Here Today... Gone To Hell!

Guns N' Roses => Dead Horse => Topic started by: slashsbaconpit on September 12, 2008, 06:38:33 PM



Title: Sympathy for the Devil
Post by: slashsbaconpit on September 12, 2008, 06:38:33 PM
Okay, I remember reading harsh words about this cover, from critics to Slash, saying it was crap.

I quite like it. Always have.

So here's my question ... why do people trash on this song? I actually like it better than the original. Same with Live and Let Die.

Knocking on Heaven's Door, that's a cover I can live without (except in concert, it's pretty damn good in concert).

So what do you guys think, was GNR's SFTD better than the Stones'? The same? Worse?


Title: Re: Sympathy for the Devil
Post by: oldgunsfan on September 12, 2008, 06:46:53 PM
slash's parts were r-recorded by paul huge; or someone of that ilk, forget who


Title: Re: Sympathy for the Devil
Post by: Bodhi on September 13, 2008, 03:27:10 AM
I think there has been a thread about this already but I love this topic so ill jump in

i agree the GNR version is WAY....ill say that again WAY better than the Stones version....yet the GNR version gets ragged on all the time....

I am a Rolling Stones fan...but I think "Sympathy for the devil" is a crap song...i always have...it fucking sucks...and I dont care who disagrees with me...its not even one of my top 20 Rolling Stones songs....


Title: Re: Sympathy for the Devil
Post by: Genesis on September 15, 2008, 01:30:05 AM
I prefer the GN'R version too. You could fall asleep listening to the Stones version.


Title: Re: Sympathy for the Devil
Post by: metallex78 on September 15, 2008, 09:08:31 AM
slash's parts were r-recorded by paul huge; or someone of that ilk, forget who

Um, actually no, Paul Huge plays lead along with Slash's parts that sounds a bit wanky.


Title: Re: Sympathy for the Devil
Post by: Olorin on September 15, 2008, 02:03:40 PM
Stones version for me hands down. But I do like singing along to it Axl style when I'm driving.


Title: Re: Sympathy for the Devil
Post by: axlrosegnr on September 15, 2008, 10:11:18 PM
I think it was Slash who said this song is the sound of a band breaking up......well, if that's the case, more bands should break up cause I love it.


Title: Re: Sympathy for the Devil
Post by: Gunner80 on September 23, 2008, 12:56:46 AM
I think there has been a thread about this already but I love this topic so ill jump in

i agree the GNR version is WAY....ill say that again WAY better than the Stones version....yet the GNR version gets ragged on all the time....

I am a Rolling Stones fan...but I think "Sympathy for the devil" is a crap song...i always have...it fucking sucks...and I dont care who disagrees with me...its not even one of my top 20 Rolling Stones songs....
You're not a fan! poser. :smoking:


Title: Re: Sympathy for the Devil
Post by: alejoyp on October 14, 2008, 07:19:09 PM
Mmm... I think is a good version but very similar to the original one... Guns N' Roses used to change a lot some covers like KOHD, Mama Kin or LALD to make it sound like Gn'R songs... but SFTD cover is just too similar to the original so it don't sound like a GnR song IMO


Title: Re: Sympathy for the Devil
Post by: Verse Chorus Verse on October 15, 2008, 08:26:20 PM
I actually like Guns' cover more than the Stones version. (Mainly because I think the Stones version sounds more tinny because of it's age, and the "woo-hoos" are more annoying and pronounced)


Title: Re: Sympathy for the Devil
Post by: oldgunsfan on October 16, 2008, 08:08:24 AM
i've always felt this was one of their lamer covers---and reading some accounts of the recording of it,  I can see why


Title: Re: Sympathy for the Devil
Post by: Drew on October 16, 2008, 05:36:28 PM
I prefer the GN'R version too. You could fall asleep listening to the Stones version.

I agree. I've always felt the same about the song "Live and Let Die." I love GNR's version but I absolutely hate listening to Paul McCartney's version. It's like having a drill drove right into my brain. Awful!