Smart Move to keep the name "Guns n Roses"

[mikegiuliana]

Axl is Guns N'Roses like Robert Smith is The Cure.

that's simple.

axl is not gnr because he would have never been famous alone... SCOM is their mega hit that propelled afd, that song has more then just vocals .. Listen to any afd song or popular gnr hit and they were a group effort.. There's no denying gnr was a guitar rock band... To me that is like saying zepplin was plant


zombux in my eyes it ended when izzy left.

[DeN]

they were a group effort, and it will be the same effort with the new band, so what ?

of course it's not Axl alone with his piano.

[mikegiuliana]

they were a group effort, and it will be the same effort with the new band, so what ?

of course it's not Axl alone with his piano.

well you said axl =gnr, so I expressed my opion..

You can't just switch guns n roses like some gay band as if it was nickleback.. Gnr were household names, any rock fan knew axl n slash, like perry or tyler or jagger richards... I'll never get why people consider a band with no members from their glory days still gnr.. It's basically an entire tour selling because of the gnr name.. Shit what ever happened to fan loyalty to a band, you love? a band from 87 that sold 90 million albums then in 2006 the entire band is different and you still call it gnr and love them... They play mostly old gnr music..

I suppose when people are young and didn't really experience the real gnr that today as long as they see axl rose and he pretends it's gnr it's all good or if axl has always been their favorite the rest don't count

[DeN]

i'm 34 and i saw "the original band" in 1992 at Vincennes.

the new band is just better, and i'm more excited by the new stuff than the old appetite one.

the fact is you can replace every member but not Axl.

look at Velvet Revolver : 3 "former" members, does it sounds like Guns N'Roses ? not at all.

[Slashead]

According to Duff's biography on this site http://www.heretodaygonetohell.com/bios/duff.htm, he left the band in August 1997, not in 1999...

In my opinion, the beginning of the end was in 1990 when Steven got fired... The band's sound changed completely with Matt. Not a good thing...
We really were near of the end when Izzy left... The end of GNR happened when Slash tendered his resignation in 1996.
 
Slash can't be replaced. He's a GNR symbol, just like Axl.

[mikegiuliana]

i'm 34 and i saw "the original band" in 1992 at Vincennes.

the new band is just better, and i'm more excited by the new stuff than the old appetite one.

the fact is you can replace every member but not Axl.

look at Velvet Revolver : 3 "former" members, does it sounds like Guns N'Roses ? not at all.

VR doesn't have to sound like gnr though... Matt is a replacement..I'm sure they could use samples like ftp musically and sound like a lost illusion's track.. New band is better, finck fucks up all the solos from scom nr and other afd songs.. Anyways how good they are as players doesn't make it ok to be called gnr..

Ok you go enjoy the axl rose band  stuff and I'll take the best rock album out there that took a fraction of the time done by gnr

I am excited for cd because i'm an axl rose fan just like any other ex member from afd..

[zombux]

i'm 34 and i saw "the original band" in 1992 at Vincennes.

the new band is just better, and i'm more excited by the new stuff than the old appetite one.

the fact is you can replace every member but not Axl.

look at Velvet Revolver : 3 "former" members, does it sounds like Guns N'Roses ? not at all.

true. I like VR but I don't consider them GNR.

[mikegiuliana]

i'm 34 and i saw "the original band" in 1992 at Vincennes.

the new band is just better, and i'm more excited by the new stuff than the old appetite one.

the fact is you can replace every member but not Axl.

look at Velvet Revolver : 3 "former" members, does it sounds like Guns N'Roses ? not at all.

true. I like VR but I don't consider them GNR.

but why would you consider "velvet revolver" guns n roses? I look at them as a different band so I don't expect gnr.. Duff has lots of punk influence

[mikegiuliana]

According to Duff's biography on this site http://www.heretodaygonetohell.com/bios/duff.htm, he left the band in August 1997, not in 1999...

In my opinion, the beginning of the end was in 1990 when Steven got fired... The band's sound changed completely with Matt. Not a good thing...
We really were near of the end when Izzy left... The end of GNR happened when Slash tendered his resignation in 1996.
 
Slash can't be replaced. He's a GNR symbol, just like Axl.

you lose izzy n slash gnr is over... izzy the great song writer, slash the axe man on all those amazing solos.. Plus you got dizzy reed

[DeN]

New band is better, finck fucks up all the solos from scom nr and other afd songs..

it must be a joke.
Robin just propel Sweet Child to another level, more modern & arty.
he's the best thing who happened to Guns since Sorum left 

[zombux]

but why would you consider "velvet revolver" guns n roses? I look at them as a different band so I don't expect gnr.. Duff has lots of punk influence

sure but many people consider them as "new guns n' roses" and are awaiting something like the old band - and they're disappointed and bash scott weiland

[DeN]

but why would you consider "velvet revolver" guns n roses? I look at them as a different band so I don't expect gnr..

so Slash, Duff & Matt are just studio musicians ?
they change their singer and they totally change their music ?

ok, now i get it. 

[mikegiuliana]

but why would you consider "velvet revolver" guns n roses? I look at them as a different band so I don't expect gnr.. Duff has lots of punk influence

sure but many people consider them as "new guns n' roses" and are awaiting something like the old band - and they're disappointed and bash scott weiland

Well I don't consider them as new gnr, slash matt dizzy all worked on snakepit but I didn't think of gnr either.. There were big long solos but it sounded different to me..

[mikegiuliana]

but why would you consider "velvet revolver" guns n roses? I look at them as a different band so I don't expect gnr..

so Slash, Duff & Matt are just studio musicians ?
they change their singer and they totally change their music ?

ok, now i get it.?

Well matt technically is... I think when you start a group that has scott weiland you don't want to just be gnr minus axl.. I hear some gnr in vr, but I also hear a lot of stp infulence.. When I hear a song like slither I don't care what it sounds most like ,I just know it rocks

[zombux]

sure I can see it the same way - snakepit, VR and other solos were great but not GNR. current GNR are GNR, nothing ended for me, things have just changed. I don't care much who exactly is in the band, as long as they do music I like. and I like all music by GNR - both AFD and Illusions stuff, and the new material sounds very promising.

[mikegiuliana]

sure I can see it the same way - snakepit, VR and other solos were great but not GNR. current GNR are GNR, nothing ended for me, things have just changed. I don't care much who exactly is in the band, as long as they do music I like. and I like all music by GNR - both AFD and Illusions stuff, and the new material sounds very promising.

Well, see to me gnr was a certain group of people or at least had to have certain members in it based on their style.. It's not typical to just love any band out there, it's something that happens naturally ..People feel in love with gnr when they came out for many different reasons, only one gnr made it big..

Now it's more like whoever axl hires is gnr and that's it.. To me that's not a band, axl owns everything and everyone can hit the road if they don't follow axl's lead, no one can talk about anything.. That;'s not a band to me and definetly is not gnr,..  I've never been into a band so much that had not one album.. When one man controls eevrything it's not  aband it's a solo project with a famous band name..

[mikegiuliana]

Just wanted to say for the sake of axl and his new band I think if he didn't use the name you would have seen exactly how many people were into this band and axl's work instead of the backlash of old guns fame..

It's like cd could sell 3 million albums, but how many of them were because they loved the new music and had genuine interest in new gnr only?

Could axl have toured twice already without an album if he didn't have the gnr name as a security blanket or had that much money to spend, would he have been getting pampered across europe if he didn't have the name?.. ANy other band that did this they'd get picked apart by this forum.. I remember when vr released 3 covers people bitched and moaned but it's cool for axl to use the name, tour twice in four years with rehash and have 8 guys onstage which have changed several times since oh my god came out.. people need to be consistent, play both sides..

Everyone wants to act like the shows are selling and what not because f the new band, but it really has zero to do with the new band, this lineup could change again tomorrow and then start a new tour and the results would be the same.. as long as GNR is on the billboard it will sell.. When little piss head kids are wearing gnr afd t shirts that know nothing about gnr then you know the name is bigger then anyone in the band,,

[Tomorrows]

i'm 34 and i saw "the original band" in 1992 at Vincennes.

the new band is just better, and i'm more excited by the new stuff than the old appetite one.

the fact is you can replace every member but not Axl.

look at Velvet Revolver : 3 "former" members, does it sounds like Guns N'Roses ? not at all.

It aint just how they play, its who is doing the playing.

[mrlee]

Axl keeping the name Guns N Roses will be his downfall.

Axl needs to respect the original band by giving up the name.

Axl needs to respect the new band by giving the band it's own name.  They deserve their own name.

The new GNR will always live in the shadow of the original GNR, and thats sad.

agreed, i hate it when people say

"this is guns n roses!!!" about the new line up. its not.

axl should change the name, its not like he cant still play gnr songs live anyway, as he wrote or co wrote half of them.

[Slashead]

Axl keeping the name Guns N Roses will be his downfall.

Axl needs to respect the original band by giving up the name.

Axl needs to respect the new band by giving the band it's own name.? They deserve their own name.

The new GNR will always live in the shadow of the original GNR, and thats sad.

agreed, i hate it when people say

"this is guns n roses!!!" about the new line up. its not.

axl should change the name, its not like he cant still play gnr songs live anyway, as he wrote or co wrote half of them.

Exactly.
Axl can play GNR songs if he wants, but he's not in GNR anymore. Paul McCartney plays some Beatles' songs live, it doesn't mean he's The Beatles.