had him sign a GNR shirt... But it was from the 02 tour.. No way I woulda took my UYI tye dye shirt for that

Guys, its a 'stock' photo. Rolling stone do not have to pay for it. Hence why its used.
Simple

More like "little people with big heads"......

The kind of people who think they can come to our message board and tell me I don't deserve to run it.



/jarmo

Here I was thinking they used that photo because it's a picture of the people who played on the album...

What he wants we don't know. but I certainly rather see updated pics and articles.
If you saw a recent show you wouldn't be saying so and calling people names like  'DOUCHE BAG fans' .

Yes, he most certainly "will destroy AFD..." with his new album! He will blow it to smithereens! They won't be able to see from which way he came!

Do you realize the irony of that statement?

I wonder how many people think that CD will actually be bigger then AFD.

I personally think there's just no way, not with the music industry the way it is right now.

Anyhoo the music industry right now is not the only judge nor a main judge. we are.

I think CD is not going to be better or worst that AFD, simply they are going to be different. AFD and illusion are very different and I think that both are wonderful. We don?t know what Axl thinks or feels about the RS cover, but I believe that he sings the AFD because those are his songs and he loves those songs. One thing is love the old songs and other thing is living in the old stories and not evolved. Axl has evolved but he still loves his old songs.

with GNR today the old songs sounded evolved too.

I agree with you Suntorytime.

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/coverstory/15690883

An excerpt of the article

Some people here really can't read at all. Who's claiming about a reunion? Who's talkin' shit about the new line up? No fuckin' one!!! The big question here is that some Axl's "ass lickers" thinks is unfair to the new band that the old band is on a cover of Rolling Stone magazine!!!! ?Why the new band should be on this fuckin cover??!!! What they've done these days to be on this?!!!! Please answer.
No one here want to come back to 87 . But put down 1987 just because you're in 2007 is ridiculous. ?If you don't want to live trough 1987 or trough the old band, burn the fuckin' records and dvd or VHS of these shows. ?But the majority of Axls "ass lickers" won't do it. ?
You , Axl's "ass lickers" should understand that in the world outside the GNR foruns, people think that the new band didn't do anything relevant to be on? the cover of any fuckin' magazine. To this same world Appetite was a great record and should be remembered. Just that, so stop with this shit about "Axl will get upset about it" . Axl is 45 years old man. He can deal with this shit. He had a band, now he has a new one.
The point is, people are celebrating the 20th aniversary of Appetite For Destruction and the ones who've made it . If you don't like it or don't want to live trough 1987 , or don't ?want to cheer the old band. Don't fuckin' do it, but don't start to bitch around because some people do.

Believe me, I am not here to "lick Axl's ass" as it was so crudly put - he and I are way past that stage...... ::)



Nobody here told you "Lick Axl's Ass" but you really wore the outfit. I don't know why?  I don't remember  writng the post directly to you or anyone. But you're the who complained about . So...

The GNR forum fans are not the only people that are going to judge this album.

I think you said something like this ^  in response to the comment that I had just posted.

Maybe, just maybe, you're on the wrong site because this one is aimed at people who live in the present time. While we acknowledge the past, we don't put down the current band and dream about a reunion.

On the contrary, we are here because Guns N' Roses in 2007 is the best band in the world.

Which is kinda interesting since I thought Guns N' Roses was the best band in the world in 1988, 1991, 1992, 2001, 2006 and so on and so on.....

Basically, they've always been the best band in the world for me.





/jarmo

russ I didn't mean just The GNR forum fans by us. I meant The music fans now and the future.

Is that directed to me? Because you're so fuckin' wrong!! I don't put the new band down nor I dream about a reunion. But I don't need to put the old band down to support the new one . Simple, if Rolling Stone is celebrating Appetite For Destruction the old band should be on the cover. Because they were the ones who wrote. If Chinese got released and Rolling Stone make a cover about it, It must have the new band on It.? But right now, these band did anything that deserve the cover of this magazine. And this is not puttin' the new band down. This is a fact.?

Yes it was aimed at you and your insult filled post.

Maybe you need to relax a bit.


/jarmo

I'm relaxed dude... It's not because I wrote it with passion that I'm pissed or something. Sorry, next time I'll put the "Parental Advisory" stick before I write a post. I don't want to offend any 14 years old girl with my bad mouth. Now, I gotta get goin' to work.

No one is putting the old band down to support the new one. we just can't help loving the band for how it is.
Have you seen them?
I might add that in the past it often seemed to me that old fans tend to put the new band down to support the old one.

Umm, sure. That's what I was talking about.  ::)




/jarmo

Any good exposure for GN'R's, old or new, is good in my book.  Can't wait to pick up that issue.

Ahhh!  I just picked up the new Rolling Stone at the store today.  Day off from work so I got to go to story-time with my wife and kids and then we hit the grocery store where I picked it up!  I was very gentle with it and my wife was making fun of me asking if I needed a seatbelt for it in the cart.  :)  The check-out lady even went along and individually wrapped it as I handed it to her instead of putting it on the conveyor belt.   :hihi:

It's like a Christmas present for me.   :yes:  I can't imagine when CD is actually in my hands.   :beer:

I give you an update on what the "new band" is doing. Playing concerts where 85% of music is from 1987. Maybe you should tell Axl what year it is.

where does the number come from? Have you seen a gnr show recently?

the best band in the world is fall out boy

Guns N' Roses playing Guns N' Roses songs that the fans enjoy hearing. What's the world coming to? The horror!





/jarmo

Just because a band keeps the name , doesn't make it true in the hearts of a lot of fans.

That's true, but it also begs a question:  If you (not you personally) feel that sentiment is true, then what are you doing posting here?

Ali

Maybe you should go read the Rolling Stone article.  There's a good quote in there from Izzy, when he was talking to Tracii Guns and explaining to him they were keeping the name Guns N' Roses even though Tracii had been replaced by Slash.  "It's just the name of the band, man"   :hihi:

Expressing an opinion?

Just like you did by raiding the Rolling Stone blog and defending Axl for hours upon end.

Jesus Christ, did you not read the part where I said NOT YOU PERSONALLY?  I was asking a general question.  Let me be more precise since you completely missed my point:  Why would you want to come to a board that is for supporting the new Guns N' Roses if you don't consider them Guns N' Roses?

Ali

If you were in a room full of concentration camp survivors do you think it would be wise to express something along the lines of: "you know that Hitler, I think he was doing a good thing"......

I'm not taking it personally - I'm defending RageNirvanaNIN against your comments.

Those fans should not bother coming here then.




/jarmo

Again, what part of NOT YOU PERSONALLY do you not understand? ?I wasn't referring to HIM or YOU! ?I was asking a general question saying if you, the general you, don't want to support the new GN'R, then why would you post on a board that is about supporting the new GN'R?

Ali

Holocaust analogy - wonderful.

Axl is the sole reason why the original band broke up, no one can dispute that.

He fired Slash, fired Matt, and then Duff left him.

All we're talking about is the prospect of a reunion.

Wrong.

A poster with several warning should be very careful about spreading lies.


Bye.




/jarmo

Because this thread isn't about the new GN'R.

 ::)

Thank you Jarmo!! That is exactly my point! ?If you feel that way, and I'm not saying you as in RageNirvanaNIN or DunkinDave, then why would you post here? ?This is clearly not the board for you then.

Ali

The people who truly want to contribute to this site do not share that view Dunkin Dave!

Why come here and fight about it all time!

The only people who got fired/kicked out were Adler and Sorum.  Get your facts straight. Slash QUIT.  Duff QUIT.  Izzy QUIT. 

Thank you, I can see the cover with my own eyes, sir. ?But, this board is about supporting the new GN'R. ?This thread is on a pro-new GN'R board!

Ali

DunkinDave won't be posting here anymore.

Somebody who's not interested in the current band and spreads his own bullshit version of the band's history won't be posting here.



/jarmo

Jeez seems to be a lot of attitude on here.

I have never felt the need to post but this has riled me.

No-one has the right to take away what the "old" members contributed. Take away the fact that they imploded, for 4 years or so they were the biggest draw on the planet (along with U2 and yes Bon Jovi).

Whatever the reasons for each individual member leaving they are still part of the Guns N' Roses legacy.

The so called "new" members (Robin Finck has technically been in the band for nearly 10 years now!) will never be seen in the same regards as Duff, Slash, Izzy etc, regardless of whether CD gets released or not. They may by some members of this board but for the casual GNR fan Guns N' Roses IS Duff, Slash and Izzy.

I dont think that the release of CD will alter peoples opinions regarding Robin, Tommy and co but if we are (and i hope to god that we are) having these same conversations in 10 years time, and Guns N' Roses have release 2, maybe 3 more albums then maybe people will start to recognise who makes up Guns N' Roses

I have seen this "new" band 6 times now, and i have to say that not only have they got tighter as a unit, Guns N' Roses are far better live than they were 15 years ago.

Guns N' Roses needs Axl Rose, just like Bon Jovi needs Jon & Ritchie, Van Halen needs Eddie, Kiss needs Paul and Gene, the list could go on...

Providing they are entertaining the masses, which all of these bands do, who cares who is on stage playing the Rocket Queen solo?

Thanks guys for a fabulous 18 months, hope to see you in the Uk very soon!!

Peace out

steve

that being said though, when I listen to VR's Mr. Brownstone I feel sad. Scott's voice just doesn't do it for me.
it's like Chester singin' Paradise City. I like his voice, yes, but Axl should be the only one singin' Paradise City.

How bout u get the facts STRAIGHT!!  I'm pretty damn sure Gilby Clarke was fired.  On top of that, this whole F'ing discussion has become a joke.  People's arguments and opinions recently have been as blindly ignorant and absurd as....well.. the creation of Chinese Democracy to this point.   :smoking:

Actually they didn't really fire Gilby, they just stopped paying him  :hihi:
Kind of like Office Space http://youtube.com/watch?v=tFYRW4ZbHIA

But either way, doesn't make the other guy's comment that Axl "fired" Slash any less moronic when even Slash himself has never claimed Axl fired him or kicked him out of the band.  But thank you for picking through my post and finding an error that really doesn't impact my overall point, which is that that Slash, Duff and Izzy all quit by their own choice and anyone saying otherwise doesn't know what they're talking about :rant: :rant:  8)

Jarmo, to me you are Guns N' Roses.   : ok:

To me you'll be "banned" very soon.  : ok:



/jarmo

Don't know if anyone posted this yet;
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/coverstory/15690883

no there is no irony.   Just because they play a lot of classic GnR songs during the shows doesn't mean they are living in 1987.    go to any rock show by a band with a 20+ year career and you shall see this.  I'm talking about the lineup of bandmembers. 

Grrrrrrrrreat point!

IN other news..... RS STILL hasn't even sent me this issue!

They're honoring  the album and those who made it, the cover is absolutely appropriate.

Agree and I love the lineup we have now

oh god... this thread is turning into a war zone... :no: "What?s Guns N?Roses? Old or New?"  :-X guess now it?s my turn to say this should be in Dead Horse...



cool you got the magazine!  : ok: I can?t wait to get it too  :) meanwhile, could you post some scans for us to see please? that would be kind.  ;)

Good for you!

humm alright honey, nice to see you?re in good mood today  :-*

what?  :nervous:

you have a great username  : ok:

I support the band to a point , but I honestly like VR more. They've put albums out , but when I do get CD Im sure I'll be a supporter right now I have my doubts. But I was just saying I mean really my statement rings true , To most people GNR is still what is on the issue of RS.

So have the Spice Girls.  Doesn't mean they're better

When will people realize that a lack of an album release is not an indictment of talent?  And that just releasing albums does not automatically mean you're making good music?  If Axl had released 4 mediocre albums in the last 10 years would you think more of him as a musician? 

There's probably a million reasons the album hasn't seen the light of day so far, from legal to personal reasons for those involved, but one thing that should be obvious to anyone who claims to be a GnR fan is that it's not because Axl and the guys in the new lineup are incapable of making a quality album

Excellent point, sir.  Bravo!!

I'd rather have one album that the artists poured their hearts and souls into and really felt was right than an artist that just fires out albums.

Ali

Dude you are putting words in my mouth. I have nothing solid to reference myself for considering the new lineup has.  Lack of album makes it hard to judge a band. I'm sure there is a million reasons for the album not coming out yet ( trust me I think we've heard our fair share lol ) I am a GNR fan , both old and new , but until Axl and Co' gets CD released I can't say I like them more than VR right now. I'm sure the new line up are capable of making MIND MIND BLOWING MUSIC , look at the band you have BBF ,  Axl , Robin , these guys know music. I'm claiming VR to be putting out the most amazing stuff either , their stuff is just straight ahead rock n roll and I dig it. Slash and Co are capable of creating AMAZING music too , but they haven't put out the most mind blowing stuff. I like both bands end of story.

EDIT: To poster above , I would to but we have nothing to judge Axl on right now ,we don't know if the album is medicore or pure 100% heart/

Wow 14 pages is a lot! Although I do like VR, my opinion is that Scott Weiland needs to go back to STP. His voice just does not fit with Slash, Duff and Matt. In addition, CD should be released and  a tour to support this album. Afterwards breakup the new GNR. I like what I saw from the Hammerstein Ballroom last year. However, nothing beats the original GNR. This is why  Rolling Stone magazine is celebrating the 20th anniversey of one of the GREATEST albums ever released!!!

Yea that's how I feel right now nothing beats the classic line up. I haven't seen them live and don't really wanna judge on the leaks because , well being a musician I understand that DEMOS are DEMOS and things will change.

Nothing beats the classic line up just like nothing beats being away at college at 18 getting wasted and f-ing hot chicks who love getting drunk and giving head.  But nothing lasts forever.  You deal with the present.  Today we have a Guns N' Roses that has over the past 7 years become a true band.  While dissappointed that the wait has been so long for CD, I'll wait and be as patient as I can.  I have great hopes for a November 2007 release of the most anticipated album of all time.  And nothing will ever be as anticipated again in the new age of the digital single.  It feels good now.  Love the band.  They rock hard, they're cool as shit and the tracks I've heard so far are outstanding.  Respect to the nth degree the original line up.  Continue to follow each of their careers.  My favorite album of 07 is Libertad, been playing the shit out of it.  I'm really looking forward to getting this issue of RS.  Should be a good read.  Just hope they respect the power of what GN'R today has, can and will do.

 :beer: :beer: Why can't more people be like us , open minded about BOTH bands.

^^^^^^^^^^ I am with you guys!!!  I am so fucking ready for CD, its sick.  But the longer it goes, and goes, and goes....., the more legendary the classic line up gets!!

Just three things:

- the people who Believe in the vibe of this site do have open minds about both bands and their views about each band are supported by the people who run this site.
 

- ^ accept that a certain point of view is upheld here. The posters who also uphold that view should feel more than comfortable posting here and not have to put up with terms like 'asslicker'.

- a person who also posts  here because they share the same view would have nothing but positive things to say about the upcoming release of the album.....

now, thats just fucking great... 14 pages of all this and no one scanned the thing for people who cant get the magazine (such as brazilians for at least 2 months!)!!

goog going u guys!!!? : ok:


don't throw me in the name calling just yet, i'm actually kidding? :hihi:? :peace:

oh, and just to throw in my opinion, if GNR is getting some kind of coverage, cool, nice to read it, no matter who's pictured... nearly everyone involved with GNR (past, even further past and present) has enough money not to care if they are or not in the picture... i think you guys care about this a lot more than they do so i'd just enjoy the reading (if it's any decent, that is!!!)

anyway, please dont tell me to go fuck myself or talk about the sweet old lady that my mother is just because i have a diffent opinion? : ok:

Edit: Ohhh yeah, and even though VR do release albums, i think i'd like'em a lot more if they didn't!! The guys (u know who) are cool, but i would hug and thank Scott, for the rest of his life, it that's what it took, if he promissed me that after finishing such promisse he would never again speak another word or even produce another sound (to prevent him from even doing 'ooooo's as backing vocals anywhere else) but HEY! that's my taste!! everyone's entitled to disagree!

No need to bring money into 'the good fight'! It's not always about money.

VR at least have a product i can get into and enjoy. Im not denying that the new band wont put out a great album, im sure they will, but right now when i turn on my ipod il listen to Libertad over crappy live versions of Chinese Democracy.. Until Chinese Democracy comes out, the actual product, you cant properly compare new GnR MUSIC with old incarnations/VR...

In any case, putting old Guns N Roses on the cover for a 20 year Appetite anniversary is perfectly legit..  i mean Tommy/Finck etc shouldnt get credit for Slash/Duff's work!

In other news you can see the cover at the website... and a really awesome article involving Axl and Stevens girlfriend

I picked up the rag today....woop woop...  It has a pretty gross picture of big hair Axl with the assless chaps, red pubes for all the eyes to see....

Pink Floyd. Waters.

Marillion. Fish. Hogarth.

Mighty Black Sabbath. Oz. Dio.

Skid Row. Baz.

Accept. Udo.

Iron Maiden. Remember their debut and Killers?

Aerosmith Doing It With Mirrors.

Even the Rolling Stones once had another guitar player.

The list is endless.


Dunno. Just felt like posting this. People are on Axl's ass and it will always be thus and it's a pitiful example of double standards. So, if Duff had stayed in 1997 they could still use the name? Then it was, technically, only Slash who was no longer in the band... or?

Amazing.

Guns N' Roses is Guns N' Roses through time. The members today - many of whom have been together LONGER than the original line-up - show so MUCH respect for the classic material, that I wouldn't know what more could be asked. It's genuine and it's respectful. And they manage to add in their own touch. It couldn't have been played better.

Guns N' Roses Version 2.0  : ok:

I've seen the original band twice and the new band three times. The new band blows the old out of the water. Regardless of who wrote the songs. And that is not a knock on the old material or the old line-up. That was then, this is now. And it's been 13 years now and the band has changed gradually. People tend to forget that.


 :peace:

RF

I forward this motion.

If you want to bash the new band, go beat off in a corner at some other place that is shit, compared to here. Why some people stay here and continue to bash, is because they know where ever they go that it is not going to be as good as this site. They also, don't have anyone to fight with, because where they post it will just be a bunch of bitching whiners.

^is J formerly known as JimmerJammer?  just wondering.

By the way, there is no controversy here.  You can bet your ass there will be a (pardon the pun) "Better" Rolling Stone cover coming very soon to a newsstand by you.   ;)
Although I have to say Rolling Stone managed to make the read a bit anti-Axl if you ask me, but then again, I'm assuming Axl probably refused to comment. 

RS was very pro-new GN'R last year, then the band lashed out at the magazine for printing 'false' dates. It appears to have cost GN'R though, RS was one of the last pro-CD mags around, and now they largely ignore the new band.

That's great, GNR at the cover of RS, despite RS being a piece of junk of a mgazine, it's important to the "major media". Again the planets are aligning, this came in a excellent time, hope uncle Axl doesn't ruin this time again...

Does anyone know why this article hasn't been posted in the headlines section of the main page?

Old band vs. new band debate not withstanding this is still GNR's third appearance on the cover of rock's biggest magazine.

I think one thing to point out (I'm piggy-backing on your comment) is that Izzy, Duff, Matt, Steven, and Slash do not have a problem with Axl using the GNR name.  All of them have said they can't wait for the album to come out.    these are the guys that helped create the name GNR...if they were that upset with Axl, wouldn't they stand up and say something?

I also think it's amazing that the new band has been together longer than the original line-up.

What Sorum feels about it is a non-issue. He was basically a hired-hand, don't forget that.
His opinion on Axl using the GNR name doesn't mean all that much to me.

I am a huge fan of the new band, and to say I cannot wait for the eventual release of CD when the time comes is an understatement.  Having said that, the current band may have now been together longer than the original line-up, but it's hard to argue against what the original line up accomplished and released during their time together, whereas much of the world at large remains unaware of the current band, what they're capable of, and the amazing music they're creating together. 

That said, I think that perception is sure to change with Chinese Democracy.  Hearing what I have, I feel that the best is yet to come.

Now if only my Rolling Stone issue would show up in the mail...

you know what would be fucking cool?

if on they'd do a cover about the 3 guitar players in GnR.  They could do a kickass pic of the three of them together, and inside talk about them and their backgrounds and show the world whose in Guns N' Roses today.    Robin, Richard, and Ron. all three deserve it.  :peace: 

Yeah, that would be cool, but it wouldn't happen until Chinese Democracy is released.

But no one in the mainstream media would know who they are. Perhaps after CD is released and they've sold millions of copies maybe, at the minute - no chance.

the media would know who they are if they were on the cover of Rolling Stone.  :)   

Yeah But rolling stone is a business like anything else. Putting the 3 of them on the cover would guarantee people like us on GnR boards would buy it but not many others.

I know who they are. You know who they are. But does typical mainstream emo, nickelback buying rock fan know who they are? Uh No. Lets start with the cover of guitar world and work our way up : ok:.  And I hope that all of you know that if and when CD is finally released it will be just Axl on the cover. Not Axl and the band that no one outside of here knows anything about.

What would that make the new people playing in GNR? At least he played on UYI. Once Chinese Democracy is released then maybe the new guys won't be considered by many to be just Axl's hired guns. Until then this will be a huge problem as far as the new guys really getting any respect. It's sad, but true.

That's one of the smartest things that I've heard for a long time!

Yeah It'd be great!!! It would have a lot of pictures and little text based on Guns N' Roses... It would be like that

Question: Hey Robin , you've been in the band for so long... Can you tell me when Chinese will be released?

Robin: Sorry, there's a lot of things goin' on behind the scenes, so I cannot give you the exaclty date because if It not happens nobody gets frustraded.

Ok... let's talk about the day you work with NIN and Trent Reznor.

Question: Richard, the guitar in The Blues that leaked are awesome, and I realize that you play big part of it live. Could you tell me about your setup and approach in this song?

Robin: Well, I'm not sure about how much about what we can or what we cannot talk about the leaks so... Next question...

Ok, let's talk about working with Christina Aguilera.

Question: Ron, we know that you recorded parts in Chinese Democracy after the last US tour. So can you tell me how much of you can be heard on the record? And if there will be any Buckethead parts on It?

Ron: Yeah!! It'll be some of that but I can't say how much will be on the record. But anyway, It's great being part of the band and touring all this time. That's all I can say...

Ok, let's talk about your "foot" guitar and about your producing skills


Let's face it . These 3 guys have all the respect from the music bussiness and anyone interessed in music. But talkin' about news, the main reason of any magazine... These guys don't present that much right now.

And that's the reason the new line up of the band are not on the cover of Rolling Stone Magazine

these guys didn't release AFD back in 87, that's the reason

I wouldn't hold your breath on that one.

Yeah of course, no doubt. ?You're right, the main reason is that. But the other reason that the new line up never been on the cover is the lack of news.

Or, they had some connection to Steven's gig....

the day will come

Soon

I don't know if soon is ther word

Maybe if you want to get banned quickly...

I dunno if this has been posted yet but here?s some great pics of the band in their early days on the RS site: http://www.rollingstone.com/photos/gallery/15710743/reckless_road/1


I?ll just post some of the best... enjoy!  ;)

(http://img259.imageshack.us/img259/2106/1571050815710510largemt6.jpg) (http://imageshack.us)

(http://img261.imageshack.us/img261/6479/1571068015710682largekn5.jpg) (http://imageshack.us)

(http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/9617/1571070415710706largegt5.jpg) (http://imageshack.us)

i saw the magazine today but i couldn't read the whole thing.  i read the beginning- it was funny about the house being a disgusting mess and axl having a perfectly neat room with a padlock on it.  also, there is a picture of axl wearing his black leather chaps/black leather thong combo and it is truly horrific.  fuzzy orange hair everywhere- after all, it was back in the eighties when no one had ever heard of a brazilian wax and before people were so anal (pun intended) about hair removal.  it is truly a cringe-inducing picture if i've ever seen one.  all i could think when i saw it was, "axl must have really pissed someone off at rolling stone for them to have run that picture."

chill woman.. he only quoted axl himself

and its as true today as it was 5 years ago.

Got problems with hairy men?

A man having a brazilian wax.....that sounds kinda gay, although...he was wearing a thong  :hihi:

but still... have you never had sex with a man who actually had hair ? I believe Axl is pretty hairless compared with a lot of men. Maybe you're still a teenager  :P

Hahaha...YOU'RE ALL FUCKIN' CRAZY!

I finally got this issue yesterday and read through it.

Good retrospective on the album.

I don't think there's a whole lot there that most of us don't already know, but the rare pics were certainly cool!

speaking of hair, anyone noticed that Slash has no hair on his arms?

is that genetic, or does he shave em?

 :hihi:

slash has hair on his arms : ok:

And some think the Axl's clothes thread is pointless.....  :hihi:





/jarmo

lol  this thread is getting kinda weird indeed.

It's just that men with hair are kinda scary in a very exciting kinda way.......

are they?  ??? tell me more!  :hihi:

Have a look at that photo again........!  :P

oh... well... now I?m a bit scared too  :confused:  lol guess I won?t sleep too easy tonight.

teddies have more hair and not scary or exciting.

But this summer is already too hot. I'd like to see something mellow. :P

Oh, that's a lovely thought........see Ines! look at it that way!? : ok: It's the middles of winter here!  ;D

lol yeah... I guess I gotta be a bit more open-minded on what concerns.....the hair.

 :hihi:

Right now they dont deserve it

When CD comes out

Y ES then they will deserve it.

Don't deserve it!

And so their live work doesn't count?

A good rock journalist would be embracing the momentum created by this band.

ROLLING STONE web site has some great GN'R footage..Looks like they were able to clean up the footage.
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/15734535/vintage_video_six_early_guns_n_roses_live_performances

the last video showing paradise city must have been where they filmed the live footage for the music video?!

yes it was in 88 opening for aerosmith at giants stadium : ok:

I picked up my copy of RS this week.

There are some great pics of the band in there.

It's a can't miss for the true gunner fan. Great photos.   

As part of Rolling Stone magazine's ongoing tribute to GUNS N' ROSES' legendary debut LP "Appetite for Destruction" (which was released 20 years ago last month), the RollingStone.com web site has been updated with footage of six early GUNS N' ROSES performances. Watch the video material at this location. The six featured clips are as follows:

* Roxy, 3/28/86. Axl dedicated the midnight show to critical LA Weekly writers.

* GUNS N' ROSES at Bogarts, 7/21/86. Slash and Izzy showed up very late to this gig. Before the set started, Axl said, "Hey, this place ain't so bad" (Bogart's, now closed, was in an uninspiring suburban mall, but it was actually a very comfortable club that presented a good cross-section of local bands).

* Music Machine, 9/13/86. Everyone in the band thought this was the worst show ever, but everyone else loved it.

* Central, 5/1/86. The band was asked at the last minute to play a fifteen-minute set at this special acoustic show.

* UCLA, 10/31/86. GN'R opened for the RED HOT CHILI PEPPERS. The band performed "Perfect Crime" for the first time publicly at this gig.

* East Rutherford, NJ, 8/16/88. GUNS N' ROSES opened for AEROSMITH at Giants Stadium.

Seeing slash on that jackson for nightrain , WIERD lol! Great footage i'd love to see more of this stuff!!

anyone know why?

These videos are cool... is good to see the old band playing, awesome!!!   Long Live AFD!!!!!!!!!!

That's what they usually say when a king dies........

Hey, how come we don't have these shows in the trading community???   They look great as I said, I can't believe no one has laid hands on these babies!!  :nervous:


* GUNS N' ROSES at Bogarts, 7/21/86. Slash and Izzy showed up very late to this gig. Before the set started, Axl said, "Hey, this place ain't so bad" (Bogart's, now closed, was in an uninspiring suburban mall, but it was actually a very comfortable club that presented a good cross-section of local bands).

* Music Machine, 9/13/86. Everyone in the band thought this was the worst show ever, but everyone else loved it.

* UCLA, 10/31/86. GN'R opened for the RED HOT CHILI PEPPERS. The band performed "Perfect Crime" for the first time publicly at this gig.

* East Rutherford, NJ, 8/16/88. GUNS N' ROSES opened for AEROSMITH at Giants Stadium.

very cool

I think it's safe to say that's what the majority of the fans are wanting to see.   : ok:

I went to two book stores today to get the magizine and both were sold out :(

when will the RS magazine be out in Europe?  ??? can?t wait to have it.

Even gnrontour.com hasn't listed some of these shows. Would be sweet to see it in full length. Also didn't know that "Perfect Crime" was played so early.

It doesn't sound like Perfect Crime...sounds like Nightrain.

yea it doesnt say at all that this is the video of perfect crime...it's just the same show as when they 1st performed it

Yeah, I was all excited about that too then I realized RS just kinda worded that heading wrong.

Just picked up my copy yesterday...it's great and it's also cool that I used to have that picture that's on the cover on my wall approx 20 years ago.  : ok:

It should be in stores now. I'm picking up my copy this afternoon.

Yeah, got it yesterday, great article. I learned a few things I didn't know, and it was just a fun read. : ok:

I don't see what's so amazing about playing under the huge mega known name gnr playing songs that were already huge hits and already get air time.. Once nu guns release something and have their own indentity that's when I think they deserve recognition.. It's not like this is some unknown band with a not known name bring people to the fences..

There's only one identity: Guns N' Roses.

They are that already. They've had their own identity since day one.

They play the old songs because it'd be stupid to pretend nobody wants to hear them.



They are Guns N' Roses in 2007 no matter what you people say.

People go see Guns N' Roses in 2007 to hear Guns N' Roses songs performed live. The songs they love, sang by that voice they know from the albums and radio/MTV.

Obviously some people didn't want that to happen and would rather have seen that there was no Guns N' Roses around in 2007, but fortunately things didn't go their way.




/jarmo

The band is just playing other people's music mostly while the orginal lead singer and songwriter sings the songs. It's no different than when David Lee Roth sings Van Halen songs? or Water's does Floyd songs with a backing band. When the new album comes out then the journalists will have something to cover for real.

I think you mean Van Halen with Sammy Hagar singing songs written when Dave was in the band. 

The band was still called Van Halen and people went to see Van Halen perform Van Halen songs even though it wasn't the original line up.

Same goes for Pink Floyd, AC/DC, KISS, The Rolling Stones, Smashing Pumpkins, Alice In Chains, The Who etc etc.

All those bands have new members playing songs written by other line ups.





/jarmo

No I meant David Lee Roth. I was just giving examples of other lead singers and songwriters who have none of the other orginal core members, but still sing their old bands songs with a different band behind them. By the way, in all the other cases of bands you mentioned the majority of the core members are still in those bands and can't not be compared at all with Guns & Roses situation of a totally new band who has yet to put out there own material. That said I have no problem with axl calling the band GNR or anything and I  like the new unit he has in place. Though I did like it better when Buckethead was in the band and I would rather have Brain only in the fold than have both Frank and him

I just wanted to interject something. It's a point I like to remember about this whole deal and one that's very important to me:

As far as I'm concerned I'm glad Axl didn't give up on Guns N' Roses just because certain people decided they wanted to.

No because when sammy joined VH , HE was the new member , the rest of the real band was there. DLR is the perfect example as of right NOW that is what Axl Rose is a DLR , until he releases the material he just playing old songs with a back up band.

Wrong.

Guns N' Roses was started by Axl, Izzy, Tracii Guns and so on.
Van Halen wasn't started by David Lee Roth, he joined the band after it already existed.

David Lee Roth QUIT/LEFT the band to go solo. Axl never did the same thing.



GN'R is just doing what many other bands, who continued with the same name and playing old songs even though line up changed, are doing.





/jarmo

But the line up that first made an album is the one that matters. They barely even did shows with them. GNR ( which now consists on 1/5 original members ) is basically a good version of adler's appetite , except axl is iconic and steven isnt.

Of course you'd twist the history of the band to fit your needs.

Nobody is saying that line up doesn't matter, but it's a fact that Slash and Steven joined the band after it already existed.

Same way as Matt and Gilby joined an already existing band.



Your comparison to Adler's Appetite is ridiculous since the band kept going even after Steven was out of the band and Axl's input in the bands legacy is bigger than Steven's.

No matter what Steven Adler fans say, and I'm not disrespectful towards his input in GN'R, but it's a fact that Axl had a major role in GN'R and still does. Steven was "just" the right drummer at the time.





/jarmo

So your saying that incarnation of the band is important?! Slash and Steven joined a band and MADE music , sorry but this band hasn't had any music put out yet. I'm just saying UNTIL Axl puts out music than he is still doing what DLR did. He is Axl with a back up band.

Actually KISS has never put out an album under their current carnation. The last release was still Ace, Peter, Paul, and Gene (talking about psycho circus, not Carnival of Souls). Tommy has yet to record an album with them, and Eric only recorded Revenge. That being said, KISS is very close to what Axl is doing, except they now actually have new members wearing the old make up. I have no say in the matter, but Axl is doing everything correctly. He has great guys with him, is kicking ass, and playing great shows!

Sorry to waste your time

No, It's Guns N' Roses! If Axl went solo and was playing the songs under "Axl Rose and the hired Guns" or something like that, then he would be doing what DLR did. Or even similar to Bach, but when people goes to see them play, they want to hear the songs they know and love. Same when you go see a Guns N' Roses show, you want to hear the songs you know and love. I've been to a few shows and I did not see one single person going "Ohh damn, they are playing (insert song here)" and bummed out. Sure, people bitch about them not playing new songs, but the bottom line is, they are still going there to see Guns N Roses.

See but that is basically what he did , went solo with hired guns. Exactly people go to here GNR songs created by previous line ups of the band , people wanna hear jungle , PC , etc.. I'm just saying UNTIL Axl releases CD than he is basically with a back up band , until people go to here Madagascar or The Blue or Better , until people WANT to here the new gnr than I'll credit him. Because people want the old music right now. Honestly , If Axl would drop the name it be better for everyone involved but whatever.

What Axl and GN'R are doing now has never really been done before.

Just because it makes no sense to you, because your way of thinking, doesn't mean it's wrong.


You can keep bringing up DLR all you want, but he left his band to go solo and then performed his old band's songs under his own name. Axl's never done that.

Steven Adler is doing something similar to that. Slash did it in Snakepit.




/jarmo

Axl is keeping it alive that he has a vision and a band that he still believes in.  The other guys had their choice as to whether or not they wanted to be in Guns N' Roses and they chose to quit

yes i suppose at that time just two choices were possible :

1) guns n'roses without axl (fired by the other members).
fortunately he was clever enough to obtain the rights of the name before that.

2) guns n'roses without duff slash & matt.

in fact i don't understand why duff quit.

even if i admit axl was certainly difficult to deal with at that time, it's an evidence
(but maybe he needs more help from his friends and didn't obtain it).

i hope someday we will have the whole story...

 :o

Axl was hard to deal with , the rest of the band was drugged or boozed out , it made for difficult times. Axl had a WHOLE other vision of what he wanted the GNR name to be , he got the rights to the name ( which i think was morally wrong thats a dick move ). I'm not saying wrong its jarmo? I'm saying right now he is living off the old gnr.  The ENTIRE band but him had gone , he should've called it a day and made a new band.

So are the former GnR members.  They marketed Velvet Revolver as GnR+STP.  They even chose a name that contrasts a gun (revolver) with something "opposite" (velvet, roses).  VR used their GnR connection heavily in their marketing.  Adler named his band after a GnR album.  Those guys are all living off of the old GnR too

 :beer: I agree , BUT the difference is VR has released 2 albums , sure everyone here has mixed opinions of them BUT the fact remains albums are put out.

That is true.  Contraband did pretty well for their debut album but so far Libertad has got to be viewed as a HUGE dissappointment.  Maybe things will pick up, but so far not so good.  And it really sets things in reality when you think that Rick Rubin told them to come up with more songs.  Maybe he was on the right track.  While it is an accomplishment to release two albums in 3 years, is it really worth it if those albums don't sell well?  Maybe that's what Axl's afraid of and why CD hasn't been released yet.  I couldn't blame him, the fear of failure is one of the biggest.  But from what we've heard from the supposed album he has nothing to be afraid of, at least in my opinion.  I just think the general public (non-hardcore fans) have a hard time accepting the current lineup as GNR and don't really care for a GNR/STP mashup either.  I think it's great having them both, but I'm a little biased.

Thanks for not attacking me!! haha I am a HARDCORE GNR fan , GNR being to me the AFD to UYI era. I agree as a musician it is nerve wrecking wanting to create both A. Music that makes you happy and B. Music that can sell.  But you have to understand after a certain point it gets old , he needs to put it out soon and I've been saying that for A LONG time.  I didn't like better , it sounds like axl is trying TOO hard to incorporate different musical elements. But The Blues is SWEET!!!! The general public ( IMO ) will always think of GNR as Axl and Slash , the faces of old gnr.  I will end with the same statement as you lol , I think it's great having both bands around , but I'm a little biased.

Pretty good article. However, the pic of Axl in his chaps is perhaps the most horrifying thing I've ever seen. It's a cool pic, but, uh, I could have done without the hairy crotch.

Otherwise, pretty cool.

Yeah that was very disturbing.  Not one of his finer moments.

I think you're wrong.

Axl always was, and still is, the most known GN'R member.

His name still sells papers.....


Slash is still known as "Slash from GN'R", but I don't think the casual concert goer buys a ticket for a GN'R show to see Slash play. They want to hear the songs they know from radio/MTV sung by Axl.

That's the impression I've gotten from watching shows and talking to people at the shows.

Some of them might say things like "I wish the old band was still together", but when you ask them if they liked the show, the usual answer is "Yes, it was awesome" and that the new band kicks ass.


It's almost like some people feel ashamed to admit that this band does in fact kick fucking ass and that since the old band isn't there anymore, you have to hold that against the guys who are there. That's just bullshit in my opinion.


/jarmo

I think a lot of people share that point of view, GNR is Axl AND Slash. ?Let's be honest Slash is one of the greatest guitar players ever and was a huge part of GNR's sound and all their accomplishments. ?Izzy Stradlin may have been just as important though as chief songwriter, no offense to Duff, Matt, or Steven. ?But for me GNR IS AXL. ?VR is pretty much GNR minus Axl and while they've put out 2 albums they haven't come out with anything that can come close to comparing to vintage GNR. ?Not to say Axl can, because we're still waiting. ?I for one though, believe in the material that we've heard. ?Not to compare it to classic GNR but I think it blows VR, and any other band out of the water. ?I just hope we get to hear the finished product someday before a reunion takes place, because I think that's inevitable.

WOW I agree with you crazy!! If you say this incarnation is not talented you are tone deaf and shouldn't listen to music. Slash's name still sells paper as well , a casual ticket buyer buys tickets to hear songs that slash made with axl. Why couldn't axl , make a new name , get with this new band and create music and still play some old gnr , he choose to keep the name.

To Faldor - I agree VR comes no where near the original GNR , but Axl hasn't put anything out to compare with. See while VR to you is GNR minus Axl , This version of GNR to me is GNR w.o Slash hahaha.

Possibly because he did not want GN'R to die and stop existing no matter what others, including you, wanted.

He was there since day one. Remember that.

Others who came on board later tried to kill the band.





/jarmo

That right there is why I don't get how people can shit on Axl for doing what he is doing. He isn't one of the guys that tried to destroy the band. He tried to keep the band together. Slash and Duff both wanted to make sure Axl couldn't go on anymore with GNR when they left.

How can people honestly fault Axl for wanting to keep GNR alive? I don't get it at all.  :-\

You don't know the full stories neither do I on who did what and said what about the band and all the internal issues. No one tried to kill the band?

People left the band, then complain about how Axl kept the name.

1+1=2.





/jarmo

Axl has the rights of the name Guns N' Roses. But where does the name come from? Mostly knowned is the combine of the names Tracii Guns/Axl Rose and L.A. Guns/Hollywood Rose. So what if Tracii start a legal issue against Axl to claim the name Guns and to get it out of the bands name? Tracii was 1 of the original founders of G N' R so could he make a change to win this case?

You do understand that bands are never 1 + 1 issues? I'd be bugged that there was only 1 member keeping the name , so by complaining they wanted to KILL the band ? Thats a bit of a stretch. What if everyone in GNR had quit but Slash , and he hired Scott and kept the name GNR...... Exactly.

It is safe to assume that "manscaping" was not something readily practised on the Sunset Club scene 20 years ago.

However, has "Queer Eye" over stimulated the puritanical grooming sensibilities of today's society that the picture can be deemed as horrifying?

Horrifying is a car driving off a collapsed bridge into the water. Horrifying is a packed nightclub on fire and people unable to get out. Horrifying is 9/11.

Giggle inducing or eyebrow raising (after being pointed out by the crotch staring crowd) maybe. If the picture had been of a female, disturbing definitely.

Very cool pics, looking forward to more.

No.
1- Axl has the rights to the name Guns N' Roses since the early '90s.
2- Slash is not an original founder of the band so he couldn't make any change to claim the name.

Im not arguing legal matter here , but AFD is where things matter. The line up that made that is what matters. What if everyone had quit but Slash? Everyone would be complaining how its not right.

The thing to remember is that the others left on their own free will. I would be pissed if Axl had kicked them all out then continued with the GNR name but he didn't...

It wasn't free will when a person in the band had a whole agenda and different idea for the band. I mean what where they supposed to do?

They where supposed to record an album but the ego's of some members did collide.

On one hand you keep asking for proof and on the other hand you keep repeating what ex-members have said in the press.

So it seems like you're not happy to hear the other side of the argument, but take anything the former members say as fact.


Axl himself said he wanted to make an AFD-type record.




/jarmo

They should have gone along with it. If I remember correctly they didn't want to do Sweet Child O' Mine, Estranged, November Rain etc, and they turned out to be amazing. They even admitted afterwards that they were glad they listened to Axl in regards to those songs.

Axl never said that. Im glad to hear both sides of the argument , and sorry I have a hard time trusting axl's words. Duff seems like he'd know the most without being biased , Slash had too much of ego. Better sounds nothing like AFD nor Madagascar or anything else I've heard.

No slash didn't like playing SCOM , the rest I don't know what you're talking about.

Strange. I've readed in an interview years ago that Axl wanted to make an electro rock (Nine inch Nails,..) album and that anyone else (and especialy Slash) in the band was against this.

You think I'm making it up?

Here you go:

---

Rose: I originally wanted to make a traditional record or try to get back to an "Appetite [For Destruction]" thing or something, because that would have been a lot easier for me to do. I was involved in a lot of lawsuits for Guns N' Roses and in my own personal life, so I didn't have a lot of time to try and develop a new style or re-invent myself, so I was hoping to write a traditional thing, but I was not really allowed to do that.

Loder: What prevented you from doing, like, a traditional rock record?

Rose: Slash.

---

Axl Rose - A conversation with Kurt Loder
MTV US November 8th 1999 (http://www.heretodaygonetohell.com/articles/showarticle.php?articleid=28)



/jarmo

I dont buy that for a second , Axl didn't want to make a AFD sounding record.

That doesn't make sense. Why would Slash be against recording an traditional rock album?

How the hell do you know that? Axl says he wanted to make an AFD type record and you call him a liar? What the fuck?

 :rofl: *sarcasm* :rofl:

Exactly this is from Slash's fan site

While SLASH chose to remain quiet except for the wish to work with Axl again if they could settle their disagreements, Axl declared that he could not work with SLASH because Slash wanted to produce another rock album while he, Rose, wanted a new direction for the band.

Slash says he rose wanted a new directions

How the hell do you know that? Slash says he wanted to make an new type record and you call him a liar? What the fuck?

You claimed Axl never said that, I showed you the proof.

You were proven wrong and instead of just admitting it, you disregard it while believing what the guys who quit say.



No use in discussing this with you then.

Facts mean nothing to you.


Here's more for you to think about:


On the subject of Slash Axl commented:

?Originally I intended to do more of an Appetite style recording but with the changes in the band's dynamics and the band's musical influences at the time it didn't appear realistic. So, I opted for what I thought would or should've made the band and especially Slash very happy. Basically I was interested in making a Slash record with some contributions from everybody else. There?d still be some chemistry and some synergy happening and whatever dynamics anyone else could bring in to the project. It seemed to me that anytime we got close to something that would work, it wasn?t out of opinion that Slash would go ?hey it doesn?t work?, but it was nixed simply because it did work. 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. If the material were strong enough for me to sink my teeth in then I would still be in a certain public position in regards to Guns, we?d have possibly still held a certain popularity with the public as I have previously been fortunate enough to have had. Slash and his ex-wife Renee and his security guy and closest confidant at the time, Ronnie Stalnacker could not live with that. It?s not something Slash could live with. Slash chose not to be here over control issues. Now people can say ?Well Axl, you?re after control of the band too.? You?re damn skippy. That?s right. I am the one held responsible since day one. When it comes to Guns n? Roses, I may not always get everything right but I do have a good idea about getting things from point A to point B and knowing what the job is that we have to do. Within those parameters, I give everyone as much freedom to do what they want something Slash has verified in several interviews. Had Slash stepped up and written what we captured glimpses of, it would have created an environment that was beyond Slash?s ability to control. He did not want to do that or put himself through the rigors of taking the band to that level even if he was capable of writing it. Was he capable of doing it? Absolutely 100%. I think that some of the riffs that were coming out of him were the meanest, most contemporary, bluesiest, rocking thing since Aerosmith?s Rocks. The 2000 version of Aerosmith Rocks or the 1996 Aerosmith Rocks by the time we would have put it out. I don?t know if I would have wanted to even do a world tour at the time but I wanted to put that record together and could we have done it? Yes. It?s not something I would want to approach (without Slash) because at the time there was only one person that I knew who could do certain riffs that way. We still needed the collaboration of the band as a whole to write the best songs. Since none of that happened, that?s the reason why that material got scrapped. If one were to say well then why not do it now there are several reasons.1) My band, too much time, too much effort and hardship. Confidence in our material. Excitement in watching this grow and being a part of the whole experience. 2) Money. You get what you play for and nothing?s free. Can you cover the cost of this venture and its financial potential that I am just supposed to walk away from and for what? To where? I do not believe in any true effort or potential regarding most of my past relationship from the other party or parties, creatively or emotionally. Without that the money from a reunion doesn't mean much and though I'm sure the alumni is up for it for me it would be as or more lacking than it was during our attempts to work together previously. As a friend and former friend of Slash said to me in regards to working with Slash, "you can only do so many pull ups." This is my shot and you can root for me to fail all you want, but there is simply way too much put into this to cater to someone else's selfish needs and destroy peoples dreams I truly care about including my own. Not too mention that though I've fought what feels like the heart of the nature of this entire industry, my own people would probably eat me alive if I opted for a lesser course. 3) Slash has lied about nearly everything and anything to nearly everyone and anyone. It's who he is. It's what he does. Duff's support for the man though understandable in one sense in regard to his circumstances, is inexcusable, and furthers my distance from the two of them. For me Matt doesn't figure into the equation and for as much as I was a friend to him he was incapable of reciprocating and life is much better without such an obvious albatross. Don't get me wrong, I'm not taking anything away from the alumni in regard to their prior performances on record or touring to support the albums. I know how I was treated and more importantly I know how they treated others during both of these things, it's not a way anyone should be forced or even asked to work. And for the record I'm referring to Slash and Matt in regards to their actions and behavior, Duff played more of a supporting role (for reasons I've never understood). For the fans to attempt to condemn me to relationships even only professional with any of these men is a prison sentence and something I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy. I'd say my parole is nearly over. I'm practically a free man and if you don't like it you'll have plenty of time to get used to the idea.?

http://www.heretodaygonetohell.com/articles/showarticle.php?articleid=82



Why was he against recording certain songs that turned out to be classic GN'R songs?

Does that make sense?




/jarmo

How come though when AXL says something you hold it to be 100% true but ex members MUST be lying is my point? I see alright he said it yea oh mighty jarmo all wise ,  you said I hold everything ex members say to be true , sounds like you trust in all axl's words.

You say Axl never said that, I show you two different instances where he did and what do you do? You try to insult me.

Hahaha!

You're so classy.  :hihi:


I'll tell you something. The way I work is that if somebody sticks to his/her story, I tend to believe that person more than somebody who's story changes every other week/month/year.... Hey, that's just me.

Maybe you think that if two or three former members/employees/friends/ex-wives say something about you, it must be true!



/jarmo

When have the other members changed their story? Except maybe Steven. Axl promised a tour in 02 , that failed ,Axl promised CD that still isn't out.  You make Axl out to be the most honest to godness person ever.

A lot of people believe Axl because his story on things have remained pretty damn consistent over the years, unlike the other guys. Hell slash can't even make up his mind as to whether he went to Axl's house in 2005 or not. One day it's "no I didn't", the next day its "yes but only to talk about a lawsuit," and then the next its "yes but only to apologize about stuff I've said in the past." How can you believe someone who can't even get something that simple straight?

He said No I didn't go to Axl's house crying and begging him to be back in GNR. Axl still has no music to account for unlike all the ex members , thats all I was saying. You hold him in such a high regard but he isn't that great.

You keep changing the topic in order to prove your "points".  :hihi:

Now it's suddenly about released music and not the fact that Axl has stuck to his story for years while other flip flop....

We get it, you love the old band, you don't like Axl.


BTW: The songs they played live in Japan are better than anything the former members have released after they left the band.  :)



/jarmo

He actually denied going to Axl's house at all at first.

What does it matter if Axl has not released an album yet? How does releasing music make you more believable? You hold slash in such regard but he isn't that great. There I can say it too. The fact of the matter is Axl's story has not changed throughout the years but slash and duffs etc has.

Don't try to argue with him, we already saw what he's about.

He says Axl never said that, then when he's been shown two different quotes basically saying the same thing, he still denies it!  :rofl:



/jarmo

Axl is a human beeing just like anybody else. He is not some type of Superman. It's human to make mistakes or tell a lie. Everybody does it once in a while so why can't he? This sort of things happens when a band split up. Members and ex-members have their part of the story to tell and none of these will sound the same.

I'm not even sure where this arugment got started at this point all I said was Axl basically has a back up band thats the vibe it sends without a CD to listen to. You can't judge a band on live performances , its obvious this can continue forever so I'm just going to quit

BTW: Its all opinion on what sounds better : )

Tell Jarmo that not me , thats what I'm saying we dont really know what happened. How come when Slash says No I didn't got his house everyone attacks , but its ok for Axl? I agree no story will sound the same.

You are joking right? Slash LIED when he said he didn't to go Axl's house. We know he lied because he has recently admitted to going there. So you are telling me it's ok to flat out lie and deceive fans?

What did Axl lie about? I can't remember one thing that he has actually lied about.

It's funny how you wanna label Axl as a liar even when we've shown you how he sticks to his story.

Slash admitted that he went to Axl's house after denying it at first. He was caught lying!

For some weird reason all this means to you that Axl is a liar too..... No logic there.



I explained to you why for me, and for many others, Axl is a way more reliable person than some others.



Expect to see something about a release date mentioned here or tour dates.....  ::)

You know the usual. Things that are out of your control, but it doesn't matter....





/jarmo

 ;D Velvet Revolver for example made 2 succes full albums in the past 3 years. That's something Axl couldn't realised in the past 10 years. Don't get me wrong. I have a lot of respect for Axl and the new songs are realy impressing but isn't it time that he proves something to his fans? We get a lot of talk about the album from Axl but after all these years he still fails to release it.

That wouldn't surprise me but I don't see how they can justify that as a lie.  A lie is something that is completely untrue and fabricated. Axl saying the album is tentatively going to be released is not completely fabricated. They were trying to make it happen at that time but something obviously happened to prevent it. As for tour dates, I don't see anything that could even remotely be construed as a lie. They have never promised to tour somewhere and then it not happen. There has always been a reason for a show to be canceled or postponed.

I think people want to make Axl into a liar because it's easier to do. The media and the ex-members have been doing it to him for a long time, so it's easier for so called "fans" to do it too.

GN'R never was like other bands....

It doesn't really matter what VR, Paris Hilton or Nickelback do....


/jarmo

It does matter what VR is doing because 3 members of VR are former members of G N' R and at this moment they are more succes full as G N' R. This can change when G N' R release an album. But will they (G N' R) ever release an album and when?

Maybe to you they are more successful....

Anyway, if you wanna talk about how successful they are, the GN'R section is not the place.



/jarmo

Libertad isn't successful.  Anyway releasing albums isn't an indication of talent.  There are a lot of mediocre or shit bands that have put out mediocre and shit albums over the years.  That doesn't mean their music is good or that they're better musicians than Axl. 

If Axl released a mediocre album every 3 years would you think more of him?  How does that make sense?

No, not to me. But what has G N' R realised in the past 10 years? Nothing beside 1 decent tour (2006-2007). So, isn't it time that they fulfill their promises and give something back to the fans beside another tour?

They don't have to do anything.



/jarmo