Scott Weiland Interview Washington Post

[GeorgeSteele]

I believe that Scott was brought in to heighten the band's exposure, not to have him come in and push the boundaries of the music that they were capable of producing.

Another completely unfounded suggestion that is undoubtedly based on your own bias.? I also dont accept the premise youre offering, that the choice was between exposure of "pushing the boundaries of the music."? I think it came down to who was the best frontman available, and they agreed it was him.? Again, if theres evidence to the contrary, Im interested.

Booker, all of our opinions, including your own, are based on personal bias, no need to keep reiterating that. ?My bias is probably similar to Slash's - I didn't like STP back in the day. ?Yet he thought that group's frontman was the best available for the music they wanted to make? ?Sorry, brother, I don't buy it.

[jarmo]

Maybe it wasn't a shot solely at Izzy, but it was a shot at the music they wrote with Izzy, the three of them.  And again, I have never heard a song Izzy wrote with Slash and Duff that was anywhere near atrocious.

I just have a hard time believing it was "atrocious".

Ali

For those of us who grew up listening to music created by these people, hearing somebody (that I consider to be a less gifted songwriter), label their material as atrocious is a bit hard to believe.

Now Booker might be one of the few here who thinks Scott is right and has good judgment. 




/jarmo

[guns_n_motley]

IMO vr is done. we will get a live album and they will break up.

their schtick is gone. Now, I would hope slash/duff/matt continue to work together and get a real hard rock guitarist like izzy and then get a RNR singer and just make a balls out guitar rock record.

thats what I miss with VR. it isnt a balls out RNR record

Izzy won't be involved if if they bring in another lead singer. ?This interview by Scott is a perfect example of everything Izzy wanted to avoid. ?His instincts were right on the money - you bring in a frontman with a strong personality and it will compromise their musical integrity. ?Granted, without Scott they wouldn't have the exposure and commercial success that they've had (at least with Contraband). ?So, congratulations, Slash and Duff. ?You abandoned the "atrocious" music that was true to your souls in exchange for one commercially successful album and feeling "relevant" again. ?And now your frontman is openly talking about reuniting with his old band. ?To paraphrase Duff's recent comments about Axl - they made their bed, now they can lie in it.

i agree IMO to an extent they sold out to gain commercial success.

I mean they were working with the guys from buckcherry! imagine what sort of kickass RNR they couldve made with them. but in the end they saw that making heavy "alt music" and hiring a singer from stp would get them more commercial success.

as I said, the one thing i missed on VRs 2 albums is slash's playing. it doesnt sound like slash IMO

and now its backfiring. ?

[guns_n_motley]

I believe that Scott was brought in to heighten the band's exposure, not to have him come in and push the boundaries of the music that they were capable of producing.

Another completely unfounded suggestion that is undoubtedly based on your own bias.? I also dont accept the premise youre offering, that the choice was between exposure of "pushing the boundaries of the music."? I think it came down to who was the best frontman available, and they agreed it was him.? Again, if theres evidence to the contrary, Im interested.

Booker, all of our opinions, including your own, are based on personal bias, no need to keep reiterating that. ?My bias is probably similar to Slash's - I didn't like STP back in the day. ?Yet he thought that group's frontman was the best available for the music they wanted to make? ?Sorry, brother, I don't buy it.

georgesteel is right. You think it was by coincidence they chose weiland?? coming off a big drug scandal, still popular?? they wanted to boost their exposure. it wasnt just ex gunners finding a new frontman anymore. it was ex gunners with ex stp singer. a supergroup and that was part of their schtick.

ive heard some of the demos with another singer, and it sounds real good. like classic GNR. radically different from the music on contraband

[Ali]

Maybe it wasn't a shot solely at Izzy, but it was a shot at the music they wrote with Izzy, the three of them.? And again, I have never heard a song Izzy wrote with Slash and Duff that was anywhere near atrocious.

I just have a hard time believing it was "atrocious".

Ali

For those of us who grew up listening to music created by these people, hearing somebody (that I consider to be a less gifted songwriter), label their material as atrocious is a bit hard to believe.

Now Booker might be one of the few here who thinks Scott is right and has good judgment.?




/jarmo

Yes Jarmo, you and I are 100% on the same page on that one.  Like I said, while I consider Scott to have a great voice and stage presence, I really don't feel he has anything on Izzy as a songwriter.  So, to criticize the material he co-wrote, if not his writing ability directly, it is a difficult pill to swallow.  Especially considering that Slash said the material they wrote with Izzy would've made a great GN'R record with Axl singing over it.

Ali

[Booker Floyd]

Some of us just find their comments AMUSING!

One day it's this, next day it's that.

This band is a train wreck

And only a person as disinterested yourself would not only follow the bands comment, but regularly comment on them himself.  Im sure everyone believes you when you declare your lack of interest.

No, I agree, that can't be a comment about his songwriting at all. Just because he was part of writing that crappy material...

He didnt like the material.  Saying you dont like a song isnt slanderous toward the songwriter.  Not even remotely so, enough to justify your "basically" qualifier. 

Do you have any evidence that suggests otherwise?  Your eyeroll icon suggests that you do, so Id love to see it.

RCA picked the first single.

This is a marketing decision, not a musical one.  Nevertheless...

Dave Kushner:

It wasn't as though we were forced by the record company; that song just struck a chord with them so they ran listener tests with all three songs and 'Quick Machines' supposedly tested the best.

Slash:

?Quick Machines was my first pick, but there were so many songs with single potential that it took a while before we all agreed on what the first single from the album should be."

Clive Davis was involved enough to point out one of the songs needed a solo.

From a 2004 article, on Clive Davis:

"I already met him a couple of times, long before there was any talk of Velvet Revolver," says Slash. "We became friends, so he was one of the first people I told of our plans. He was interested from the start."

"He even came to our fucking rehearsal space somewhere on a decayed fucking industrial area in Burbank," says Duff. "You don't see a president of a big record company do that very often. And when he came in, it was CLIVE, you know. Oh wow, okay, cool!"

Scott is also a big fan of the record executive: "An amazing man. I had big expectations of him before I ever met him, but he lived up to all of them. I have a great deal of respect for him. That's all I can say. Except that he also put alot of money in my pockets."

Then Daves comment on the song:

"The solo was a suggestion made by Clive Davis [RCA Records] at the time when we were considering releasing 'Get Out' as the first single from the album. Clive wanted a trademark Slash solo on there, so we did it."

Were they bullied?  Or do they respect Davis enough to try out what Dave called a "suggestion?"  A less biased person than yourself could look at the evidence and come to a logical conclusion. 

[estrangedpaul]

I believe that Scott was brought in to heighten the band's exposure, not to have him come in and push the boundaries of the music that they were capable of producing.

Another completely unfounded suggestion that is undoubtedly based on your own bias.? I also dont accept the premise youre offering, that the choice was between exposure of "pushing the boundaries of the music."? I think it came down to who was the best frontman available, and they agreed it was him.? Again, if theres evidence to the contrary, Im interested.

Booker, all of our opinions, including your own, are based on personal bias, no need to keep reiterating that. ?My bias is probably similar to Slash's - I didn't like STP back in the day. ?Yet he thought that group's frontman was the best available for the music they wanted to make? ?Sorry, brother, I don't buy it.

Eh, you're wrong...Slash did like Stone Temple Pilots, he also liked Nirvana and other grunge bands. He didn't like Pearl Jam. Big deal, either did I. I still like grunge bands. Besides, its not like grunge is a type of music anyway, it's just a silly term to describe most hard rock in the early 90's. The fact some critics compared the two bands is irrelevant - its possible to like one without the other.

[Lord Kayoss]

Matt and Scott both have big mouths and love to hear themselves talk, and they say stupid things to the press from time to time.?

Like Matt saying in Rolling Stone that if the cash was right he might consider a GN'R reunion. ?Two major flaws in that statement. ?One - Adler would be the reunion drummer, and two - who would actually offer Matt alot of money to do anything? ?He's a tool, not a star.

[Ali]

Some of us just find their comments AMUSING!

One day it's this, next day it's that.

This band is a train wreck

And only a person as disinterested yourself would not only follow the bands comment, but regularly comment on them himself.? Im sure everyone believes you when you declare your lack of interest.

No, I agree, that can't be a comment about his songwriting at all. Just because he was part of writing that crappy material...

He didnt like the material.? Saying you dont like a song isnt slanderous toward the songwriter.? Not even remotely so, enough to justify your "basically" qualifier.?

Do you have any evidence that suggests otherwise?? Your eyeroll icon suggests that you do, so Id love to see it.

RCA picked the first single.

This is a marketing decision, not a musical one.? Nevertheless...

Dave Kushner:

It wasn't as though we were forced by the record company; that song just struck a chord with them so they ran listener tests with all three songs and 'Quick Machines' supposedly tested the best.

Slash:

?Quick Machines was my first pick, but there were so many songs with single potential that it took a while before we all agreed on what the first single from the album should be."

Clive Davis was involved enough to point out one of the songs needed a solo.

From a 2004 article, on Clive Davis:

"I already met him a couple of times, long before there was any talk of Velvet Revolver," says Slash. "We became friends, so he was one of the first people I told of our plans. He was interested from the start."

"He even came to our fucking rehearsal space somewhere on a decayed fucking industrial area in Burbank," says Duff. "You don't see a president of a big record company do that very often. And when he came in, it was CLIVE, you know. Oh wow, okay, cool!"

Scott is also a big fan of the record executive: "An amazing man. I had big expectations of him before I ever met him, but he lived up to all of them. I have a great deal of respect for him. That's all I can say. Except that he also put alot of money in my pockets."

Then Daves comment on the song:

"The solo was a suggestion made by Clive Davis [RCA Records] at the time when we were considering releasing 'Get Out' as the first single from the album. Clive wanted a trademark Slash solo on there, so we did it."

Were they bullied?? Or do they respect Davis enough to try out what Dave called a "suggestion?"? A less biased person than yourself could look at the evidence and come to a logical conclusion.?

But Booker, he didn't just say he didn't like the songs they wrote with Izzy.  He used the word atrocious!  That is a harsh word with, in general, a very negative connotation. 

Still, like I said, I'll take Slash's word on that material over Scott's.  Slash is a better judge of what Izzy's material is like, or, at least, a better judge for a Guns N' Roses fan's ear.

Ali

[estrangedpaul]

No, I agree, that can't be a comment about his songwriting at all. Just because he was part of writing that crappy material...

 

I thought most of Libertad is crap. Does that mean I think Scott, Slash, Duff, Dave and Matt's songwriting abilities are crap too? Pretty dumb conclusion, particularly as I loved Contraband and pretty much everything Slash and Duff have done before.

Don't see how this comment is a slur at Izzy anymore than a slur at Slash and Duff. If you take it to mean Izzy is a crap songwriting then it would have to mean the same for Slash and Duff. Obviously, Scott does not think Slash and Duff are bad songwriters, so I don't think it applies to Izzy too.

[Bodhi]

Matt and Scott both have big mouths and love to hear themselves talk, and they say stupid things to the press from time to time.?

Like Matt saying in Rolling Stone that if the cash was right he might consider a GN'R reunion. ?Two major flaws in that statement. ?One - Adler would be the reunion drummer, and two - who would actually offer Matt alot of money to do anything? ?He's a tool, not a star.

wrong...Adler most certainly would NOT be the reunion drummer for the simple reason he would be unable to play most of what was on the Illusions due to the fact that Sorum is a 10 times better drummer than him......that aside...i find it amusing how VR continously brings up Axl Rose, and I am yet to hear the words "velvet revolver" come out of Axl's mouth....

[Booker Floyd]

My bias is probably similar to Slash's - I didn't like STP back in the day.

Did Slash ever say that?  Like I said, completely unfounded.

Yet he thought that group's frontman was the best available for the music they wanted to make?  Sorry, brother, I don't buy it.

Scott was the first guy that I thought of, that would be perfect for this band. I liked his voice, liked STP, but wasn't aware of that much about him.

Unless you have something suggesting otherwise, you have nothing to back up your suspicion except your own bias.

I just have a hard time believing it was "atrocious".

Its his opinion, not an objective fact.  Youd probably disagree with him. 

But Booker, he didn't just say he didn't like the songs they wrote with Izzy.  He used the word atrocious!  That is a harsh word with, in general, a very negative connotation.

Yes, it was harsh, but still just his opinion on the music.

Still, like I said, I'll take Slash's word on that material over Scott's.  Slash is a better judge of what Izzy's material is like, or, at least, a better judge for a Guns N' Roses fan's ear.

Agreed completely.

[stolat]

Izzy is a much better song writer and has so much more cred.

[jarmo]

And only a person as disinterested yourself would not only follow the bands comment, but regularly comment on them himself.  Im sure everyone believes you when you declare your lack of interest.

Considering how much shit they say about my favorite band, I try to keep up with it and point out how things have changed.

Only somebody like you would have a problem with that on a GN'R fan site.

 

A less biased person than yourself could look at the evidence and come to a logical conclusion. 

Don't start throwing the bias insult around here Booker. Please! 

You're one of the least objective VR fans I've ever seen.



In case you didn't notice, I'm not the only one on this site that thinks there's more to the picture than you see by wearing your "nazi hat" and aviator glasses.

It's all a huge marketing thing with this band.

That's why I've been smiling at the dangerous and unpredictable act for years. Maybe you wanna quote me on that and "discuss" it once more? 

I thought most of Libertad is crap. Does that mean I think Scott, Slash, Duff, Dave and Matt's songwriting abilities are crap too?

I think it's different when you have the same group than if you have a different group of people.






/jarmo

[GeorgeSteele]

Eh, you're wrong...Slash did like Stone Temple Pilots,

I doubt it.  During the Contraband promotion, he admitted that he had never seen them live nor did he have any of their records, only that he had heard them on the radio.

[Booker Floyd]

wrong...Adler most certainly would NOT be the reunion drummer for the simple reason he would be unable to play most of what was on the Illusions due to the fact that Sorum is a 10 times better drummer than him......that aside...i find it amusing how VR continously brings up Axl Rose, and I am yet to hear the words "velvet revolver" come out of Axl's mouth....

You havent heard many words come out of Axls mouth recently, have you?  So its kind of a fatuous point, isnt it?

Yet you have heard (read) the words "Slash," "Duff," and "Matt" since each left.

[Eazy E]

That's not exactly a secret.

Oh, so you figured out why it was placed in quotation marks. Congrats.

 

Only a person that is TRULY disinterested in a band can take the time to analyze hundreds of one-line comments made by the bandmembers and maintain a section of a message board in order to trash those comments.

Anyways, Scott thinks that Wu-Tang is more influenced by the Beatles than Grandmaster Flash? ?He could be right.

[stolat]

Marketing is the word here Jarmo and Weiland donning the Nazi hat and aviator glasses is really quite offensive, particularly beacause he is only doing it for marketing reasons alone.

[Ali]

No, I agree, that can't be a comment about his songwriting at all. Just because he was part of writing that crappy material...

 

I thought most of Libertad is crap. Does that mean I think Scott, Slash, Duff, Dave and Matt's songwriting abilities are crap too? Pretty dumb conclusion, particularly as I loved Contraband and pretty much everything Slash and Duff have done before.

Don't see how this comment is a slur at Izzy anymore than a slur at Slash and Duff. If you take it to mean Izzy is a crap songwriting then it would have to mean the same for Slash and Duff. Obviously, Scott does not think Slash and Duff are bad songwriters, so I don't think it applies to Izzy too.

I guess the thing that gets me the most is that Slash and Scott have such widely different views of the material that was written with Izzy. ?That and what I took as a very harsh assessment of the Izzy material. ?Like I said, as a GN'R fan, I think Slash's opinion is a better opinion to take into consideration as to what that material was like, how good it was.

Ali

[GeorgeSteele]

My bias is probably similar to Slash's - I didn't like STP back in the day.

Did Slash ever say that?? Like I said, completely unfounded.

Unless you have something suggesting otherwise, you have nothing to back up your suspicion except your own bias.

Doesn't sound like an STP fan to me...

I had never seen Scott perform before last Thursday. I had never been to a Stone Temple Pilots show, I didn't even have their records