Band Members Contracts

[nesquick]

imagine a "spice-gothic" ala robin finck
wow...the Spice Girls would become suddenly totally unsexy!

[Mikkamakka]

If you were a founding member of the Disney or McDonald's company and you left, do you think they'd change the name? Nope!

According to your logic, GN'R would be GN'R if Axl left and Robin would have the name and he'd team up with DJ Bobo, Weird Al Yankovich, Bobby Brown and a monkey and they'd make Christmas songs in a yodli style. Well, I know that a lot of strange things has happened in the history of GN'R...

[badapple81]

the difference is that tracii Guns never sold 80 million records worldwide with GN'R. Slash and Duff did. They have a status. They made Guns n' Roses (I should add IZZY). especially Slash. Would you call the spice girls "the spice girls" with just jerry halliwell and 4 others gothic (finck) /bucketwoman (BH) /mercenary (brain) and Village People (pittman) girls? Come on...
Dizzy, Richard Fortus and Tommy Stinson are ok though. They are Rockers, so there is something of the real GN'R inside them. They have the GN'R spirit.

That is so closed minded. Just because Robin has a different look.. he doesn't have the "GN'R spirit"?

I guess because Axl wears oversize jerseys, big chains and has his hair in braids, he doesn't have the spirit either?

GN'R is no longer just about leather jackets and bandannas.. get over it and move on.

[nesquick]

That is so closed minded. Just because Robin has a different look.. he doesn't have the "GN'R spirit"?

it's not (only) a question of look at all but mainly a musical question. Finck is not a Rocker. He is the indus/gothic/industrial touch of the new line-up. He is the opposite of the "classic Rock n' Roll" musical approach and spirit of the original band. I don't say he is bad, I just say he is not what I like. Sorry man, I prefer Rock n' Roll and Rockstars like Slash, Axl (vintage), the Gallagher brothers (Oasis), Jim Morrison, Freddie Mercury etc... just Rock n' Roll.

[badapple81]

That is so closed minded. Just because Robin has a different look.. he doesn't have the "GN'R spirit"?

it's not (only) a question of look at all but mainly a musical question. Finck is not a Rocker. He is the indus/gothic/industrial touch of the new line-up. He is the opposite of the "classic Rock n' Roll" musical approach and spirit of the original band. I don't say he is bad, I just say he is not what I like. Sorry man, I prefer Rock n' Roll and Rockstars like Slash, Axl (vintage), the Gallagher brothers (Oasis), Jim Morrison, Freddie Mercury etc... just Rock n' Roll.

Well the new GN'R seemingly isn't JUST about old school classic Rock N' Roll now, so I guess Robin does have the current GN'R spirit then?

I do get your point, I understand you prefer classic rock, whatever that is, it's just well.. now that we get your point.. no need to bring it up on every single post relating to the new GN'R line up. I mean if you only like vintage Axl and don't like the "new GN'R spirit", perhaps the Velvet Revolver section is more for you, rather than posting negatives on what most of us here, enjoy..

[leesixxrose]

its not really "guns n roses" anyways with out slash and duff or izzy...

is Judas Priest really Judas Priest if its only Rob Halford?? no it called "Halford"

Is it really STYX with just Tommy Shaw??? no its just Tommy Shaw...

with all these contracts and secrecy there is no wonder why axl cant keep a band together..

he is just keeping the name only coz there is a big payout for the next album from the band "Guns n Roses"...  no matter who is in the band the record company doesnt care . they have the new "Guns n Roses" album...

The fans... the smart fans know the difference.,,,,,,

but in axls crazy mind he thinks that he is "guns n roses" hes forgotten who helped make that name worth anything... but the more he fucks up with his mini tours and cover band members in and out makes the "guns n roses" name worth less to the fans....

even slash said he would never regroup with the original members under the name guns n roses anymore coz axl has ruined the name....

sure axls new record will be good and have some decent songs on it, but its not going to "change the face of music forever" and your never going to see another album like AFD ever again.... Axl has fucked it up... the name, the history, his friendships with his old band mates, his friendships with his new band mates...  hes a classic screw up ...

[norway]

yes it almost seem axl wen't commercial, but it's just too puristic to bother

It is gunsnroses now, no matter what you heart says

[ppbebe]

Excuse my ignorance but Whatever the fuck Judas Priest n STYX are or no matter how smart they are (are they?), they're not my fav bands.

Guns n' Roses is. The only Guns n' Roses existing is. 
Guns n' Roses is Guns n' Roses not your damn SMART band.

On topic, I didn?t know he counted the manager. I wonder it?s still the same.
No one here mention the function of the fourth man in a party to a contract.

[younggunner]

it's not (only) a question of look at all but mainly a musical question. Finck is not a Rocker. He is the indus/gothic/industrial touch of the new line-up. He is the opposite of the "classic Rock n' Roll" musical approach and spirit of the original band. I don't say he is bad, I just say he is not what I like. Sorry man, I prefer Rock n' Roll and Rockstars like Slash, Axl (vintage), the Gallagher brothers (Oasis), Jim Morrison, Freddie Mercury etc... just Rock n' Roll.

Some people will never get it. Let me ask you a question. When old gnr broke into the scene was their look/attitude and style immediately accepted? Have you heard the song one in a million and how some of it came about?
What made GNr style "cool', "CLASSIC ROCK N ROLL", bad as slets go smoke a stoge, yea dude...etc,?
THEIR MUSIC!. Their music did the talking first. When the music is a success everything else follows.

As for the new band. They are their onw. What I love about the new band and the direction Axl has taken was that he isnt trying to recreate that"badass" 80's lets just rock out image. Each member is unique in terms of musical style background and image. And it works. It seems to all fit. I love that thi sband is a bunch of different kind of people.

But ill tell you what. Th elook, whether you hate it or I like, doesnt mean jack shit unless the music is good. The jury is still out. The difference between me and you is that I guess your ignorant about this image thing and are still stuck in the gnr hey day. Trust me kids my age do not care about the "classic rock n roll look.

You talk about this rock n roll spirit. Last time I cehcked rock n roll doesnt have any rules or guidlines. Thats what makes it rnr. RNR is attitude. The music you make and how you dleiver it is rnr. WHat make site cool and acceptable to the people like you is if its good.

[33]

they could not work together and axl kept the name

i think it's that simple

Good words Norway at least someone can see it was as simple as that.

I havent been on for a couple of weeks cos I broke my computer, and I cant believe that on my first day back the same old people are still rattling on about the old band members being fired, or the new band not being any good, or how its sucks that Axl kep the GnR name. Fucking get over it people!! We are on the verge of getting the album we have all been waiting so long for from the band we all love so why keep bitching about the past?

[nesquick]

younggunner you weren't born when the REAL Guns N' Roses ruled the world. for you GN'R is robin finck and brain and Buckethead because you're 15 or 16 but it is not. That's not Guns n' Roses man. That's an Axl Rose band. It's the new GN'R but certainely not "Guns n' Fucking Roses" I knew and all the world knew back in the days. It's an hybrid version, a kind of false revival version of the original band. They have never sold just ONE record for the moment, and the songs they played were and are songs by the real band, by Axl, Slash, Izzy (gilby), Duff, Steven(Matt), Dizzy. Some people say they're a cover band. I wouldn't say that but it's nearly that. believe me, people who went to the new GN'R shows didn't come to hear "chinese democracy" "silkworms" or "rihads and the bedouins", NOBODY CARED, but came to hear the old GN'R classic songs, the old GN'R success and Hits.

as soon as "Chinese Democracy" won't be released, the new-GN'R notoriety will be close to zero.? To judge this band, they have to play their owns songs. and I seriously doubt they'll have 1/4 or 1/5 of the real band success. The real band sold over 85 million albums worldwide.You weren't here in 1991/1992, I was here I remember: GN'R ruled the world they were fucking huge. And this success is Axl,Slash Duff,Izzy, and steven/matt success, not robin (gothic) finck or fuckedhead, or any other clowns. They are employees. they are employees that can be fired by w.Axl.Rose at every moment. They don't have the rage, the fire the old band had. and on top of that they are not "Rock n' Roll". If they were Rockers I would have accepted them better.? At least, Fortus and tommy are Rockers. and that's why I accept them. They have the minimum required.
 
Excuse me but I can't bear when a "young-kid" try to give me lessons about GN'R. I'm 23, I've been a fan since 1991 while you were a small baby, I know better than you what is "Guns n' Roses". And this is not what you saw at the VMA'02 (even if I loved it when I saw it live when it happened). Capichi?

[jarmo]

Excuse me but I can't bear when a "young-kid" try to give me lessons about GN'R. I'm 23, I've been a fan since 1991 while you were a small baby, I know better than you what is "Guns n' Roses".

How would you feel if some older fan told you that you were just a kid in 1991?




/jarmo

[ppbebe]

The Older people get the stiffer their necks and brains become, in general.

And some go gaga singing the same old tune again n again.

[nesquick]

Excuse me but I can't bear when a "young-kid" try to give me lessons about GN'R. I'm 23, I've been a fan since 1991 while you were a small baby, I know better than you what is "Guns n' Roses".

How would you feel if some older fan told you that you were just a kid in 1991?




/jarmo

yes I was just a kid but it was the original band but at least? it was the real band. I grew-up with them. Now, I will buy "chinese democracy" when it comes out, I will listen to this album very carefully, I will see them live if they tour but I think it won't put my heart into it. I just can't. Something is missing. It will be more by curiousity just "like that". Yesterday I re-listened to "Use Your Illsuion 2" entirely (exept "my world" of course) and what a great album, what a great band, what a great chemistry. You can feel the old band chemistry through the music. It's called nostalgia. Without Slash, Duff and Izzy to write songs and to play them, it will never be the same. I miss the old GN'R sound. You cannot erase legendary years.

[AxlsMainMan]

it's not (only) a question of look at all but mainly a musical question. Finck is not a Rocker. He is the indus/gothic/industrial touch of the new line-up. He is the opposite of the "classic Rock n' Roll" musical approach and spirit of the original band. I don't say he is bad, I just say he is not what I like. Sorry man, I prefer Rock n' Roll and Rockstars like Slash, Axl (vintage), the Gallagher brothers (Oasis), Jim Morrison, Freddie Mercury etc... just Rock n' Roll.

Some people will never get it. Let me ask you a question. When old gnr broke into the scene was their look/attitude and style immediately accepted? Have you heard the song one in a million and how some of it came about?
What made GNr style "cool', "CLASSIC ROCK N ROLL", bad as slets go smoke a stoge, yea dude...etc,?
THEIR MUSIC!. Their music did the talking first. When the music is a success everything else follows.

As for the new band. They are their onw. What I love about the new band and the direction Axl has taken was that he isnt trying to recreate that"badass" 80's lets just rock out image. Each member is unique in terms of musical style background and image. And it works. It seems to all fit. I love that thi sband is a bunch of different kind of people.

But ill tell you what. Th elook, whether you hate it or I like, doesnt mean jack shit unless the music is good. The jury is still out. The difference between me and you is that I guess your ignorant about this image thing and are still stuck in the gnr hey day. Trust me kids my age do not care about the "classic rock n roll look.

You talk about this rock n roll spirit. Last time I cehcked rock n roll doesnt have any rules or guidlines. Thats what makes it rnr. RNR is attitude. The music you make and how you dleiver it is rnr. WHat make site cool and acceptable to the people like you is if its good.

I completely agree with you their. Every one of the new band members seems to have their own seperate stage presence and persona that are entirely different then any of the other members yet they blend together so uniquely when it comes straight down to the music that their talent is like no other and the final delivery of a song is breathtaking. I completely agree on the image issue. If people are that close minded about clothes or what brand of hair gel robin uses then just give up honestly on this new band because it just doesnt matter. The music is what counts more then anything and the creativity each member brings to the table. Nesquick says they lack the classic rock image, well sorry but times change and everything evolves. I honestly can hardly think of any band that has been around for more then a decade and have not changed their image at least once. If Axl or Robin hopped on stage in a pair of biker shorts now, they would be crucifyed. That image is extinct now and no longer applies to the new generation of youth who will be the largest group purchasing CD. Any finally, this band was never intended to be a revival act or a cover band. Axl kept the name because he felt a genuine attachment to it, and what other reason could there be for playing the old tunes? Well uhhh Axl is an original member with just as many rights to play the catalogue whenever he sees fit and with whomever he chooses.

[nesquick]

Nesquick says they lack the classic rock image, well sorry but times change and everything evolves. I honestly can hardly think of any band that has been around for more then a decade and have not changed their image at least once.

1) "Hey hey my my, Rock n' Roll will never die" (Neil Young).
---> modernizing your band is ok, but making a radical changes from A to Z is bad. and that's what Axl has made by bringing guys like Finck or BH in the band. Making things in TOTAL OPPOSITION of what you used to make and to be is a huge mistake. If you want to make changes in your band, try to keep the same spirit you always had. You want to replace a Rocker? ok, bring a Rocker, not a Gothic. It's called coherence.
2) U2 and Oasis for example...oh wait they have been the 2 biggest selllers in Rock music over these last 10 years. It shows people are attached to the spirit of a band. It's not only a question of music, but a question of spirit, of chemistry and human connexions inside the band. it's a feeling. and to have it, the band needs to be coherent. Bringing a gothic or/and a shredder in a classic Rock n' Roll band is a mistake. Would you see a gothic into...the rolling stones? or a shredder into...U2?

It just doesn't make it because that's not what classic Rock n' Roll is about.

[younggunner]

younggunner you weren't born when the REAL Guns N' Roses ruled the world. for you GN'R is robin finck and brain and Buckethead because you're 15 or 16 but it is not.

Just because Im 19 doesnt mean I dont know what GNR accomplished or how they were perceived back in the day.
And yes Gnr is what it is now for me. SO what? What does that mean. GNr is what it is today. The past is gone my friend. With that being said just because the old members are gone doesnt mean they dont have a place in gnr history. They have the ultimate place. THEY ARE ALL GREAT. Old gnr was a GREAT BAND.
But guess what...ITS OVER. In your head you might still wnat that badass band but your never going to get it. Thats your loss not mine.
And that certainly doesnt mean I cant accept and enjoy this band. This band has major potential and kicks major ass. If its not for you too fukin bad.....
 Your right old gnr was gnr....but new gnr is gnr as well

That's not Guns n' Roses man. That's an Axl Rose band. It's the new GN'R but certainely not "Guns n' Fucking Roses" I knew and all the world knew back in the days. It's an hybrid version, a kind of false revival version of the original band

No, its Guns N Roses. Sorry to break it to you.

False revival version? You were just complainig about the bands image and how it wasnt like badass/classic old gnr. SO how can it be false? Am I missing something? Last time I looked RObin wasnt smoking on stage, and Axl wasnt wearing his old bike shorts. SO what exactely are they trying to duplicate form the old lineup?

believe me, people who went to the new GN'R shows didn't come to hear "chinese democracy" "silkworms" or "rihads and the bedouins", NOBODY CARED, but came to hear the old GN'R classic songs, the old GN'R success and Hits.

Do you think your being smart with that statement? No fukin shit. Why else would some1 go see new gnr with any new expectations? There was no single or album out. SO what new stuff were people expecting?

Yea your right...nobody cares what CD is going to sound like. Kepp telling yourself that. I hate to break it to you but people do care. Axl has created a myth and mystique about himself and the album. To say peopel dont care is being dumb. But your posts ahve been showing that so its all gravy.

And when Cd does see the lgiht of day and the band does tour, ill bet you anything that the sets will contain most if not all of the songs off of Cd and maybe a few hits thrown in. If They go out and play a 2002 set again then you will have every oppurtunity to bash this band...

To judge this band, they have to play their owns songs. and I seriously doubt they'll have 1/4 or 1/5 of the real band success. The real band sold over 85 million albums worldwide.

Have I not being saying that for years? As for the latter part of your comments...now your talking about a whole new thing. Another deadhorse topic but why not....If you are going to measure the bands success in terms of albums sold and numbers...old gnr will win. Its not even an issue.
I wont be judging that way but if it makes you feel good to know that old gnr will be selling more albums then new you can call new gnr a failure before they even jump out of the gate....

You weren't here in 1991/1992, I was here I remember: GN'R ruled the world they were fucking huge. And this success is Axl,Slash Duff,Izzy, and steven/matt success,

Point me to where any1 on these boards disputes that...or me atleast...again just ebcause I didnt see gnr the first go around doesnt mean I am not acknowledging or understand how huge they were. Trust me I know.
And this might surprise you but I love the old band as well. Theres something called AFDUYI,TSI,LE< and lies that got me hooked on GNR. Last time I looked the members ?you mentioned played on those records.....

not robin (gothic) finck or fuckedhead, or any other clowns

That just about sums it up

They are employees. they are employees that can be fired by w.Axl.Rose at every moment. They don't have the rage, the fire the old band had. and on top of that they are not "Rock n' Roll".

but nice try ?

If they were Rockers I would have accepted them better

No offense but who the fuck cares if you accept them or not. By reading your posts you come off as a lil pussy so why should I accept soemthing that comes out of your mouth. EVery post of yours is the same shit. I can respect some other "GnR haters" because atleast they have some valid arguments. This shit you wrote in this post and paragraph is pretty comical. Its been talked about a 1000x thats why im not even going to respond to it some more.

Excuse me but I can't bear when a "young-kid" try to give me lessons about GN'R. I'm 23, I've been a fan since 1991 while you were a small baby, I know better than you what is "Guns n' Roses". And this is not what you saw at the VMA'02 (even if I love it when I saw it live when it happened). Capichi?

Excuse me but I cant bear it when some "rnr expert" tries to give me a lesson about what is rnr. Im 19 and have been a fan since 2000 while you were still a lil pussy, I was "getting it". I respect and love the past but I love this band just as much. Why cant I enjoy both eras of gnr? Why cant you just let it go and realize the old band is done and accept that. If you can accept that you will either go off on your merry way or hang around and enjoy this band as well. If you cant respect that thats being a pussy. Leave. Adios. What I saw at the Vmas was a special band. A band that doesnt follow the rules and has done whatever the hell they wanted. That is not following the rnr rule book. And if you really wanna get into it...go look at the vh1 show...youll see a nice washed up band...but hey..atleast they are playing by the rnr rulebook .....Capichi butona

[jarmo]

yes I was just a kid but it was the original band but at least? it was the real band. I grew-up with them.

Some older fan might tell you that the original band didn't exist in 1991. 




/jarmo

[nesquick]

Your right old gnr was gnr....but new gnr is gnr as well

that's where we disagree. For me this is not. It's an Axl Rose solo project.

[jimmythegent]

I first started listening to GN'R in '89 (I was 12) and I can tell you there was alreadya legendary air about that band - they were so damn exciting and like nothing else at the time. By the time 91 rolled around (and moreso 92-93), something had been lost, largely due to the felling that they had lost that 'brotherhood' for want of a better word. Sure, commercially they were at their peak but the cancelled shows, egos, ludicrous videos, stage show/props etc.. had somewhat tarnished their image by the early 90' especially given that grunge and the whole stripped down rock was at an all time high. This is of course just my interpretation looking back on very fond memories...