Here Today... Gone To Hell!

Slash Celebrates Velvet Revolver's 'Libertad' From Guns N' Roses Legacy

Posted Aug 13th 2007 Steve Baltin

With all of the attention currently focused on Slash's old band, a group called Guns N' Roses, people might forget the guitarist is presently in another little band known as Velvet Revolver. And while most people right now seem to be focusing on his past, Slash, as we sit in a Studio City, Calif., pub the day before he leaves on tour with VR, is living much more in the present, talking about 'Libertad,' the band's new album; tour mates Alice in Chains; the modern-day influence of Internet technology on music; and living in the shadow of G n' R.

You guys were very prolific from the outset. After doing an album and tour together, was that same burst of creativity there?

When we did the first record, there was that instantaneous electricity when we found there were five like-minded people, and we wanted to make a record quickly and get out on the road and tell the world, "Here we are!" But as successful as that record was, I was never really satisfied. There was something about that album, maybe because of the pedigree of the band, I just didn't feel like we scratched the surface of what we were capable of. So going in to do this record, nobody was intimidated by the whole sophomore thing or anything like that. But for some reason it just seemed hard to get everybody focused and on the same page. And there was a lot of negative s--- going on at the time, because there were rumors about me joining Guns N' Roses and Axl had his f---ing press release that came out, which started friction between myself and the other guys. So when we started to get back together it just seemed hard, but then once that all subsided there was this certain kind of relaxed, creative atmosphere that became the paramount thing that was really inspiring.

With those rumors in mind, how gratifying is it to have this album do well when people have been constantly looking for trouble from you guys?

I don't want to age myself or anything, but in the old days nobody gave a s---. The bands worked out the material on a record, delivered it to the record company and sort of waited to see what happened -- and maybe generate a certain kind of buzz with some live shows and maybe would do something on the street that generated a certain amount of controversy. Now a band like this especially has people that are high profile, you get together and the s--- just starts flying. And if there's nothing interesting going on, then you'll make it [happen]. There's this communication stream that's endless with the Internet and also just the media in general, 'cause everybody is capitalizing on whatever negative there is. And everybody's feeding on it; some even respectable kind of publications have all gone the way of the gossip rag. So you go and make a record and your every move is scrutinized beyond what you can even possibly control.

What's your take on the usefulness of technology like MySpace in cultivating an audience?

I remember back in the day, if you wanted to get a reaction from somebody you threw a bottle, but now I think people do feel like they are personally connected. And I think in some ways the fact that I don't have a MySpace and I don't go online and do chats and all that sort of stuff, people find it offensive that I'm not dialed in. I've heard, and it's probably true, that in order to really sell records that's the avenue a band needs to go down to connect with the kids, which it's just a sign of the times.

What were your motivations for including Alice in Chains on your tour?

I saw Alice in Chains originally with Layne [Staley] in the band in the early '90s, and Duff [McKagan] and I were really into the 'Dirt' record when it came out. That and 'Let Love Rule' were the only two records we listened to all day and night, and we got to know the Alice in Chains guys. Then when Layne died, that was one of the really major examples of a tragedy that just didn't seem like it needed to happen. It wasn't like it surprised his people that it happened, 'cause he was as deep in the abyss as you can get. So I felt really bad for Jerry [Cantrell] and for the band as a whole, 'cause they were really getting to that place where they were huge. So I've known Jerry all these years and he's done his solo records, and when those guys got back together it was sort of weird. I was like, "This is going to be interesting." I went to go see them, it was amazing, and William [DuVall] sounded great, and I was like, "More power to 'em." So when we started putting a package together for this [tour], the name Alice in Chains came up and it really sort of gave me these goose bumps. I was thinking, "That would be a significant bill" -- two of the rock 'n' roll stalwarts really doing our thing and doing it well. Jerry was working on the new Alice album and I didn't expect him to want to do it, but I saw him one night and he goes, "We were talking about doing this tour with you guys." So we let them work out the logistics, and then it was done.

How do the Guns n' Roses songs change for you in this new dynamic?

I remember when we did our first public performance, where we first announced that we were a band named Velvet Revolver and all that. We did 'It's so Easy' without really a second thought because it was really that much of a part of Duff and I. So every time you do an old piece of material you're so close to that it's not something that you think about too much. I think more, when I go see Roger Waters doing the 'Dark Side of the Moon' album and he's got a guitar player that sounds identical to David Gilmour, every note, every f---ing nuance as far as guitar playing is concerned, I wonder what that's like. Then I see Pink Floyd doing all their stuff and it seems more normal to me, even though it's odd for Roger not to be there. So when we're doing our stuff, I think more people probably look into it a little deeper than we're actually looking at it. It's just fun and it's something that we have every right to play 'cause we wrote it.

What about how the songs change for you artistically? Not only does Scott have a different voice than Axl, he's a different personality.

What happens is, music is supposed to be simple, especially rock & roll, and either it sounds good or it doesn't. And if it sounds good you do it, and if something doesn't sound right about it you just put it down and move on. There are certain Guns songs that are such standards that you don't want to really go there. But at the same time, there are a couple of songs that we thought about maybe doing, and it just doesn't feel right or it's out of Scott's range or maybe the guitars don't sound like Izzy and my sound. So you just sort of let that go and see what else there is to do. There was a point there where we said we weren't going to do any more G N' R or [Stone Temple Pilots] songs at all just because we almost felt like we were obligated to play them because we did it at the beginning. So people were coming to gigs and [we were] going, "Well, hopefully they're into our record, but at the same time they're also going to get these sort of like retro pieces in there." And after we had two albums' worth of material we got really arrogant and said, "F--- it, we don't have to play that stuff." But then we sort of missed it and we thought, "Well, maybe we'll change it up a little bit and put some fresh blood in it." So that has worked out so far, and we'll see how long that lasts.

To you it's retro but obviously not to others. Then again, everybody is anniversary-obsessed right now.

I guess so, if you're gonna put Guns N' Roses on the cover of Rolling Stone based on the anniversary of an album that came out 20 years ago.

Does it surprise you how much people still hold on to that band?

It's flattering and at the same time surprising talking about Guns n' Roses, specifically only because as soon as that band became so fascinating to everybody, when I actually split the band it didn't seem to me like it was that big a deal, at least publicly. And nobody actually believed that I quit and a lot of people still to this day are not sure what they're seeing when they buy a Guns N' Roses ticket because it's never been marketed as a new Guns N' Roses or anything. So, I'm really amazed to meet people that are like, "Yeah, I went down to see Guns N' Roses the other day and you and Duff weren't there." It's funny, it's like the band is so sort of surreal -- it almost seems like the band physically in real time isn't really what they're really after. It's really bizarre. It's interesting to watch it all and actually be able to have a perspective to check out how things are.

Edited to fit page - complete interview here:
http://www.spinner.com/2007/08/13/slash-celebrates-velvet-revolvers-libertad-from-guns-n-roses/

I like that part of the interview.  : ok:

Yea I think I found a new sig  : ok:  :beer:

I think I will go with this one. : ok:

Damn, Did Slash read my post on here or something?

"Patience"
(Stradlin)

 : ok:  :beer:




/jarmo

He was talkin about they as a collective band "Wrote IT"


Everyone is allowed to play what Izzy wrote cause he doesn't mind.

the guy really can't do an interview without talking about axl  :hihi:

It hasn't been marketed as a new GN'R?  What a crock of shit.  I'm sorry, that is complete bullshit.  Anyone with a half brain and an internet connection knows that it is in fact a new GN'R.  Go sell that bullshit somewhere else 'cause I ain't buyin' it.

Ali

Anyone who reads a GNR board, if you were a casual fan and saw they were playing and bought a ticket you could very well not know that this was a different band playing with Axl. It's not like the band members names appear on any of the tickets or the majority of the posters promoting the concert as a matter of fact.

Sorry, but you are really reaching.  It is plainly obvious that this is a new GN'R.  I know many, many people who are not "GN'R fans", who know this is a new band.  To insinuate that there hasn't been any marketing of them as a new GN'R is shit because they are always referred to as the new GN'R, on the radio, in print and on the internet.

Ali

Exactly, the only way someone wouldn't know it was a new band would be if they never had a tv, radio, never read any music magazines or have a computer.

I don't think I'm stretching because I know several people that didn't know this until I told them. I think it's starting to become better known now, but especially the first time that GNR went on tour in 2002 alot of people thought Slash was still in the band. While I would check into a band a little more before spending money to go see them some people don't. How many group photos have you seen of the new band? Or for that matter how many photos have you seen of other bands members with regards to GNR publicity (not counting GNR boards). Maybe they are publicised differently in other countries but in Canada everything I have seen only shows Axl.

I have a better question.  How many interviews, articles, etc. have you seen them referred to as anything but the new GN'R?

Sorry, but you'd have to be living under a rock for the last decade to be a GN'R fan and not know that this was a new band.  Anyone who cares enough to go to a GN'R show knows that this is a new band.

Ali

I'm not saying I didn't know and I'm not saying people that go see the band shouldn't know. What I am saying is that on all the posters and promotional material I have ever seen for the new GNR feature either the GNR logo or a picture of Axl. I have NEVER seen a group picture or a picture or any other band members on any promotional material. Even after the shows that GNR has played in Canada all of the accompanying pictures are of Axl only (occasionally there is another member seen in the background). You would not know from the article unless you read it that the band is made up of new members. In magazines and so on you do see them as new "employees" but all promotional material for the tours has kept the band members secret.

Actually the liner notes on Lies says all songs written by Guns N' Roses except Nice Boys and Mama Kin. They shared writing credits on all the songs. The songwriting credits on your page are mostly interpretations of different interviews.
Having said that, it is well known Patience was originally composed musically and lyrically Izzy, but Duff and Slash contributed Acoustic guitar included the two solos. As the solos is an important part of the song I certainly think he can say he wrote part of it.
Regardless, its irrelevant, shared writing credits means any of the members are entitled to play whatever songs they wish. And I can certainly understand when Slash says "we didn't put that much thought into it." It's not like Slash and Duff sat down and had a discussion on the rights and wrongs of playing the likes of It's So Easy, or who they might offend, they just did it. A spontaneous moment in their first gig which continued thereafter. I doubt they give two fucks what people on an internet message board think.

When the new GNR site came up last september, it didnt say slash or duff was in the band, it said finck, fortus, thal, and stinson

I don't know why people are so obsessed with "Slash/Axl said this and that... and look now what a liar he is!!".  Of course it's interesting to read interviews, but always take it with a pinch of salt, I'd say. Slash tends to exaggerate things, for example, and other times say things without really thinking it over, yet people on a forum use these quotes against him and choose to twist and interpret his words to fit their "reality". I'm sure Axl would make the same mistakes if he did interviews. And people here would take these things literally! Axl, Slash, Scott and any other artist doesn't owe anybody the truth and are free to use selective memory to put themselves in a better light, but of course they must be careful not to harm other people with their statements.

These guys are musicians, not fucking politicians. If I were a high profile artist like Axl or Slash, I would deliberately serve lies and talk loads of bullshit and claim that I shot people in Rwanda just for the hell of it. Or rather maybe give a big "fuck you" to all journalists.

It's got nothing to do with Axl, but you have to bring him up for some reason.

Slash changes his story. Period.





/jarmo

Me too:

Has there ever been an "offical"  press photo of the band as we've known it used for promotional purposes?

Wasn't the last European tour predicted to have a reunion by many GNR fans because the old logo came back?  Falcon, you are correct.  There isn't much "official" about the current lineup except they have been on the Chinese Democracy tour since 2002.

I bring up Axl whenever I want, and it's not O/T, because I used him as a comparison. This thread is about an interview, right? I could have used fucking Michael Jackson as comparison, but since I don't know shit about what he does in regards to interviews, that would just be stupid. And you're wrong to say it's got nothing to do with Axl. Slash even talks about him in the interview?

Anyway, that was not my point at all. Why do you comment on stuff that's only of minor importance in people's posts?? This is just one example of you using the well known red herring technique, by focusing on less important details in a post instead of the main point, just to divert the discussion in the direction you want it. I have noticed you doing the same thing before.

Slash changes his story. So what? It's a fucking interview. Slash is a guitar player, his job is to make and play music.

And, as I said, he doesn't have to tell the truth. Does he owe Jarmo the truth? Answer: About as much as certain other people owes me an album, in other words NOPE. Yet some people are anal about what he says in interviews and choose to spin on it over and over again, when it means jack shit.

I don't think any of us are saying that people shouldn't know that Slash, Duff, and Matt aren't in the band anymore, I think it is a little curious that none of the tour promotors or the bands label have ever released a "band photo". One could wonder if that was intentional???

Anyways i won't go on with this cause I do like Axl's GNR and I don't what to spread shit about it...but if this was the other way around lots of people would have a field day about this. And I think this is what Slash was probably refering to, however I take most of these interviews with a grain of salt so maybe things they say (and Axl too for that matter) are twisted around when they get in print.

I hope you get lied to in your day to day life and have the same attitude.  : ok:




Funny how the last tour was called World Tour 2007. Look at the band merchandise. Get your facts straight.


I thought this was the VR section.  :-*



/jarmo

exactly. and that's by design. the more people that assume this is the old lineup, the better.

and there are alot of "older" people that go to gnr shows. people with jobs that don't read music magazines and are not reading about music on the internet every day.

i'm a fairly big music fan and i don't know the exact lineup of the current Smashing Pumpkins. and my friends thought i was "living under a rock" when i mentioned that.

I don't think that's intentional. Probably more to do with the fact that the band is/have been laying low in terms of promotion, interviews etc. If and when CD comes out, there's probably promotion aplenty, including band photos. Also, they're quite a few members, you know, so it may be difficult to get them all together for a photo session ?;)

when it comes to interviews, I think we agree. They make for interesting reading and good entertainment, but that's what it is. it's just ridiculous to cite them as if it was the Bible or something.

 
I can't really see why you want to know if I like being lied to in my private life... but there you go. It certainly would be boring NEVER to be lied to, that much I know.

You can't really compare the situations though. In everyday life, you know most people that you interact with to the extent that you would know if they're lying (body language etc.) and if you are lied to repeatedly, you stop listening to them or dealing with them. (That is, if the lying hurts you of course.) ?This is an interview - a completely different setting. We don't know Slash personally, we don't know the reporter and we can't tell how much of the communication is lost on the way. Maybe the reporter is a nutcase? That happens, I've heard. And so what if some of the stories are partly made up or exaggerated? From your comment I assume that you don't like being lied to yourself. If you feel let down by Slash, and genuinely thinks he lies to you, no one is forcing you to pay any more attention to him.

I don't think he's telling lies on purpose (and no harm if he does), he just isn't born to handle the media very well. There is for example the thing with VR not playing GNR/STP, which he changed his mind on and I don't know how many times you've brought that up. You can argue that he lied, but you can also argue that he told the truth, because that was probably his and/or the band's attitude at the time of the interview. Anyway it's of little significance compared to what he does musically. I like his solos and guitar work, and additional information is just fun and amusing, really.

Firstly, I think you're conspiring.

Secondly, if it's true, it's not necessarily wrong. There's nothing wrong with being clever. Axl has the legal rights of the name, and if you tell me a strategy like this is illegal and/or immoral, I tell you the opposite. As far as I've heard, CD has cost  a few bucks and somebody have to pay the bill.

Get our yourself you fucking idiot , Stradlin didn't write ever part in that song , take away the solos and slash guitar and its not as special anymore. FYI Izzy isn't in GNR anymore , how come they can play patience? OH WAIT BECAUSE

GNR plays GNR , right right , yea FUCKING RIGHT this ISNT guns n roses its axl and friends , he is doing exactly what adler is doing cept he calls it Guns N Roses.

Sir, come down. No need to get that agro over something so fucking meaning less.

Consider yourself smote, that kinda shit is absolutely not tolerated.

Good job Falcon.

That guy needs to start reading before posting his replies.  :hihi:




/jarmo

What do you consider official?  Do the photos of the new band by George Chin on the band's website count?

Sorry, I just don't see how you can say the band hasn't been marketed as the new Guns N' Roses when there was a story on the band's website before last fall's tour called "Meet the New Guns N' Roses".

Ali

Has there ever been a group photo?
I have never seen one

IS there a pic anywhere on Gunsroses.com of any member not Axl?



I know people on the bon jovi board who had no idea there was a new band and they got to the concert and were shocked.

I don't know much about how everything has been marketed the past couple of years but I don't think it's too unreasonable to believe alot of people have gone to some of the shows not knowing who was gonna be there besides Axl. Theres a lot of people who love SCOM and WTTJ and just know GnR as a brand name. It wouldn't surprise me if people just picked up tickets based on knowing a couple songs, many casual music fans do so. Not to mention outside of GnR fansites new GnR is not exactly a hot media commodity yet. I know we obsess and scrutinize over every little thing mentioned about them but think about it...does the average person ever see any of it?

Yes, there have been many pictures of band members other than Axl on the official site. ?How about the picture of Tommy and Ron standing back to back that was posted when they announced they were postponing the Japan tour. ?What about the recent picture of Ron with the two Japanese girls after a show? ?What about the picture of Frank with the Japanese police officer posted with the story on the Budokan show?

Anyone who doesn't look into what they're getting before they get have only themselves to blame when they get surprised. ?The band can't be held responsible for other people's ignorance.

Ali

I think that it is the fan's responsibility to look into what they're getting before they get a concert ticket, especially when there is information out there regarding the current lineup of the band.  The band's official website promoted them as the new GN'R immediately before the last US tour.  Therefore, how can you say they are not marketing themselves as a new GN'R? 

Ali

http://web.gunsnroses.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20070717&content_id=a1&vkey=news&fext=.jsp

http://web.gunsnroses.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20070720&content_id=a1&vkey=news&fext=.jsp

http://web.gunsnroses.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20070715&content_id=a1&vkey=news&fext=.jsp

http://web.gunsnroses.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20070606&content_id=a1&vkey=news&fext=.jsp




/jarmo

Exactly!!!

In precisely zero of those photos is Axl pictured.  So don't tell me the new band isn't visible or being marketed as a new band.

Ali

You're right about the fan thing. If you haven't yet discovered that Slash and Duff are out of GNR, then you can't call yourself a fan.

But I don't think you can call putting things on your own web site "marketing". As far as I know, the web site as such is not promoted or "marketed" (please correct me if I'm wrong), thus will the information published there be received by fans, music industry people and other particularly interested people, and these will already be well aware of the "new" GNR.

If a website is not used for promotional or informational purposes, then what is it used for?

Also, the website is one thing they have control over and they use it responsibly by making no bones about the fact this is a new band.  Can you hold GN'R accountable for any misrepresentations of them made by the media?  Is that fair?

Ali

I never said anything of the sort, I just asked if there has ever been a group photo of GNR as we know it used for promotional purposes.

Not you, Falcon.  I should have been more specific, but I meant Slash.  Sorry about that.

Ali

(shorted this quote down a bit for scrolling purposes)

I may have expressed myself a bit unclear. The content of the website is of course promotional and informational. Thing is, and this is where I am maybe jumping a bit to conclusions, that the website as such is not heavily promoted. It is not being "sold" to people who are not already aware of it, because the only way you can find it is by doing it on your own initative. It is not part of a greater promotional package if you see what I mean.

Also, there used to be an official website with absolutely no information. Don't know how long it was there, and then it just disappeared. I think the address was gnronline.com. if you type in that now, you are taken to geffen with no mentioning of or link to gnrs official site. Many people I guess assume that there is still no GNR website with anything on it, because that was the situation for x years. A good thing we have google.

The bottom line is, I guess you could call GNRs website "marketing", but I don't think it's a very outward kind... I would rather call it a website for the fans, with news and merchandise.

And I'm not holding GNR responsible for any misinterpretations by the media. when did I ever say that?

No worries Ali, thank you for the clarification.

I should have been more specific in my initial question.

Has there ever been an official pic of the entire band used to promote a concert? ?Is there even one available?

Shit, I need to be more specific.  I didn't mean you in that last part, sorry.  I was speaking more generally to everyone out there.  My point was that one promotional or informational tool that GN'R has control over, the one they do have control over, they use responsibly.  The other promotional tools are not in their control, specifically the media, therefore they should not be held accountable for them.

Ali

This new band?  No.  The only true band photo I've seen was after Donnington 2006.  That was more spontaneous.  I've only seen the new roses and pistols logo used in promotional pictures or art.  Maybe old pics of Axl too.

Ali

So to promote Axl's GNR concerts they use pics of Axl and the GNR logo, do you agree with this? Not ever has a band photo been used to promote a concert. It's funny cause all other bands I know have used GROUP pictures to promote their concerts, I just hope they are a little more honest with the album when it finally sees the light of day and actually include a picture of Axl and his current employees that made the album.

Oh please, how many more interviews are we going to get with Slash pushing the blame for tensions within VR onto Axl.? You gave him the ammunition, Slash, and all this shifting of responsibility in interviews is getting extremely tedious.? It seems as though old habits die hard...


Slash should get himself a ticket for a GNR show then as it seems like he'd enjoy Ron, Richard and Robin giving their own interpretation of classic Guns songs.


Yeah, pretty much sums up how I feel about 'Patience'.?

 

I don't recall seeing posters proclaiming that it was "a new Guns N' Roses" when Matt joined, so why should promoters consider it necessary now.? Slash has a higher press profile than Steven ever had and has never shied away from interviews, so I find it incredibly hard to believe that anyone with more than a passing interest in rock could be unaware that he'd left the band. ?And even more so that someone would buy a ticket for a show and remain in ignorance about the band they were going to see.



Yeah, I have to say that I'm amazed that these people still exist, Slash, but perhaps it says more about the people you get at a VR gig than anything else.

When Matt replaced Steven and Gilby replaced Izzy there were NEW band photos taken that were distributed for the promotional concert materials and a new band picture was taken for the Illusions records for which Matt was very easily seen. There was a lot more transparency back then than what we see now from the current regime.

 I was talking to my girlfriend last night on the phone.her sister was working at a VR concert the other day. I told my gf to tell her i was jealous cuz she got to see slash live and my gf said " wait,so Slash wasnt with guns n roses when you saw them last year?"

  not everyone knows lol

In all fairness if Slash went to a Guns N' Roses concert it would be to see GNR songs sound like GNR songs. If he wanted to see interpretations of Guns songs he would go to the local club and see a cover band. When you bill yourself as something it is to deliver the product people are paying to see, not something that is kind of in the ballpark. This is why when VR cover a GNR song it is not held to the same standard as GNR playing a GNR song. You can take liberties and do interpretations of the material when you are covering things. Last I checked GNR is not a cover band.

Well you are right the band is called called GNR, they take monstrous liberties and interpretations of the material when it is played. The only thing that remains true is the vocals and the bass is pretty close. You cannot possibly say that the music has remained true to the originals.

And while I don't like the versions of Axl's GNR takes on the GNR material from 1985-1993 as much I can't fault the musicians for making the material more their own and trying to put a little spin of their own on it. I just don't like those renditions as much as the older ones. Scott's vocals on the GNR material is also not quite as good in my opinion as Axl's, but he is putting a little of his own spin on it and making it somewhat his own just as Robin, Ron, and Richard do with the guitar parts and Frank does with the drumming. All are perfectly justified and each individual has every right to prefer any of those versions over another.

The argument over who is entitled to play the material, and who is playing it as a cover is mute. Both bands are covering the music, anyone with a little common sense can see that.

As someone has already pointed out, the new band members have been promoted on the GNR website and I've no doubt that when the album comes out it'll contain up to date photos of everyone.? I wasn't involved in concert promotion in '91 but do remember the posters and adverts for the UYI tour and it definitely wasn't billed as the 'new Guns N' Roses'.? And when Gilby replaced Izzy there was even less media attention if I remember correctly.

I'm not sure why you think there was more transparency in the old days.? My experience was that it was far more difficult to access information about your favourite band in the pre-internet times and GNR, in particular, was always surrounded by rumour and controversy.

Sorry, my fault there, I didn't make it clear that I was making a tongue-in-cheek response to Slash's remark:
"I think more, when I go see Roger Waters doing the 'Dark Side of the Moon' album and he's got a guitar player that sounds identical to David Gilmour, every note, every f---ing nuance as far as guitar playing is concerned, I wonder what that's like."

I was suggesting humorously (or so I thought!) that, if that was the case, then perhaps he'd enjoy the creativity of GNR's guitarists putting their own stamp on GNR classics, rather than listen to them copy note-for-note what Slash had previously played.

In no way am I seriously suggesting that Slash's ego would enjoy watching the three Rs give his old material a kick up the arse.? ?;D

Yeah, but your sister didn't go to the show did she?  The people who care enough to go to the show should know something about who and what they're seeing before buying the tickets.  Anything less would be irresponsible consumerism.

Ali

The new GN'R logo is in fact a new GN'R logo.  Of course they have every right to use the band's logo to promote their concerts.  I don't think it is as uncommon as you are making it to use a logo in an ad for a concert.

Ali

Slash tried to go, Dec. 29, 2001.  Axl wouldn't let him in.

More lies.

http://www.heretodaygonetohell.com/news/shownews.php?newsid=427



/jarmo

Sorry, you are right....  Axl's management didn't want him in because they were unsure of his intentions and didn't want him being a distraction at the show.  My point was that he tried to go.  And wanted to go.  Why would Axl's management be scared of Slash?

dude, it was the first time Axl unveiled the new lineup to the world.  Slash had no place there, it would have definitely been a huge distraction from what Axl was trying to do.

Imagine you were uninformed enough to attend a concert not knowing who is in the band.  At that point you MUST have learned that Slash quit the band 10 years ago.  But when you run into Slash a few days later you would say "Yeah, I went down to see Guns N' Roses the other day and you and Duff weren't there."  :hihi: ;D

 ? ? Holy Christ, enough already. ?It's really about listening to something you enjoy right? ?The interview took place in a pub and I doubt it was set up to take place in the first place. ?PUB=DRINKING=What the fuck talk. ?It was probably more of a buzzed guy talking to a another and one guy printed the interpretation which will lead to the other guy's denial. ?Some of these posts are douche chilling. ?New, old, same songs, different songs...who gives a shit. ?If you like the way the band sounds listen if not...well don't. ?There are valid points for both sides but why are there sides on songs that originated from the same selctive group of people with a few guys coming and going? ?You can enjoy both bands and enjoy new and old versions without having a pissing contest. ?It's like listening to my kids argue over some bullshit that in all honesty they know nothing about. ?That's when the boon dockers get inserted in rear ends.
 ? ? ?Some of these people arguing weren't old enough to know or see the bands. ?Some like Sabbath (How many Line-up changes have they been through), Van Halen, Ozzy, bon jovi, Iron Maiden, Judas Priest, The Stones......I could go on but it's pointless. 
     And yes, when the media is present some guys play them.  They screw with them and call the other guys and have a laugh.  It's common place.  It happens in music, hollywood, goverment and in sports ALL THE TIME!  It's called publicity with a twist.
 

So no one seems to think it is slightly dishonest that Axl's GNR is being advertised by logo or by pictures of ONLY Axl and not the hole band. Geez No Doubt concerts are even advertised with the whole band not just Gwen Steffani. Advertising with a band photo of the new band would put aside all these problems.

? ? ?Darth I understand your point however why should anyone take it as being personally lied to or decieved?? In reality it was the so called "original band mates" who legally signed over the rights to the bands name and logo to Axl while still being in the band.? I maybe wrong?? And I'm sure there were reasons for it that are true, untrue and unpublished.
? ? ?Business is business and if your in the position of calling the shots, your damn well right that you're going to want the legal authority to do so.? Money and notoriety caused many problems within the band (Add dealing with drug and alcohol problems) then someone was going to have to step up and try to keep what they earned.? Was it right or wrong?? Only thoughs involved know for sure and their not letting us in on it.
? ? ?I have no problem with Guns and Roses being Guns and Roses.? If anyone claims to have a problem, then is it ok to use a play on words and and start a band and cunningly call it Velvet Revolver.? It's the same thing as GnR but reversed and used brillantly.? (Where's My Thesaurus). It keeps them current and close to the band they obviously had and have great affection for.? I'm sure they all wish things were done differently but such is life.? If that were the case Clapton would be a guitar player for Cream.
? ? ?Remember just recently of a comment by Duff something to the effect of Don't believe everything you read and hear.? It's probably not true and didn't Duff try and quell any statements made in the past by Scott?? It's a game of publicity.?
? ? ?I'll just listen to both and enjoy both and try not to read to much into the statements of others.? It's good for your blood pressure.? Later I have a building to create......or do I and what do I really mean?

Jimmy Bobby, wrong again.  Axl showed the new lineup to the world at Rock N Rio in January 2001 right after Vegas shows around New Years.  Not Las Vegas December 2001.  That was pretty much a year after the debut.  Plus they played Vegas the year before.   Get your facts straight. 

I fully agree with you JMack. It's just that certain people on this board would jump all over VR if they ever did something like that and already do because they cover a few GNR songs. What I'm trying to emphasize is that both groups have done things which are wrong and one shouldn't be held to a higher standard than the other. I would love to see the silly squabling stop and fans be allowed to embrace the band of their choice for the music they play and not be put through this subjective bullshit, especially when a large percentage of people are fans of both bands, yet they are in a way forced to choose a side on this board.

Doesn't it say that at the end of the live era video for Welcome to the Jungle "Can't we all just get along?"

There is nothing dishonest about using a band's logo to advertise them.  Nothing at all.  The logo currently being used is different than the old logo.  So, I don't see how anyone can claim the use of the logo is misleading when it is unique to this band, this era.

Ali

But a band can change their logo without changing it's members. Most bands that advertise their concerts do so with logos and band pictures.

I believe you're choosing to read my post incorrectly. I didn't say real fans I said casual fans. Read my post again I explained my point, but try paying attention. CASUAL MUSIC FANS. Plus your point of not being a real fan if you don't check the bands website is retarded. I hardly ever check the official site. I have friends who are HUGE GnR fans who barely ever go online.

What in the hell are you talking about?

When did I ever say you are not a real fan if you don't check the band's website?? I said that the information is out there and it is your responsibility as a consumer and a fan to look into what you are buying into before you buy into it.? You can't claim ignorance when the information is easily accessible.? You can only claim laziness.

You are the one who is either choosing to misread my posts or you're confusing me with kingcanute and even misreading what he said.

Ali

That still doesn't make it dishonest to use a logo to advertise a band's concert.

Ali

Jimmy Bobby, no reply?

dont give me that get your facts straight bullshit.   so i was off by a fucking year a couple shows.   I thought it was the first show Slash tried to go to, sue me.  fact remains, slash did belong there, it would have been distracting.  its a small venue.


yea sorry i have a life and like work to do and shit and can't check this thread every few hours like you do.

Interesting, you have no idea what Slash's intentions were. For all we know (and which is probably the case) he was there or wanted to be there to support Axl like he had done with a few ex members already. Yet he was being turned away.

whatever his intentions were, do you not see the obvious distraction it would have been for Axl and the band?  Slash isn't the kind of guy who just blends into the crowd, and if it was at the Joint, that venue is tiny.    Axl was showcasing that lineup for one of their first performances ever.   It wasn't the time or place for Slash.   

They had already played together a handful of times. Slash was already in town for bussiness, it wasn't like he was going there to only see Axl's GNR. He was always supportive of Axl's project and has said numerous times that he thinks the album Axl will release will be great. I'm sure he was going there as a friend to support Axl's project and would have been good for them to fix their friendship too. He's done this numerous time with Steven, Duff's band Loaded, but he wasn't ever doing so with the intention of joining the band. Axl choose not to have Slash there for reasons only he knows (and please don't get into the shit that Axl never said he couldn't come cause people in his entourage don't piss without his permission), but if Slash had been there that night relations would probably have been a lot better.

Amusing.

Slash didn't wanna perform with Adler's Appetite last month because it would be for the wrong reasons (it was hyped as a reunion).

You have no problem with that.


But you have problems with Slash not being allowed to attend a show he had no tickets to. If he had attended, his presence at the gig would've gotten some of the focus away from the band.

The fact that he turned it into an "event" afterwards is kinda telling. Instead of being quiet about it, he went on ABCNEWS radio to tell the world about how he tried to get in.

Slash had pretty much been out of the spotlight during the second half of 2001 (with the exception of the Michael Jackson shows in September). What a "great" way to get headlines. Go to the GN'R show.....




/jarmo

I have no problem with what he did with Adler's Appetite...he went there to support his friend...that is the exact same thing he did or was going to do with Axl. And what better publicity could Axl have had for his new group of employees but to have Slash show up and endorse the group. Slash had a prior bussiness engagement in that city and had said MONTHS earlier he was going to check out the band. Axl's publicist had announced to the media a week or so before the show that Slash or any other ex member would not be allowed at the show, so it wasn't like Slash went out of his way to start having the stroy in the media, it was initiated from Axl's GNR camp.

How do you know that was his intention? For all you know he could have gone there to start shit, and honestly that wouldn't surprise me one bit if that's what he went there for.

Would you mind supplying the source of this info, i.e. the direct quote, because some of us find it hard to believe that Slash had such altruistic motives in mind.? Thanks.

It was on one of Slash's websites months before the event in the news section before the concert. I don't have the time to go dig up a reference from 2001, you can choose to believe me or not...I really don't care anymore. It's not about facts or the truth for several people on this site. It doesn't matter if you make a logical argument cause this board and logic don't really mesh together. It's unfortunate that for some people Slash only has ill-intentions and Axl is an angel. Reality is BOTH of them have done some stupid and dishonest things, but I don't think either of them is a bad person. The fact is they are people like you and me and do make mistakes.

The Vegas shows were announced just a few weeks before the shows took place. Not months.



You don't find the coincidence that he was out of the spotlight and the fact that he went to tell his story to a radio station somewhat odd?

Nobody gives a fuck because your band isn't getting any headlines any more and then all of a sudden you're in the headlines.....  How convenient!





/jarmo

I think that part of the ongoing Slash vs Axl saga is that Slash enjoys stirring Axl just to keep Axl on his toes.

You know how males often find it hard to express their emotions?

Well, in some bizarre blokey way, Slash is trying to express his.

I haven't heard that either, that he was saying months in advance he wanted to see the band.

Ali

Once again Jarmo, you nitpick at every little detail of anyone's comments to try and make Slash and company look bad and Axl look good.? I haven't posted much here in the last year or so and probably won't continue, but you lack any sort of objectivity.? For example, earlier in this thread when you quoted Patience as being written by Stradlin, was that really an objective post?? Slash made a general comment about how he and Duff wrote the Guns songs that they play live and how he has every right to play them.? He was obviously talking about It's So Easy and Mr. Brownstone, which have been played live since the start of VR, and possibly, but certainly not definitely, Patience.? This interview was published last week, which likely means that this interview was done before the start of this current tour and before they ever played Patience.?

And even, lets say, it was done after they started playing Patience, is Slash really lying here?? Do you expect him to say something like, "We wrote the Guns songs that we play so we have every right to play them, except for Patience, which was really written by Izzy but we have the songwriting credit?"? He was attempting to deceive anyone; the official release of all Gn'r Lies material (except for the two covers on there) has "Guns N' Roses" as the credits, so Slash was not only not lying or deceiving anyone, but actually telling the truth.? You can comb through dozens of interviews and try to pinpoint Izzy as the songwriter, but you can do that with any song by any band and you'll probably see that different members contribute more or less than other members on certain songs with all members getting equal songwriting credits.? So, again, in a nutshell, you made a post just to make Slash look like a liar just so you can satisfy your ego as the all-mighty defender of the new-Gn'r.? Before I finish, I know you'll twist what I have said here and say something like, "Do you have to bring Axl into every discussion?"? Well the truth is, Jarmo, on this board, yes I do, because virtually everything YOU say, regardless of whether Axl's name is specifically mentioned, revolves around making him look good by making the old members and any naysayers look bad.? VR is out doing their own thing, they've said a few things, especially Slash, that seem contradictory (and I, for one, have criticized Slash and Matt heavily for their comments about Axl actually), and that is worth criticizing.? But if you are going to stoop that low and add the snipper about the Patience songwriting credit or something like that to make Slash look bad, then no level-headed person wants to hear that nonsense.? That's all I've got.

here here man :beer:. 

Jarmo's anti VR policy does seem to be a way to bolster new gnr support, and to keep people from digging VR.  And honestly, Slash and Axl aren't perfect, both have their faults, and fortunately for us VR fans, Slash's faults don't include not playing music for a decade, or not touring or releasing new albums frequently.  I respect both, but if Jarmo goes on the offensive against VR, it becomes hard to avoid referencing and offending new GNR, whereas, when there are no attacks, its easier to like both bands and respect their music together.

Once again, repeated due to the slow minds of certain VR fans: Axl's story doesn't change. Slash's stories change every other week. He keeps talking about Axl in every other interview. Maybe it made sense in 2004 when VR was starting to talk about the past bands, but three years later and they're still going on and on about Axl.

If Axl chooses to give his side of the story one day, I hope you VR fans are open minded. But I assume it'll be "fuck you Axl, you're a liar" like always.



You keep going on and on about their right to play Patience because they "wrote" it.

Duff is the guy who accused Axl of not writing anything, yet Duff and Slash should get credit for Patience when in fact it's one of Izzy's songs. Funny.

Sure, they had part in the recording and added their input to it, but so did Axl.


Scott Weiland is free to slaughter any GN'R classics he wants to. But I don't have to think it's great just because Slash plays guitar on it.


You don't even address the points brought up about how "nice" it was of Slash to try to get into a GN'R show. In the end, he used it for his own publicity in a time the press wasn't exactly filled with Slash headlines..





/jarmo

I think anything these guys said before VR shouldn't be taken literal , they where drunks and pissed off. I heard about slash trying to get to see GNR , If i was kicked out of my ex bands show for no reason I'd be pretty pissed as well. If axl wanted to see Slash play with VR and got kicked out that be pretty fucked up. Although I do not know the full mechanics of the particular story. I know Izzy wrote it , but Slash , Duff and Axl have a right to play it , since they added their own part to it. I dont think Izzy thought of whistling hahah!! Axl is brought up because interviewers ask the question , I'm sure if Axl did more interviews or when he does them , Slash and Co will be brought up. Anyways what story are you talking about , that doesn't change??

EDIT: And its your opinion that Scott slaughters these GN'R classic as it is ours to say Robin or Ron ruin certain parts of Slash's work such as SCOM intro or PC outro , its all opinion. I respect the fact that you think Scott sucks and he murdered a perfectly amazing song , and you should respect the fact that I think sometimes the guitarist in GNR ruin GNR classics.

If I quit my job and then showed up at the Christmas Party five year later...do you think that they would let me in. ;)

Thats different though , because  Christmas Party is a Employee only event , but I do understand where you are coming from bro. A concert is open to public, if Slash paid for a ticket and did nothing wrong why kick him out? A GNR concert isn't something where ONLY people that are in the band can come to , its like if I quit my job and showed up at the same location one day to check out how the store was without me. If im not making a fool outta myself I should be allowed in.

Did Slash pay for a ticket?  I thought he tried to get in on the guest list?  If he had a ticket, you can't turn him away as a venue.  You'd be opening yourself up for a nice lawsuit if you did.

Ali

Thats what I asked Jarmo , I don't know the full story of it I just know he tried to go see them back in like 02 or something and got kicked out. If he tried to get in on the guest list!!  :rofl:

It doesn't seem like he paid for a ticket:

Slash, who quit the group in 1996 and later formed Slash's Snakepit, said he was in Vegas on vacation when he learned that GN'R would be playing there in two weeks' time, on New Year's Eve and two days before. He said he made some calls and got on the guest list for the December 29 show via the venue and the promoter.
............................

Ali

Where's that from?  Well I mean he was on the guest list so he should've been allowed in anyways , eh what does it matter he wasn't let in/kicked out big whoop.

Believe it or not, THERE are people outside that like GN'R, but have NO idea of who is in the band or supposed to be in the band. And I'm telling you 'cause Ive been in 5 GN'R concerts and in those 5 concerts people have been shocked that there are no gunners left, I mean no one gives a shit bout Dizzy anyway. But its was even funny people asking for Slash, or Duff or even Matt! lol  I mean,we know shit here because we love this fuckin band. but that make us a fuckin 10% of a whole crowd.

My point was that MAYBE you could get to the show not knowing who was in the band, but once you were there you HAD to learn that Slash quit years ago :-[...but you would still go up to Slash and say ""Yeah, I went down to see Guns N' Roses the other day and you and Duff weren't there." : ok:

I was there Jarmo, I think they were announced mid November or so. I had to have time to get plan tickets... I barely made it there.. Walked in, dropped my bags off at the front desk, got two drinks at bar for me and two for friend, went to front row for an amazing concert.? I was so blown away by buckethead that night.? truly special show.

I found it here and it was originally from MTV.com, I think.

Ali

Smoking Guns, I never got to see Bucket with Gnr >:( but I saw him a few times solo....on the front row, completely fucking floored. I've seen Eddie Van Halen, Page, Slash, Townsend, Keith, Clapton, and slews of other great guitarists.....never seen anybody have complete control over their instrument like Bucket. ?: ok:

He can be turned away by the venue.  The venue is PRIVATE property and they can decide who enters and who can't.  It is just like a department store, they can decide who enters and who can't.  They just allow everyone in because they want to make money and be recognized.  The only thing is, they can't discriminate; that is where a lawsuit would come from.

Slash is one of my favorite guitarists but it would've been funny to see Slash's reaction to Bucket's playing.  Either a laugh or a shock expresion comes to mind.

Madagas, he was so awesome.? Not a bad note all night.? And he could shred on acoustic too!? But so beautiful.? Big acoustic solo before patience.

Not if he has a ticket.  When you go into a department store, you don't have a ticket that you paid for giving you entry.

They would have to have just cause to turn him away and they'd have to refund the ticket.  The question of just cause is where a lawsuit could come into play.

Ali

I guess if AXL Was GUNS N ROSES it shouldnt matter if the old band sit front row.  Slash would've drawn as much attention as Axl.

I'm not one of those Axl was Guns N Roses people.     I do believe he has always been the biggest draw and had the most influence in the sound of GnR, but I've never denied any members contributions to this band, past or present.

Yes, had Slash been sitting there in the front row it would have been a distraction, that was not the night.  Slash left the band, it was time to introduce the crowd to the new lineup of Guns N Roses and Slash had no place there.

If slash were there no one would've cared about the new band.

Well I think if he had good intentions and a ticket he should've been let in. But obviously he didn't have a ticket and what happened was just.

nobody even knew who the band was yet.   this was their night, not slash's.

it would be the same as Axl showing up to VR's first gig at that theatre in LA a few years back.  had he been in the front row it would have been a huge distraction.  Difference is, Axl isn't someone to do something like that for attention.  Slash is.

See that's the thing that bugs me, you make it out to seem like Slash is some media hungry celebrity? You really honestly think he went to the show for attention for himself , he wanted to see what the band sounded like jesus christ , people sometimes take celebrities actions for more than they are meant. He had a good intention , you think he wanted to go in there to take the spotlight away from Axl??

you dont think slash realizes the scene it would have created?   he's not stupid.

I'm sure he knew the scene it create and he took precautions to not make a big scene , I mean he just wanted to see what the band he left was up to. Which is a just reason in my book. He wasn't going in to get spotlight on him , I really don't think that.

Just reading through some of the above -

Slash & Duff go on and on about Axl, in interviews - from what I've seen - ?most of they time, they are asked. ?The media and interviewers continue to bring it up. ?So they answer. ?Answers may change, through the years. ?Would anybody, here, give the same answers and opinions that they gave several years ago? ?We all change what we think and say. ?Difference, here, is that the individual thoughts and opinions are published. ?So, since it's in print, it becomes indelible. ?I'm not concrete, myself. ?I might say different things, at different times, depending on my mood or thoughts. ?And what I said 3 yrs ago, might not be what I'd say now. ?I'd hate to think that everything I said was in print, ready to be ripped apart. ?
 
I've asked before - when was the last time Axl gave an interview? ?(not a statement - an interview) ?If he gave an interview, today, I'm sure the same type of questions would be posed to him - regarding GnR or Slash/Duff or VR. ?

The thing about Slash showing up for the show in Vegas - people talk like he had some big ulterior motive, for publicity. ?Granted, I never thought about it in terms of his being a distraction to the show. ?Good point. ?However, I doubt it was publicity. ?Come on. ?He was there. ?I've never heard that he knew about it, months in advance. ? He wanted to check it out, out of curiosity. ?From what I've understood, there was a disclaimer, there, that said no former member of GnR would be allowed in. ?So, he was denied, at the door. ?Did he have a ticket to the show? ?Come on. ?No. ?He thought he could get in. ?Denied, because he was a former member, and especially, because he was Slash. ? ? ? ? ?

 :beer: I brought that up early if Axl does interviews , old gnr will be brought up and he will answer. Hell Ron and Robin will get asked how they feel replacing and playing Slash's stuff its bound to happen. What they say may be different every time,  people are human beings. Trust me I'm sure 1987 Axl would have a lot to say about 2007 Axl , Im sure 1997 Axl would have a lot to say bout 2007 Axl as well , people's opinions and thoughts change. He had no ticket , wasn't allowed it thats the way it goes.

Distraction - I can see that. ?Attention? ?I don't think so. ?

The announcements were made in early December in both cases.



Then why did he have to go talk to a radio station about how he wasn't let in?

Nobody would've known about it if he hadn't opened his mouth.

He can say he wanted to be discrete about it, but then when it didn't work out, suddenly that doesn't matter anymore.



/jarmo

Of course people mature over the years and their opinions and attitudes towards certain people and situations are liable to change, and I wouldn't expect Axl or Slash to be any different.? However, what I struggle to understand with Slash is how he changes his opinions on a monthly, if not weekly, basis, and for examples of this just read back through this year's interviews alone.? I also dislike it when artists try to belittle their previous work merely in order to promote their new material.

As I've said before, Slash has got years of experience in this game under his belt and is well aware of the impact his words and actions will have on the media and fans of both bands.? As the highest profile member of VR, he's aware that much of the responsibility for generating publicity will fall on his shoulders, and that being so, one of the easiest ways of generating column inches is through his GNR connection.? Contrary to what some people may think, I don't begrudge him using his past in this way as long as he:

a) remains consistent in his opinions;

b) sticks to commenting on the period of time that he was actually with GNR and refrains from speculating about the period after he'd left or trying to ride the coat-tails of current and future GNR successes;

c) accepts that the more he utilises this connection, the more frequent the comparisons between the two bands will be and the greater the potential for friction it'll cause within VR;

d) acknowledges that Axl is not personally responsible for any difficulties or tension between VR band members.

Slash being Slash, I don't actually expect him to alter his way of operating, so while he persists in doing this, I'll continue to criticise him for it and remain of the opinion that he's got one eye on the media whilst doing so.

Your comment about Slash having one eye on the media is apt Cyllan.

For years, Slash has been 'playing a certain role' and yes he has said some very hurtful things about Axl.

It would take a lot of guts for Slash to actually turn around now and admit that he was wrong about a lot of things.

Think of the loss of face - and the reaction of the media......his career would be on the line.

Performers rely on 'ego' a lot.






That being said, I think that it is time that Slash supports Axl so he may move on into the next stage of his life in peace.

At 44, I think that Axl would like to set some of the story straight.




Slash being in a band with Scott 'nazi salute' Weiland makes the situation very awkward to say the least.

You guys were very prolific from the outset. After doing an album and tour together, was that same burst of creativity there?

slash quote "And there was a lot of negative s--- going on at the time, because there were rumors about me joining Guns N' Roses
and Axl had his f---ing press release that came out, which started friction between myself and the other guys."

can't see anything related to axl in the question.


just a recent example.

I did say - MOST of the time.  Most of the time, in almost all intereviews, the questions are asked first.   

and when they aren't, he still talk about axl. that's my point here.

It's because Axl was involved, whether inadvertently or not, in causing friction in VR, and Slash feels he should divulge the source of the friction.  Which answers the question that the interviewer asked.  And I don;'t doubt that the interviewer knew that Slash would talk about Axl in response to such a question, and knows that would draw more attention to the article, so he purposely asked a question that could fuel controversy.

Btw, Axl is 45.

Look at the latest interview look how it OPENS up , first question

Q: Despite the success of Velvet Revolver, wherever you go, there's a GN'R reminder.

A: I know. Look at the cover of Rolling Stone. It's interesting to me that no matter what, that band is still on people's minds. It's on the edge of people's lips, good or bad, that's cool. I just don't know why they have an article on Velvet Revolver in the same issue.

It's ridiculous how people are scrutinizing Slash for talking about Axl.  He obviously gets asked about him every time, and when a press release from the Axl camp talks about Slash and causes problems in VR, its alright to discuss it.

maybe on their website but where else

the only source of the friction is slash himself, calling his frontman a fraud, duff spineless and saying he hates sorum.

btw, he's 42  :hihi:

shit man, nothing is good enough for you cynical mother fuckers.   nothing will ever be good enough.

fuck

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

http://2006.downloadfestival.co.uk/gallery/index.aspx?f=Artists%20-%20Guns%20N'%20Roses%20(PG%20Brunelli)

http://2006.downloadfestival.co.uk/gallery/index.aspx?f=Artists%20-%20Guns%20N'%20Roses%20(D%20Nicoll)



/jarmo

Good lord, that quote by Slash about people looking at stuff way too seriously is so right on when you read this thread. We've got 7 pages of people bitching about whether or not people can really recognize it's a new GNR! OMGZ!!!

I think that was definitely the case during the 2002. Even with the VMA appearence, people had no idea who was who in the band. It's the same now, obviously it's not as much, but there's still plenty of casual fans who aren't dialed into the world of GNR like posters on these boards are and just see one TV spot or here one radio ad promoting a concert and have no idea it's a new band.

When they were playing ads on KROQ for GNR's L.A. concerts, they never mentioned a new band or new members ONCE and all the songs they played were original GNR songs (Nightrain, WTTJ, SCOM). Those TV ads they've run in different cities for concerts show the guitarists for a total of maybe 5 seconds so it's not hard to imagine how many fans get confused.

The website doesn't help. Yeah, if you go read every story on the website you might eventually figure it out, but there is absolutely nowhere on the website that lists who is in the band, what they play and what their names are. There are no bios. Nothing.

Not to be a dick but VR fans need to re think the whole " well they aren't even marketed as a new GNR " ok say maybe people don't know slash quit the band what does that say about VR? When people don't even know that Slash and Duff have a new band that speaks volumes about VR. Why should Axl or GNR management have to market a new band? VR needs to do a better job of putting themselves out there maybe , think about it.

What does GN'R have control over?  Their own website.  That's all they have control over and they use it responsibly to promote GN'R as a new band.  Period.

Ali

for once I agree.   Slash was the one who left the band, and its been so long that most people are aware of the fact that he's not in the band.   All the promo/commericals I've seen show the guys who are in the band now.   

and even if a lot of people are unaware to know who is in GNR these days,
everyone knows velvet revolver and who are the members of this band, so...

I was at a club last Friday and I was asking around if people went to the GN'R concert and spreading the word that the new album should be good, going by what was heard at the concert.

I was amazed at the reponse "But it's not GN'R!" and the amount of hostility towards Axl and how he did the dirty on Slash. Now the person I was talking to was Indigenous Australian and so obviously he'd also heard the lies about Axl being rascist. As I've said before GN'R completely disappeared from Australian media for the past 14 yrs. That's one of the reasons why they had to come here before releasing the album.

That's how damaging this constant bickering is. I really had to calm down this guy by saying, look don't believe everything you read - certainly Axl and Slash don'y feel so bitterly towards eachother. They certainly don't share the same venom that many VR fans and fans of the second 'original' GN'R seem to display. It's all media hype!!!

It would be a good thing when the album comes out and people hear "The Blues" to know exactly how Axl feels about it.

(That is, if you want to believe that the song may be about Slash)...

I've been telling you everyone here that that is the mentality of the general public!

Good thing this site is here to educate people then!

They let you out of your cell for that long?

:rofl: :rofl:
Oh my God, that's great!

I've been a real good girl!

 :rofl:

(I see that you still haven't forgiven me for the hair comment that I made in another thread...)  :P

No, I just don't like you or your spamming.