Here Today... Gone To Hell!

First off I like the latest incarnation of GN'R..A Reunion would flood the arena with masses of bandwagon go fans as did the 1994 Kiss Reunion. But if it were to happen I wonder if certain stipulations would have to be put in place...
1-Drummer(s): Adler,Sorum or Adler and Sorum...
2-Dizzy: Axl has always been a fan of keyboards..Dating back to AFD he insisted on keyboards for PC...
3-3 Guitar attack: Ever since the historic HOB 2000/2001 show I have been a fan of the wall of sound 3 guitarists provide for a live environment..Apparently it is something Axl prefers as well...Would the 3rd guitarist be Richard Fortus, DJ Ashba Bumblefoot or someone to Slash and Izzys liking? Perhaps a real old school choice of Traci Guns...
Again I am not looking for a Reunion, although I would plan on attending, but just wondered if it would be more than the AFD lineup..I can't envision the, not including UYI material, therefore Matt and Dizzy would likely be included..Also not sure how Steven Adler could be100% excluded..

sorry will never happen.

I don't ever think there will be a full blown reunion. If anything it'll be a hybrid kind of like what we've already seen....izzy for a few shows, Duff for a few shows. If Axl and Slash really buried the hatchet, then possibly slash for a song or show....but I don't think there will ever be a full AFD era reunion

I wouldn't want it to happen either.It's better to reminisce about the original band and watch a dvd or sth than hope for a reunion.
Who says that it will be any good again ?
What once was,will never be again.Like an old girlfriend you still like but the glass is broken and you know it  :)
The sad thing though is that the reunion issue is the cancer of this band and apparently will never go away.Everytime there is a hiatus someone will mention sth about reunion and here we go again....

I think they should deep six the GN?R name.
Would be nice to see Axl move on, like everyone else, and start utilizing his enormous talent again.
Preferably with a new project. The GN?R name has taken a beating over the years and could use a little dirt nap.

It?s been 2 decades, and nuGuns has never really managed to create and maintain any momentum.
Doesn?t appear to be any on the horizon.

On the other side, bands don?t often split up for 2 decades, reform and pick up where they left off.
The longer they wait, the worse their odds become. I think they?ve far surpassed their expiration date.

All that said, I?ve paid to see Axl play with a small army of musicians I don?t know or care about.
Same with Slash.
So odds are I?d pay to see them play together again should it happen.
New material could be dicey, but I?m confident they could still put on a good show.

1.
Both Adler and Sorum should be included.
Excluding Adler would be a dick move, and make it a sham.

2.
Dizzy?s in.

3.
No third guitarist is necessary when you have Slash and Izzy gracing the stage.
Wouldn?t bother me to see Gilby up there, but not needed.

A reunion will always be people's preference because the real band was so awesome.  But that is only heightened by the fact the new band has done so little of note.

There would be less reunion talk if the past 15 years had produced a few albums and a few notable songs that stuck in the public consciousness.  You would never eradicate it totally, but there would likely be more people into what they were doing now.

Reunion Whit Robin, Brain & Bucky

 :beer:

I find it entertaining that a good part of the staunch reunionists are 20-somethings and 30-somethings that never saw the classic AFD lineup.

Guess I'm ageist  :hihi:

Not sure that's the right read.

The harder core reunionists are people that were around for the real band's heyday.

Its rare you find someone that will tell you they only stumbled onto GNR in the past 10 or so years being all about a reunion.  That group is people that lived though their prime and see what a joke comparing the two eras really is.

Agreed.  Everybody I know that has disregarded the original lineup over the years are people who are too young to remember the original 5 members, or care if they reunited.

On the other hand, I watched (and recorded on VHS tape) the famous 2/2/88 Ritz show when it originally aired on MTV.  Had that tape for nearly 20 years afterwards.  One such reason as to why I prefer the original lineup.

Honestly, at the point, I'd only go see Guns N Roses if it were the original 5 members.....and even then, I'd stop and consider it.  People my age are much less likely to leap out of their chairs for any concert, regardless of what it is.

I think, at least the first time, they move tickets without a problem.  Like KISS in '96, or Van Halen the first time back with Dave.  After that, I think it would be less of a must see event, if they were somehow able to do another tour 2-3 years after. 

Because I think people would have to leap at a reunion the first time because they know how fragile it all would be.  It could well be the literal last chance, given the combustible dynamic with the people involved.  Could go up in flames at any moment.

People are also going to buy a reunion ticket sight unseen that first time around.  But, elephant in the room, a lot of these people have not seen or heard Axl in years, for some, decades.  What they see and hear is going to be pretty jarring.

Anyone of us that has played their friends live Axl clips from recent tours can attest to some of those reactions.  Hit or miss, to be kind. 

Yep, and that would be the #1 motivator for me to go if I did go.  I'd wager that it would be the one and only tour we'd get.

I would say I would have concerns about if even one reunion tour would be completed because of that combustible dynamic.

Then again, I don't want Jarmo to grab onto that like quote a pitbull and still be whining about it 5 years from now.

I have seen every lineup except the original with Ole etc. and do not consider any of them a "joke".

I do consider several self-important online personalities Jokes though, I rarely go to any other shows than GNR.

Good to know.  And if that ever actually comes up, you can puff that chest right out.

But no one said that.

What was said was that comparisons between the two eras is a joke.  In terms of...well, in terms of everything.  Impact, relevance, quality if studio material, quality of live performances.  Just about across the board its not much of a contest and a not a terribly serious discussion.

But that was only part of the larger point you introduced that I was refuting.  You seem to think that the harder core reunion people are people that never saw the old band :


I think its just the opposite.  The harder core reunion folks are ones that did see the real band in their prime.  And thus, less to entertain the concept things are anywhere near on the same level.

Your harder core reunion people never game anything post 2000 a chance.  They were mad, were going to say mad, and have stayed mad.  Because they DID see the real band back in the day.

Most of my friends were huge Guns fans growing up.
I don?t think anyone likes seeing the disintegration of a band they follow, but most understand that it happens.
Most Guns fans will never agree with Axl?s decision to move on w/o the others, especially seeing that he?s managed next to nothing w/o them over the course of 2 decades.
That said, I don?t know many people that weren?t willing to give it a chance for what it was.
People didn?t all of a sudden become disinterested in Axl Rose.

For whatever reason(s), it took a ridiculous and unprecedented amount of time for him to release his sole album.
In some ways, it may have helped him, as the mystique was very much alive. People were curious to hear what he was up to.
But when people didn?t like what they heard, which in my experience is every Guns fan I know, it didn?t do him any favors.
It took a long, long time to craft an album that didn?t resonate. So now the cats out of the bag, the mystique is all but gone, and with it, interest in what, if anything comes next.

If people liked the songs, they?d listen to them. I don?t know anyone that doesn?t listen to them out of spite.

One of my favorite bands was the New York Dolls.
4 of the originals are long dead. They split in ?75, reformed 30 years later and put out an album I rather enjoyed.
It doesn?t sound anything like the New York Dolls. But I can dig the songs Johansen, Sylvain and the new guys came up with.

Maybe not to the extent of the Dolls, but I think most people probably have a similar story, as it?s been proven many times that it?s hard to keep a rock band together.
There is going to be turnover in personnel. or the band is going to implode altogether eventually.

It?s not just the fact that everyone in Guns left and Axl decided he?d continue anyways.
It?s the perfect shit storm of how it all went down.
At the end of the day, it comes down to the music, and the little music he?s managed since UYI just hasn?t caught on.

Oh, I think they have.

You aren't playing "up close and personal" type tours because you have retained all your clout and drawing power.

I have a boatload of people that were fans of the real band and still love them.  Even still love Axl, but they love *that* Axl.

Most don't even consider what he's doing now a real thing.  They certainly don't consider it Guns N' Roses.  Its not given a second thought.

I don't even disagree with most of their basic premises.  I'm just such a monster, over the top fan, I can overlook things and make excuses.  But you are talking a serious level of devotion at that point, and not the norm.

Right, I understand that?s the thinking now, and has been for some time.
I?m just saying it took a while to get to that point. It didn?t happen overnight.

If Axl had released an album within a reasonable amount of time, and he sounded like the Axl people remembered and loved, and the music was there, than people would enjoy it for what it was.
It would never be essential Guns N? Roses, but it would be that album you throw on when you?ve exhausted AFD, Lies, UYI..

Unfortunately Chinese Democracy isn?t even that album to anyone I know.

Agreed.

Its just a shame not even one song was able to catch on and become a radio staple.  Would have made a huge difference and given Axl some much needed viability.

When you hear them say there is Guns N' Roses coming up after the next break, you can be pretty sure it's going to be a song from when Reagan was President.

I did see the band back in the day, so did many of my long term friends, so there goes the relevance of your theory  because it clearly does not apply to everyone.

What you are omitting in your little contrived tale, is that the entire music industry has changed since the 80's and 90's-  album sales have nosedived and the entire industry has been affected to one degree or another.

I like the comment Noel Gallagher gives about a Oasis reunion.

When asked about Oasis fans that have never been given a chance to see the original line up.

Who cares...  The Beetles where his favorite band and he never got a chance to see them...

Yea, but Noel didn?t dissolve Oasis then name his new project Oasis, though.

The flip side of the coin would say that other band members abandoned Axl and he soldiered on to carry on with what he created. It's a matter of perception. Just saying.

I think its more of a one sided coin

Wasn't it Axl who dissolved the Guns partnership, taking the name, then trying to have Slash and Duff as contracted employess?

You?d have to edit that to say ?soldiered on to carry on with what THEY created?, but even then, I?m not buying it.

How many people have to leave before people say, hmmm maybe it wasn't all Slash, Duff, Izzy, Steven, Matt, Robin, Buckethead, Bumblefoot, Tobias, Freese, Niven, Youth, Moby, Clink, Baker, Beavan, Cadieux, Mercuriadis, Azoff and whomever else?s fault that Axl can?t seem to get out of his own way.

Abandoned seems a touch dramatic. I think it was more a case of people seeing the writing on the wall. Nothing was getting done, and not many musicians are going to be satisfied to tour their sole album of 2 decades.

But even if you wanted to look past the mountain of people that have left, and think it was their fault things weren?t working(and I?m not saying they didn?t have blood on their hands), it wouldn?t change the fact that he legally dissolved Guns, and created a new project with the same name. New band, in just about every sense of the word, same name. New players, same problems. Hard to miss the pattern.

Yep.

But the spin that Axl, (and by proxy, some of his more ardent supporters) is that he was only trying to protect himself.

Because they tried to fire him before, that time...in 1987.

THAT'S CORRECT.

One would think, yes.



Yep.  Seems rather academic, no?

Axl didn't force them out though. They left on their own accord. They had their reasons obviously, but once they left Axl tried to carry on as best he could. The original statement made it sound like Axl fired everyone and decided to carry on with replacements. I don't think he really wanted them to leave. Obviously he wanted things on his terms. Some people could look at that as shady, others could say it's good business.

Yeah, but its a tough sell to guys who have been your equal partners since day one.

Would you roll with that, in their spot?

Regardless, it's the choice they made. Maybe they thought Axl would back down and plead them to come back as equal partners. Seems to me that Axl isn't one you'd want to challenge, or one who admits fault easily.

Money, fame, and success change things. Some bands are able to find their way through and stick together. Many don't. Let's not forget the state that Duff and Slash were in back then either. The way they were going, they weren't long for surviving within the band as it was. They made magic together. There's no denying that. Right place, right time. But it just wasn't meant to last. It's unfortunate things got so ugly and the lack of progress that's been made under the GNR banner since. But that's just the way it is. Thankfully, they are all healthy and still "active" in varying degrees obviously.  : ok:

I agree overall with the exception of Slash and Duff thinking Axl would eventually back down.
I get the impression that they knew that wasn?t going to happen. They had hoped for a compromise for some time, but by the time they left, they were beaten up, over it, and not looking back.
They didn?t see Axl coming around, and were proven to be more right than I?d bet even they anticipated.
It?s a pattern that has repeated itself many times. Members leave, and become productive again, while Axl sits idle.

Even from a strictly business stand point, I?m not sure Axl made the right call.
Sure, he has the control he wanted, but with it he?s transformed the biggest band on the planet into an afterthought.
Opportunities are still and will always be there, but his actions and more so inactions over the years have taken a toll on the brand.
Which is all GN?R is at this point. It ceased being a creative entity some time ago, and the brand becomes less potent with each passing day on inactivity.

What was Sorum's quote?  He could take the ball and run with or, or he could drop the ball...and he dropped the ball.

That's how I see it.  He wrested away all control over everything.  At the time, we all thought it was to do something radically different and his own way.  Even if that crashed and burned, you could say he tried.

He never really tried.  He went though all of this to get control and then sat on his hands.  That's the killer in all of this.

I think he did try pretty hard initially, once he got the wheels in motion at the turn of the century. Maybe he found out just how hard it was going to be and it zapped the energy and motivation out of him. Maybe he felt like he was fighting an uphill battle, and since then he's showed sporadic spurts of forward progress. He really did take on a lot with retaining the name. Public perception was against him for breaking up an all time great band in their prime. People don't get over that very easily. It's easy to say, "why doesn't he just release music?" Or "he's wasting years of his life being inactive". While that may be true, we don't know what he's gone through behind the scenes. I can't imagine it's been easy. Could another man have handled it differently? Better? Or was this destined to unfold in the manner that it has?

I agree.

I think the disastrous MTV VMAs and the problem plagued U.S. tour really took a toll.  Shock to the system.

Yep, watching Axl blow up badly on MTV, run around out of breath, and barely able to sing during the 2002 VMAs made me wish I hadn't bought a ticket for the late 2002 tour, but then the show I would've attended got canceled anyway.  So it worked out for me.... just not so much for Axl.

Hindsight is always 20/20, obviously.

But, in retrospect, the booking on the U.S. tour that year was probably a little ambitious.  They had a ton of unsold seats all over.  That had to be deflating.

20,000 seat arenas Axl played in his prime as the biggest rock band in the world at the time, but 10 years later with a totally new band, no new material...that's a tough ask.

Bums me out because I think that 2006 tour is awesome.  I wish like hell that was his first impression back in front of folks.

I agree. If 2006 was the first the world saw of the new band then the response would have been a lot better, Axl was ridiculous on that tour... So good. If they had released the record during that tour , it could have been real big ..

Only thing ridiculous are little fanboys calling Axl ridiculous.

What the hell are you talking about? I'm saying how great the performances were during that run...

Why do you insist on ruining every single discussion here? We should all learn to use the report button on you. You take issue with everything and try to insult everybody after every post that isn't to ur liking. If you are going to be obnoxious you should at least try to be amusing about it , but you aren't.

The performances were exemplary, I misread your statement entirely-just not used to the colloquial ridiculous as a compliment.

Not honestly trying to insult anybody, I think some might take things a little too personally.

You think his performances in 2002 are comparable to 2006?

I do not.  He's was not nearly is as good voice in 2002 as he was in 2006.  Real clean, little pitchy.  Didn't sound like him.

2006 sounds like him.

I agree

2002 was the best year for the band

2006 was the best year of Axls 2000s voice

IF a reunion happen. Im gonna celebrate like a kid opening gifts from christmas.

This could be the greatest event of rock n roll. And can be a lot of things...

Ax can call Slash, Duff, Izzy, Steven, Matt, Robin, Bucket and all the people from GUNS and do the best concert rock ever in history (after F Mercury tribute)

I hope never die meanwhile (from AFD Lineup) and do this before they have 60 Years old.