Guns n? Roses Planning Summer Stadium Tour

[D]

and u guys calls yourselves fans


Actually that site isn't that bad. I really didn't see anything I'd consider bashing or what not.

[H76]

God, please no.

someone has to defend this band

No actually...they don't.

I agree. I do not see any reason for it. I love GNR, but that does not mean that everyone else has to.

[ppbebe]

And that doesn't mean everyone else has to hate GNR. Go faldor and garry! (  surprised at your positive karma,  how did you do that?!!)

if people were more concerned about their posting histories there wouldn't be so much bs on the net.
and I'm allergic to the misuse of the rolling eyes smiley.

Like I already said, I'm sorry if I offended you in any way. That was not my intention. As for smilies..there are bigger concerns in this world than use of smilies right now. I come out here just to relax and have a laugh, not to pick a fight.

For me this conversation has run it's course and ends here. If you feel you got something more to say, send me a personal message. This isn't the right place for something like that.

nice copout nevermind that it wasn't me who started the offtopic convo. the quote in your post wasn't particularly aimed at you. Basically I wasn't offended in the first place just asking you a simple question and got no answer.

[faldor]

Personally, I hope the Van Halen thing is just a rumor. I know it'd be great for rock fans in general, but, for my own selfish reasons, I'd rather it be just GnR with some lesser-known bands opening. I was really looking forward to seeing my first GnR concert this summer, but I doubt I could afford a Van Halen/GNR ticket.

I respect Van Halen. I own their Greatest Hits. But I'm not really a big fan. (Who's their singer currently? Roth? Hagar? Jaime Lee Curtis?)

At co-headlining tours like this, aren't the sets shorter? I want to hear the landmark tracks, of course, like "WTTJ" and "Paradise City," but I also want to hear a lot of Chinese Democracy, and with people who will be singing along to the new tracks and not just standing around like, "I don't remember that from AFD or UYI."

I don't think there's any rule that sets have to be shorter in a co-headline situation.  I went to see Journey/Def Leppard a few years back and they played their normal sets, which are shorter than a GNR set but still their normal.  I would think both VH and GNR would play their mormal length, especially if ticket prices are high.  Who's gonna shell out the big bucks to see the bands play shortened sets?  Also I don't think ticket prices will be as high as VH's recent arena tour.  If it's a stadium setting, you've got a lot more seats to sell so the ticket prices wouldn't need to be as high.  Of course I'm sure the real good seats will still be a pretty penny, but there'd most likely be plenty of cheap seats available.  Personally I'd opt for the nice expensive seats if given the choice.  But that's just me.

[ereeper]

During the 92 tour Metallica played a full set and they went before GN'R.  I see no reason that whoever plays before Guns wouldn't be allowed there full set.

[faldor]

During the 92 tour Metallica played a full set and they went before GN'R.  I see no reason that whoever plays before Guns wouldn't be allowed there full set.

Has it been established if Metallica ALWAYS opened for GNR?  I just wonder if it'd be a problem for Eddie/Dave to suck it up and open for GNR or vice versa.  I think Axl would be fine with alternating, I'd be more worried on the other end.

[ppbebe]

yea, wouldn't VH peeps rather finish off before midnight?

[kaasupoltin]

Would be great to see them on tour now.. but I won't get my hopes too high 'cause with this band they might come down very "quickly". Plus this isn't official yet. But as I said, it would be amazing if it's true!

[patcooper]

During the 92 tour Metallica played a full set and they went before GN'R.  I see no reason that whoever plays before Guns wouldn't be allowed there full set.

Has it been established if Metallica ALWAYS opened for GNR?  I just wonder if it'd be a problem for Eddie/Dave to suck it up and open for GNR or vice versa.  I think Axl would be fine with alternating, I'd be more worried on the other end.

um.. gnr doesn't go onstage usually before 10:30. How are they gonna go on first. lmao

[Annie]

yea, wouldn't VH peeps rather finish off before midnight?

I think so. Whatever happens, I will just be happy to hear Uncle Axl singing some new tunes from CHINESE DEMOCRACY!!!

[Layne Staley's Sunglasses]

yea, wouldn't VH peeps rather finish off before midnight?

Yeah man, those old people like to get their rest!

[GNR4L]

It should be simple ! have a opening act start at 8pm they play till 9 then have Van Halen play from 9-11pm.  Then have GnR start 11:30-12am to 2am.

[Classic Case]

It should be simple ! have a opening act start at 8pm they play till 9 then have Van Halen play from 9-11pm.  Then have GnR start 11:30-12am to 2am.

u are right...Its that simple!...I agree. that should be perfect, maybe they can switch and VH plays after GNR on diferent dates, I remember KISS and Aerosmith did that 4 years ago, and out of topic, KISS made Aerosmith look like a group of babies after the played 

[123191]

It should be simple ! have a opening act start at 8pm they play till 9 then have Van Halen play from 9-11pm.  Then have GnR start 11:30-12am to 2am.

u are right...Its that simple!...I agree. that should be perfect, maybe they can switch and VH plays after GNR on diferent dates, I remember KISS and Aerosmith did that 4 years ago, and out of topic, KISS made Aerosmith look like a group of babies after the played 

KISS and Aerosmith?  I saw KISS on the tour with Ted Nugent in 2000 which was about the last time they were relevant.  Those are two bands I don't need to see or hear much from at this point.

[patcooper]

It should be simple ! have a opening act start at 8pm they play till 9 then have Van Halen play from 9-11pm.  Then have GnR start 11:30-12am to 2am.

u are right...Its that simple!...I agree. that should be perfect, maybe they can switch and VH plays after GNR on diferent dates, I remember KISS and Aerosmith did that 4 years ago, and out of topic, KISS made Aerosmith look like a group of babies after the played 

KISS and Aerosmith?  I saw KISS on the tour with Ted Nugent in 2000 which was about the last time they were relevant.  Those are two bands I don't need to see or hear much from at this point.

I went to this show and if i remember ticket prices were high. 100 bucks for GA. And they had the front section closed off for "platinum ticket holders". Both bands played 16 songs each and Salvia opened. Good show Kiss slayed aerosmith.

[Continental Drift]

During the 92 tour Metallica played a full set and they went before GN'R.  I see no reason that whoever plays before Guns wouldn't be allowed there full set.

Has it been established if Metallica ALWAYS opened for GNR?  I just wonder if it'd be a problem for Eddie/Dave to suck it up and open for GNR or vice versa.  I think Axl would be fine with alternating, I'd be more worried on the other end.

Yes. Faith No More opened. Then Metallica played a full set. And then finally GN'R played a full set. It was always that way.

Of course, though Metallica already had lots of fans in '92 they were just beginning their full-scale crossover into mainstream prominence with the Black album. GN'R meanwhile had already been an international and industry-wide sensation for 4-5 years. The Illusion albums were huge and the "November Rain" video was being shown on MTV every hour on the hour (or so it seemed). I was 16 at the time- but I remember being hardly surprised at all that Metallica went on first for the whole tour. My Metallica fan friends weren't shocked by it either. GN'R were simply "bigger" at the point in time. Perhaps things would be different were they to do it again (Summer 2009) and there's the nice built-in (and diplomatic) excuse of GN'R and Metallica simply saying "Metallica went on first last time around- so this time we thought we'd switch it up for the fans..." or whatever.

As far as a potential Van Halen tour would go... I think VH would be fine with going on first.

[faldor]

I think at this point, IF the VH/GNR tour was to take place, there could be an argument on who should open and who should close.  On the one hand Van Halen is pretty much the godfathers of the sunset strip movement.  They started it all.  They're probably considered bigger in a historical sense, slightly.  And not that I agree with it but people will make the argument that it's not the original GNR and while it's also not the original VH without Michael Anthony, 3 is more than 1.  However, GNR has a new album out to promote, so I think that could outweigh everything.  Only thing is, they'd have to start pumping that thing here in the US well before the tour would start because right now it's not exactly taking the US by storm.  If it can pick up before then though there'd be no question that they should close.

[russtcb]

I don't think VH would have any problem playing before GNR.

[ppbebe]

They started it all.  They're probably considered bigger in a historical sense, slightly.

if they are, only in the us, i suppose. 

yea, wouldn't VH peeps rather finish off before midnight?

Yeah man, those old people like to get their rest!

I was trying to be polite.    I mean we have more class than vh forums.

[Continental Drift]

They started it all.  They're probably considered bigger in a historical sense, slightly.

if they are, only in the us, i suppose. 

Exactly. And I'm not exactly certain about that either. For one thing... Hagar era VH is not as highly regarded historically (though they had some good hits) as Roth era VH. Of course, similar arguments can be made about Guns and "Old Guns" I suppose.... at least thus far.... but I pretty much think it's a wash between these two "historically" in the US though. And as you're hinting... once you go international... GN'R is a MUCH bigger band. MUCH bigger.

And before anyone gets their panties in a twist... yes, I enjoy all incarnations of VH. Fun band for sure.