A Myspace Bulletin From Me

[200?]

i definatly feel that the new guns can be just as influentual to the world as the oldguns.

who knows 5 - 10yrs from now there will be a whole new breed of guitarists who picked up a guitar because of ron and robin just as we picked up guitars becuase of influences like slash

just a thoght

[SterileEyes]

I posted this in reaction to my guitarists girlfriend receiving Myspace messages about how stupid she is for going to the GNR show in a week or so. Thought I'd share it here:

People talking out their ass about things they know NOTHING about.

Let me give you an example. My friends and I are going to see Guns N' Roses at The Palace in a little over a week and we're excited about it. Lots of us have been posting bulletins and what not about it and getting ignorant replies such as "It's not the real GNR" and "Where's Slash?" and so on.

I generally try to keep my mouth shut because I am confident in the fact that I know more about music then most people I come in to contact with but at this point I've about goddamn had it. People that talk out their ass about Guns N' Roses are morons. None of them know anything about the history of the band, it's music or it's fan base.

Anyone who thinks Slash "is GNR" is flat out wrong. Slash (Duff, Matt, Steven and Gilby) for that matter wasn't even around for the beginning of this band. He very much contributed to the rise and legend of this band but he chose to go another route. That route has unfortunately for him, lead him to a half ass band with a half ass lead singer who put together a half ass album. Axl Rose cannot be blamed for other people choices or stupidity. He also can't be blamed for replacing people when they make those choices and carrying on with HIS band.

People who say that "Axl is living off the name" or "running the name into the ground" need to take a look at those Velvet Revolver CDs sitting at the record store with a sticker that reads "featuring former members of GUNS N' ROSES!!" or watch TV for 10 minutes and catch the complete waste of a VW commercial that Slash is involved with. Now who's living off or running the name into the ground.

I went to see the new members in 2002 with all sorts of skepticism. But since I like to know what I'm talking about before I speak, I thought I'd see for myself before passing judgement. Having seen this band twice (soon to be 3 times) I can speak in actual facts about their abilities and if they "are GNR". Let me make this 100% clear; this band IS Guns N' Roses. Until you have come fact to face with a man playing rhythm guitar as if his life depends on it as Richard Fortus does, or seen Robin Finck make his guitar cry every single note using his entire body to do so, or watched a music legend such as Tommy Stinson play bass and perform like he's 20 again just because he enjoys what he's doing that much, you have no idea what you're talking about.

I haven't even begun to speak about the man (Axl) himself and how much he out classes every other performer living today. It is beyond annoying to have uninformed, ignorant GNR "fans" sending others messages that not only try to take away from others enjoyment but are just plain stupid.

For all of you who disagree:

You should know Better.

I agree with D's reply to this. Why aren't other people allowed their opinion? Why say negative shit about Slash? You can't possibly think Axl is 100% responsible for their success and Slash 0%. Even IZZY says 'of course it's not GN'R'. I don't care that he said it 5 years ago, he hasn't said it any differently since.

Shit, I've seen the new lineup, and I'm going again in December. They do a great job. But I still call them 'Hired Guns N' Rose'. As a musician, Slash is a huge influence on me as a guitar player, Izzy is a huge influence on me as a songwriter, and Duff is a huge influence on me as a bass player. Matt Sorum and Steven Adler are both influences on me as a drummer. Did Robin, Ron, Tommy, Frank, or Brain play on any of those records that 95% of the audience are going to see? No. Are they most likely going to do a killer job with the new record when it's released? Yes, I'd bet my ass on it, I wish them luck, and I admire them for being brave enough to make the effort and fill these huge shoes.

Until then, I'd respectufully advise you to show a little respect to the musicians that got Axl to where he is today and let others keep their opinions. Just because you think you know more about music than your friends doesn't mean they're not allowed to think 'it's not GN'R without Slash'. They are not ignorant or stupid. It's a valid argument. Some of us (myself included) support this new lineup and wish them the best of luck. Others are allowed to stay home. People make fun of me all the time for backing the new group. I don't feel the need to write an essay telling them that they're ignorant/wrong.

People like to say Axl wrote November Rain and Estranged. Yeah, he did, and Slash wrote the solos. Saying 'Slash wasn't even in the band at first', give me a break. According to that logic, Steven Tyler was the only one in Aerosmith at first, and Joe, Brad, Joey, and Tom are Johnny-come-latelys who could be replaced at anytime. It's true, Steven handpicked that band and it was his concept. Doesn't mean he necessarily should carry the band all on his own. Axl is doing a good job for the most part and I'm glad he's done well so far this year. But at least give credit where it's due and don't slag the old band for the sake of making the new band look better.

Edit - P.S. I'm not crazy about the Slash VW ad. But then again, I'm not wild about Axl's brand new music being used in a Harley commercial...Personally I'm not hugely offended by rock bands in TV ads, it's just not the coolest thing to do in my opinion...either ad. So no offense, but what's your point?

[russtcb]

Albums sales have nothing to do with quality.

im pretty sure 3x platunum sales have something to do with quality.

So Creed is high quality then?

yes, just because you dont like them doesnt make them shitty, and creed was a pretty bad choice to compare this to. Kevin Federline is bad quality and it reflects in his sales of 6000 albums. This might not be the best board to post this in, but besides the whole christian rock thing, creed has some pretty solid rhythms and melodies in their albums, and there is a huge following behind them.? Just because creed is not your kind of music doesnt mean they suck to the rest of the world.? Thats like saying rush sucks because people dont like the singer.

You have no clue who you're talking to. I enjoy and own music from just about every genre out there. Just because you like Creed doesn't make them a bad  example. Creed is a great example of how an artist can sell a ridiculous amount of albums with the right marketing and promotion. Not one person I know will even admit to liking them anymore.

[russtcb]

Am I the only person on here that loves both the old and the new equally?

If you love GNR now it IS possible to love the GNR of the 80's and 90's as well and love all the musicians that were involved in the rise of this band.

There is no need to crush the history of this band to praise the new incarnation of it.?

Every thread like this turns into an old vs. new debate and everyone is right about their opinion in their own mind.? But repeating it 82387287 times on here isn't going to change the facts.? GNR now: Axl, Robin, Richard, Ron, Dizzy, Tommy, Chris, Frank.

Nice bulletin russtcb-I think it's rude for anyone to diss another's taste in music no matter what they like.

 

I was afraid it would turn into what it has but I'm glad some folks got to see and appreciated the post.

[russtcb]

Until then, I'd advise you to show a little respect to the musicians that got Axl to where he is today...

You obviously missed the part where I did just that.

[dman1991]

Albums sales have nothing to do with quality.

im pretty sure 3x platunum sales have something to do with quality.

So Creed is high quality then?

yes, just because you dont like them doesnt make them shitty, and creed was a pretty bad choice to compare this to. Kevin Federline is bad quality and it reflects in his sales of 6000 albums. This might not be the best board to post this in, but besides the whole christian rock thing, creed has some pretty solid rhythms and melodies in their albums, and there is a huge following behind them.  Just because creed is not your kind of music doesnt mean they suck to the rest of the world.  Thats like saying rush sucks because people dont like the singer.

You have no clue who you're talking to. I enjoy and own music from just about every genre out there. Just because you like Creed doesn't make them a bad  example. Creed is a great example of how an artist can sell a ridiculous amount of albums with the right marketing and promotion. Not one person I know will even admit to liking them anymore.

how about all the shows theyve sold out, with fans singing along, im not really a creed fan either, but you have to admit its professionaly done, high quality studio work, and their music appeals to a broad range of people, marketing can only get you so far, if the music plain sucks, then no one would of bought there second or 3rd albums either.  Once again I bring the federline subject up, he had plenty of plugs and marketing on all sorts of big media outlets(mtv, E), You think because you and 5 of your friends dont like something then it sucks.  Imagine if you asked Ice-t and his pals what he thought of rammstein and marilyn manson.

[russtcb]

Albums sales have nothing to do with quality.

im pretty sure 3x platunum sales have something to do with quality.

So Creed is high quality then?

yes, just because you dont like them doesnt make them shitty, and creed was a pretty bad choice to compare this to. Kevin Federline is bad quality and it reflects in his sales of 6000 albums. This might not be the best board to post this in, but besides the whole christian rock thing, creed has some pretty solid rhythms and melodies in their albums, and there is a huge following behind them.? Just because creed is not your kind of music doesnt mean they suck to the rest of the world.? Thats like saying rush sucks because people dont like the singer.

You have no clue who you're talking to. I enjoy and own music from just about every genre out there. Just because you like Creed doesn't make them a bad? example. Creed is a great example of how an artist can sell a ridiculous amount of albums with the right marketing and promotion. Not one person I know will even admit to liking them anymore.

how about all the shows theyve sold out, with fans singing along, im not really a creed fan either, but you have to admit its professionaly done, high quality studio work, and their music appeals to a broad range of people, marketing can only get you so far, if the music plain sucks, then no one would of bought there second or 3rd albums either.? Once again I bring the federline subject up, he had plenty of plugs and marketing on all sorts of big media outlets(mtv, E), You think because you and 5 of your friends dont like something then it sucks.? Imagine if you asked Ice-t and his pals what he thought of rammstein and marilyn manson.

I didn't say anything about 5 of my friends, I said everyone I ask. As far as Kevin Federline goes, again you don't know what you're talking about. Did you know that his album has been finished for over a year and that no label wanted to pick it up? Sony finally purchased the rights and put little to no advertising behind it. If you call late night talk show hosts joking about you and your music career buzz for an album than thats sad.

Again, my personal opinion about music has nothing to do with this. The point I'm making that you keep missing is that album sales are in no way a direct reflection of the quality of music.

If you want to keep this going please send it through PM. We don't need to have an off topic argument in this thread.

[D]

This is the point  I am tryin to make:


Can Robin,Ron and richard be guitar gods, heroes and influence millions and millions of kids to play guitar?


sure, of course they can



Can they create timeless music that rivals the original GNR


Sure they can


BUT

They have to fuckin do it first.


Once CD comes out and a couple more albums come out, we can then DISCUSS and compare them to original GNR but for right now, in this moment in time, they dont even have a fuckin song on the radio or an album out so they can in no way compare to the original Guns.

NOt cause they arent talented but just cause they have no body of work to compete yet.

[Jim Bob]

U are the type of GNR fan that drives me crazy.


Look New GNR are a fabulous band dont get me wrong, CD is gonna be one of the greatest albums ever.

But when u have to slag off the Old bandmembers to try and make these guys look better, u look like an Axl nuttswinger who doesnt know much about the band.

on that same note, when some people feel the need to constantly bring up the old members, we are forced to slag them off.   This is 2006 and I have no interest in nostalgia or pointing the finger at what could have been or whatever.  I am all about this band.   There are no what ifs, this is Guns N' Roses.   If it wasn't for douchebags with their 'its not gnr without slash' nonsense, no one would have any reason to slag off your precious ex-members.

russ, excellent bulletin.  One of the best things I've read on this board in a long time.

[D]

I hate when people try to rewrite history


without those ex bandmembers we wouldnt know Axl as we know him today and vice versa.


I just hate when people like yourself and others on here try to bestow this legendary status on a bunch of guys who NONE OF YOU WOULD EVEN KNOW had Axl not picked them off the scrap pile.


These guys had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with GNR's success but yet some of u are bold enough to try and put them in the same class as original band members who helped make the band what it is today.

Axl didnt write those riffs or solos, he didnt come up with those grooves.   The band as a whole are equal and Im tired of people giving undeserved credit to a bunch of guys who up to this point are cover musicians


Lets at least let the New Guys release an album before we declare them the greatest this or that.

To this point those guys have done nothing but play a nostalgia tour.

[younggunner]

Ive always said that there is no reason for this band to have 2 successful eras/chapters of music. No need to diss on the old or new. They have nothing to do with each other.

The old was great and memorable and hopefully the new can follow. So far the songs we have heard are leading in that direction. The album will make it official. Then the album after that as well....

And what more can a fan ask for then great music?

[russtcb]

I hate when people try to rewrite history


without those ex bandmembers we wouldnt know Axl as we know him today and vice versa.


I just hate when people like yourself and others on here try to bestow this legendary status on a bunch of guys who NONE OF YOU WOULD EVEN KNOW had Axl not picked them off the scrap pile.


These guys had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with GNR's success but yet some of u are bold enough to try and put them in the same class as original band members who helped make the band what it is today.

Axl didnt write those riffs or solos, he didnt come up with those grooves.? ?The band as a whole are equal and Im tired of people giving undeserved credit to a bunch of guys who up to this point are cover musicians


Lets at least let the New Guys release an album before we declare them the greatest this or that.

To this point those guys have done nothing but play a nostalgia tour.

I know you weren't directing that post at me but while we're on the subject I just want to make one thing clear;

I don't think these guys are the greatest of any particular thing, I was just making the point that to me they are Guns N' Roses.

[D]

I am on board with what Younggunner said,


I am willing to give this GNR a chance and seperate things into 2 chapters.


All I am sayin is, Let the damn CD come out first before we start calling these new guys legends and before we mention their names in the same breath as old GNR.'

they have to do more than play the old bands songs and play with Axl to get that status.


they can be a great band, they can outdo AFD in my opinion but by GOD they have to do it first!


when some one claims Ron who with all due respect has wrote not one memorable riff of music ever is better than a rock legend like Slash, I find that troubling and it pisses me off.

[scar2d2w]

U are the type of GNR fan that drives me crazy.


Look New GNR are a fabulous band dont get me wrong, CD is gonna be one of the greatest albums ever.

But when u have to slag off the Old bandmembers to try and make these guys look better, u look like an Axl nuttswinger who doesnt know much about the band.



I hate to break the news to u dude but without Slash and Izzy as well as Axl,Duff and steven, we wouldnt have guns n roses.


so for people to claim Axl is GNR, they are doing so out of ignorance.

Axl didnt write those songs by himself, the very songs these new members are currently living off of.

I realize u didnt say this but a lot of people think this way and its just wrong.


slash also participated in a multi platinum grammy winning new band with a great lead singer in scott weiland.


i support new gnr but i dont support fans who try and act like the old band were meaningless.

its ridiculous to come on here and try to discredit the original band members who riffs and solos these new guys are imitating.



until CD comes out, this is not GNR, its Axl and hired musicians.

i see your point, and i hate when people trash the former members, who collectively came up with some of the most memorable songs ever.  but i think that's also a bit unfair to say that robin, richard, bumble, tommy, brain, dizzy and now frank are hired musicians.  i mean, seeing them live, watching their energy, hearing them play the fuck out of the new material and hearing the flourishes they put on the old songs--they aren't hired musicians, they're the band now.

[D]

I am speakin of the non hardcore fan

I can understand how they see them as a hired band and quite frankly until they release something that allows them to stand on their own away from the old material, this perception is understandable.

[scar2d2w]

I am speakin of the non hardcore fan

I can understand how they see them as a hired band and quite frankly until they release something that allows them to stand on their own away from the old material, this perception is understandable.

true...i would say many people have said similar things to me, without really following them closely like we do.  that's why i'm kind of sick of defending their talent--i can't point to their work in gnr as far as official recordings, obviously. 

[damnthehaters]

I hate when people try to rewrite history


without those ex bandmembers we wouldnt know Axl as we know him today and vice versa.


I just hate when people like yourself and others on here try to bestow this legendary status on a bunch of guys who NONE OF YOU WOULD EVEN KNOW had Axl not picked them off the scrap pile.


These guys had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with GNR's success but yet some of u are bold enough to try and put them in the same class as original band members who helped make the band what it is today.

Axl didnt write those riffs or solos, he didnt come up with those grooves.? ?The band as a whole are equal and Im tired of people giving undeserved credit to a bunch of guys who up to this point are cover musicians


Lets at least let the New Guys release an album before we declare them the greatest this or that.

To this point those guys have done nothing but play a nostalgia tour.

Yeah, and you might not know Slash if Axl wouldn't have picked him.  Think about it............maybe not. 

Now, before you get all fired up, I AM A SLASH FAN.  All I was saying in my previous post was if someone says that they think Ron is better than Slash after seeing both perform, I think it's a legit opinion.  You can't base Slash being a better guitar player from him having more of a history    I might go to a concert this weekend and run into a guitar player who I have never seen before, but I think is incredible.  Should I be afraid to say I think he is better than Slash because Slash has a history?  No!  I can say that because I have seen both play and maybe that guy is in fact better than Slash, but just doesn't have the history yet.

It sounds like to me, that you just got a little defensive because somebody said someone was better than Slash? 

For example, Buckethead isn't really "known" and doesn't have a ton of history.  In my mind however (even though he may be a different cat) is better than a lot of guitar players out there that ARE more popular and have more of a history.  I can say this because I was introduced to him a few years back and have listened to his work, and think it's amazing.     

[EstrangedReality]

Anyone who thinks Slash "is GNR" is flat out wrong.

Exactly. No one ever says that.

They argue that Guns N' Roses was Axl, Slash and Izzy. Mainly Axl and Slash as far as the image was concerned. I have never seen someone argue that GN'R was solely Slash.

Slash (Duff, Matt, Steven and Gilby) for that matter wasn't even around for the beginning of this band.

But they were there when the band achieved success, when they sold millions of albums, had #1 hits, and wrote the majority of the material Axl is now performing live. Slash and Izzy were both vital to that band, like it or not. And although Slash may not have been there in 1986, his bluesy solos are a large part of what propelled that album. It was Axl and Slash and Izzy TOGETHER, not just one of them.

And I'm not saying it was ALL Slash. I'm saying we need to keep in mind that not one single person is solely responsible for the band's success, and the people who were there when the band DID achieve success were the ones who were responsible for it. You can't say Slash doesn't count just because he wasn't there for the first year when the band began performing in small nightclubs.

People who say that "Axl is living off the name" or "running the name into the ground" need to take a look at those Velvet Revolver CDs sitting at the record store with a sticker that reads "featuring former members of GUNS N' ROSES!!" or watch TV for 10 minutes and catch the complete waste of a VW commercial that Slash is involved with. Now who's living off or running the name into the ground.

1) There is a difference between advertising an album to let people know who's IN the band (it also said "the frontman of Stone Temple Pilots" - does that mean Weiland is running off STP fame?) versus releasing an album UNDER a band name. Velvet Revolver had stickers on their albums to make it stick out to people who wouldn't realize at first glance who's actually in the band.

2) The VW ad had NOTHING to do with GN'R. Whatsoever. It was Slash playing guitar. Please don't tell me you expect Slash to retire his top hat and to stop playing guitar because he's not in the band anymore. 

I'm a supporter of the new band, and I want to hear Chinese Democracy more than anything, but seriously dude - posting stuff like this makes us GN'R fans look bad. Because the stuff I quoted above is pretty ignorant IMO.

No offense meant to you, I just think some of the stuff you pointed out - such as stickers on the VR albums and VW ad - was a pretty big "stretch."

[russtcb]

Anyone who thinks Slash "is GNR" is flat out wrong.

Exactly. No one ever says that.

They argue that Guns N' Roses was Axl, Slash and Izzy. Mainly Axl and Slash as far as the image was concerned. I have never seen someone argue that GN'R was solely Slash.

Slash (Duff, Matt, Steven and Gilby) for that matter wasn't even around for the beginning of this band.

But they were there when the band achieved success, when they sold millions of albums, had #1 hits, and wrote the majority of the material Axl is now performing live. Slash and Izzy were both vital to that band, like it or not. And although Slash may not have been there in 1986, his bluesy solos are a large part of what propelled that album. It was Axl and Slash and Izzy TOGETHER, not just one of them.

And I'm not saying it was ALL Slash. I'm saying we need to keep in mind that not one single person is solely responsible for the band's success, and the people who were there when the band DID achieve success were the ones who were responsible for it. You can't say Slash doesn't count just because he wasn't there for the first year when the band began performing in small nightclubs.

People who say that "Axl is living off the name" or "running the name into the ground" need to take a look at those Velvet Revolver CDs sitting at the record store with a sticker that reads "featuring former members of GUNS N' ROSES!!" or watch TV for 10 minutes and catch the complete waste of a VW commercial that Slash is involved with. Now who's living off or running the name into the ground.

1) There is a difference between advertising an album to let people know who's IN the band (it also said "the frontman of Stone Temple Pilots" - does that mean Weiland is running off STP fame?) versus releasing an album UNDER a band name. Velvet Revolver had stickers on their albums to make it stick out to people who wouldn't realize at first glance who's actually in the band.

2) The VW ad had NOTHING to do with GN'R. Whatsoever. It was Slash playing guitar. Please don't tell me you expect Slash to retire his top hat and to stop playing guitar because he's not in the band anymore. 

I'm a supporter of the new band, and I want to hear Chinese Democracy more than anything, but seriously dude - posting stuff like this makes us GN'R fans look bad. Because the stuff I quoted above is pretty ignorant IMO.

No offense meant to you, I just think some of the stuff you pointed out - such as stickers on the VR albums and VW ad - was a pretty big "stretch."

How do you refer to what I said as "pretty ignorant" then have the nerve to follow that up with "no offense"?

How does pointing the things out that I did make "us GNR fans look bad"? How is it a stretch saying that Contraband has a sticker on it saying "featuring former members of GUNS N' ROSES!!"? It does, doesn't?

As for Slash and the VW commerical the point isn't if it has something to do with GNR.

Like I said before since, in your opinion, what I had to say was "pretty ignorant" I won't bother you with explaining it further.

[EstrangedReality]

Anyone who thinks Slash "is GNR" is flat out wrong.

Exactly. No one ever says that.

They argue that Guns N' Roses was Axl, Slash and Izzy. Mainly Axl and Slash as far as the image was concerned. I have never seen someone argue that GN'R was solely Slash.

Slash (Duff, Matt, Steven and Gilby) for that matter wasn't even around for the beginning of this band.

But they were there when the band achieved success, when they sold millions of albums, had #1 hits, and wrote the majority of the material Axl is now performing live. Slash and Izzy were both vital to that band, like it or not. And although Slash may not have been there in 1986, his bluesy solos are a large part of what propelled that album. It was Axl and Slash and Izzy TOGETHER, not just one of them.

And I'm not saying it was ALL Slash. I'm saying we need to keep in mind that not one single person is solely responsible for the band's success, and the people who were there when the band DID achieve success were the ones who were responsible for it. You can't say Slash doesn't count just because he wasn't there for the first year when the band began performing in small nightclubs.

People who say that "Axl is living off the name" or "running the name into the ground" need to take a look at those Velvet Revolver CDs sitting at the record store with a sticker that reads "featuring former members of GUNS N' ROSES!!" or watch TV for 10 minutes and catch the complete waste of a VW commercial that Slash is involved with. Now who's living off or running the name into the ground.

1) There is a difference between advertising an album to let people know who's IN the band (it also said "the frontman of Stone Temple Pilots" - does that mean Weiland is running off STP fame?) versus releasing an album UNDER a band name. Velvet Revolver had stickers on their albums to make it stick out to people who wouldn't realize at first glance who's actually in the band.

2) The VW ad had NOTHING to do with GN'R. Whatsoever. It was Slash playing guitar. Please don't tell me you expect Slash to retire his top hat and to stop playing guitar because he's not in the band anymore. 

I'm a supporter of the new band, and I want to hear Chinese Democracy more than anything, but seriously dude - posting stuff like this makes us GN'R fans look bad. Because the stuff I quoted above is pretty ignorant IMO.

No offense meant to you, I just think some of the stuff you pointed out - such as stickers on the VR albums and VW ad - was a pretty big "stretch."

How do you refer to what I said as "pretty ignorant" then have the nerve to follow that up with "no offense"?

How does pointing the things out that I did make "us GNR fans look bad"? How is it a stretch saying that Contraband has a sticker on it saying "featuring former members of GUNS N' ROSES!!"? It does, doesn't?

As for Slash and the VW commerical the point isn't if it has something to do with GNR.

Like I said before since, in your opinion, what I had to say was "pretty ignorant" I won't bother you with explaining it further.

You need to take things less personally.

If you're going to put yourself out there with a topic like this, you have to be willing to discuss it. I said I thought what you wrote was ignorant, not that you are ignorant. I don't have anything against you.

And if the VW ad has nothing to do with GN'R, then why did you use it as a reason for Slash living off his GN'R fame? He's a guitarist. Him performing on a commercial where he plays guitar isn't exactly running off his GN'R success, is it?

I just don't follow your logic. I said no offense and I meant it - I wasn't attacking you, I'm just questioning your reasoning.