Izzy's "demotion"

[TheBaconman]

Axl securing the rights to the name of the " band he started with Izzy" has nothing to do with then having Slash and Duff sign contracts to be his employees.

I see them as seperate issues, he could have secured ownership of the name without taking it there.

For the last time ... If he wanted to forge ahead with them like he claimed ... Then that was foolish and naive to believe they'd go along.

I totally agree.  Nobody likes to talk about how Axl left the partnership/band and took the name with him.  Then tried to create a new deal where both slash and duff would be employees

Why did he do this?

[sky dog]

He tried to create a new deal because he saw the end of the old band. Self preservation because him and Slash were done....that was the end of the old band and he knew he would have to start over. The real casualty was Duff who tried to hang on. Matt was a hired employee already so Ax could take him or leave him either way....just a drummer.

[CherryGarcia]

He tried to create a new deal because he saw the end of the old band. Self preservation because him and Slash were done....that was the end of the old band and he knew he would have to start over. The real casualty was Duff who tried to hang on. Matt was a hired employee already so Ax could take him or leave him either way....just a drummer.

No, it's more that he expedited the end of the old band by doing that. If he thought he and Slash were done, why did he want Slash to join his new band as an employee? If he saw the end, and was trying to save the band, why expedite that end by treating Slash and Duff like employees?
 
"There were another couple of meetings like that in Doug Goldstein's office. Then, of course, there were endless meetings with the attorneys going over and over this thing. [...] [Axl] pushed this contract issue on us with so much pressure to the point that Duff and I just gave in." (Slash, Autobiography)

"We signed some document that we'd agree to have put in escrow for a certain amount of time to see if we could work things out. But if we didn't agree to put the terms into effect by certain point, the contract would be null and void, so I signed and let it go."I was forced into a secondary role, while Axl was now offically at the helm if I officially let the escrow contract become effective." (Slash, Autobiography)

"One of the few times I actually spoke with Axl about how it was going, it was pretty clear that we were coming from very different places. I was trying to get through to him once again about how working with Huge was a chore and a creative dead end in my opinion.
"You don't have to be friends to make a record," Axl said.
"Maybe not," I said, "but you do need to have some kind of mutual respect, you know."
We might as well have been talking about the two of us." (Slash, autobiography)

"Imagine you and I grow up together and you're my best friend. OK, I'm in Guns N' Roses and I tell the rest you're going to join the band. "OK, Slash, Axl, Matt, guys, this guy is in the band". "Duff, you got a minute?" "No, he's in the band" "Well, no. Everyone in the band has to vote it, Duff, so no way!" "Fuck you, this guy is in the band! I'm not doing anything unless this guy is in the band" "OK, you know what? We'll try and play with him, since you're that much interested in it. Hey Duff, the guy can't play" "I don't care" "Well that's not very reasonable." (Duff, Popular 1, 07/00)

"I tried to stick with it, but I wasn't alone in feeling like we were being force-fed some guy with no innate qualities who didn't deserve and couldn't handle the gig. But it was hopeless, we couldn't talk Axl out of it at all. I did what I could: I tried several times to have a one-on-one with Huge to see if I was missing some deeper spark in his character that Axl had seen..." (Slash, autobiography)

"I think the last words, basically, it was just, 'I'm done'... And it wasn?t even me necessarily leaving the band, it was not continuing on with the new band that Axl put together that he was now at the helm of, which was the new Guns N? Roses. I was given a contract to basically join his new band, and it took about 24 hours before I decided, 'I think this is the end of the line.'" (Slash, Piers Morgan Tonight, 05/24/12)

"I went to dinner with Axl and his manager. He was a manager of GN'R and still Axl's. [...] Me and Axl were getting along well and we had very good conversation. [...] I said 'Axl, we had very [much] fun together, but it's your own band now. I'm not interested in you as a dictator. I didn't come here to talk about the money advanced for next record. You can have it.'" (Duff, Burrn Magazine, 12/99)

"I told them I had changed. I said if they needed help, they could just call me. I told Axl this was his band, he had ignored everyone and had hired [Paul Huge,] his best friend for the band. I couldn't play with [Paul]." (Duff, 2000)

[Wooody]

For all of the 7 people who keep screaming to the high heavens on the Internet that Guns N Roses existed before Slash Duff and Steven played with Axl and Izzy ...

Keep fighting the good fight !

Even Axl laughed when LA GUNS guitarist Tracii Guns said he wanted to come back to GNR and ''put the -Guns- Back to Guns N' Roses".

Legally there was a Name before Slash and Duff, but that name had no substance or identity.  Everybody knows that, except for the 7 people you mentioned.

[Wooody]

I think it?s clear they all fucked up.
Adler certainly made his own bed, but his departure set GN?R?s demise in motion.
Izzy is on record saying the songs didn?t work without him.
Throw on top of that, Izzy not wanting to risk his own sobriety, and Axl becoming a control freak, made it easier for him to walk away.

Music aside, Izzy was also the voice of reason between the two big egos of the band, Slash and Axl.

Maybe there was nothing they could have possibly done to keep Izzy around, but he was the heart and soul of the band, but Slash and Axl?s egos were probably too big to realize it.
I think they were still very capable of making quality music, but GN?R as we had known it was over.

I think the biggest mistake they all made, which many posters here still do today, was not recognizing how instrumental each member was to the success of the band.
Thinking they could replace members, rather than work things out. Once one member was out, it became a domino effect, and made it easier for the next guy to walk away when things got tough.

Axl?s power play was good for Ax?s ego, but a kick in the balls for Slash and Duff, and the future of Guns N? Roses and it?s fans.
Really can?t fathom how he ever thought that was going to work. Maybe he didn?t care.

HE must have cared and must've thought it was going to work, if he didnt maybe they would still be together. I do agree that once one member of the band was out, others follow and it became a domino effect. But it might not have happened and it could have still worked out. I don't like Matt Sorum as a person, but I do enjoy what he brought to the table in UYI, I think it clicked and it worked with what Axl and Slash where trying to accomplish.
After all these years, I think they should've tried harder. But there's an ugly side to everything, some people idolize Izzy a bit too much in my book, maybe because they feel related to his persona, but I always wondered about his fear of GNR doing arenas and being big, it was irrational, he should've just rolled with it, and in my opinion, it was just that, he was scared of the attention. I also don't understand his lack of interest in playing and creating songs, he was good at it, yet him being a guitar player and not touching your guitar in over a year?  I play the guitar, I don't ever go 1 week without playing it. He had the opportunity to play for a living and he walked away from it, that shows lack of passion in my opinion.

I think if Axl really cared, he was incredibly naive to ...

I think he was naive to think he could go on without Slash and Duff.  But he must've believed it, he did. But he never did find a replacement for Slash if they kept quitting on him. Tommy might have replaced Duff, or did a pretty good job,  at least I think so. But that distinctive lead guitar player never came. I see some comments on youtube, about how great DJ Ashba's solo is on This I love, and its the CD version, not the live performance, and there are several people correcting said person and saying, no that's not DJ Ashba, that's Robin Fink, and yet another saying, are you sure, isnt that Buckethead? so?. yeah after so many years no one stands out. I even met a 20 year old kid, his parents had given him the old catalogue and he was a fan, but he thought Slash was still in the band 

[jarmo]

Legally there was a Name before Slash and Duff, but that name had no substance or identity.  Everybody knows that, except for the 7 people you mentioned.

Everybody knows it.
It's just one of those facts from the GN'R history that if you bring it up, expect those who don't like it to try to ridicule you...

Like if you make jokes about it, it'll change!



/jarmo

[Ringoturtle]

Axl securing the rights to the name of the " band he started with Izzy" has nothing to do with then having Slash and Duff sign contracts to be his employees.

I see them as seperate issues, he could have secured ownership of the name without taking it there.

For the last time ... If he wanted to forge ahead with them like he claimed ... Then that was foolish and naive to believe they'd go along.

It's foolish to be discussing a 20+ year old issue that probably happened when you were in diapers, or were sperm but it doesn't stop you, does it ?

Nothing said now will change a thing in the past, but people want to keep on beating that deceased equine because it didn't happen the way they thought it should.

for god's sake, stop it already. you are the most insulting and derogative person on this board and keep complainig about others being insulting. comments like "that's what idots say" (I'm paraphraising) and your sperm-comment are what some may call passive aggressiveness. I just don't get why you are allowed to do that?!

[CherryGarcia]

Legally there was a Name before Slash and Duff, but that name had no substance or identity.  Everybody knows that, except for the 7 people you mentioned.

Everybody knows it.
It's just one of those facts from the GN'R history that if you bring it up, expect those who don't like it to try to ridicule you...

Like if you make jokes about it, it'll change!



/jarmo

Technically, using the "Slash and Duff were replacements" logic, Bill Wyman and Charlie Watts were replacements in The Rolling Stones, and Ringo was a replacement in The Beatles. But are Dick Taylor and Tony Chapman at all relevant to the history of The Rolling Stones? Who, in the bands of the public, was the drummer for The Beatles?

When people think of Aerosmith, do the names Jimmy Crespo and Rick Dufay immediately spring to mind? Ray Tabano?

Keith Moon, technically, was a replacement for Doug Sandom in The Who, but does anyone care?

You call Slash and Duff "replacements" for guys who only performed 3 or 4 shows as "Guns N' Roses", who had no impact on the songwriting, who never recorded a note, and who didn't even do a single tour for the band. Really? It's just a way to belittle Slash and Duff and justify the new band. If they'd done a tour or two or recorded even a demo or written songs that Guns N' Roses would later perform you might have a case.

Tracii Guns, Ole Beich, and Rob Gardner are utterly irrelevant to the history of Guns N' Roses, especially if you buy Axl's story that he had the name "Guns N' Roses" in his head before he even got Tracii involved.

[jarmo]

Technically, using the "Slash and Duff were replacements" logic,

Nobody's using that logic so the rest of your post is irrelevant. Just shows how sad you are. You make shit up because you're upset.... Oooh, see how easy that is? I can call you sad and upset like I know you! It's so easy....


Nobody ever said that the AFD line up wasn't more successful than the one with Tracii. Nobody really made any comments about anybody being replacements. Nobody said Tracii was a huge influence on GN'R's sound or image. Nobody claimed Ole or Rab made the band. None of that has happened.

The only thing people have pointed out to you, and others like you who don't like to be reminded of it, is that Guns N' Roses' history is one thing and what people choose to remember is something else.
You can't change history. You can't change the fact that LA Guns and Hollywood Rose became Guns N' Roses with a different line up than what recorded the first album. Hello, McFly?

I do not know why that upsets you to the point that you need to be defending the Appetite line up against this "attack".


You're one calling people sad, and ironically enough here you are trying to defend people who chose to ignore a fact because it doesn't sit well with the idea that the band was nothing until certain people joined... Well, it was Guns N' Roses. That's something... Sorry. Keep arguing that it wasn't until you turn blue, won't change the fact.



/jarmo

[norway]

It's the 'new band' thats under siege, not the afd-lineup.

When people think of Aerosmith, do the names Jimmy Crespo and Rick Dufay immediately spring to mind? Ray Tabano?

'They' think about the songs which often are associated with the singer. 'People' always been a bit ignorant. Case in point: West Memphis Three

My dad wouldn't let me listen to motley crue cause of the churchburnings that was in norway in the 90's and that they were called 'crue' as in cruel.

[CherryGarcia]

Technically, using the "Slash and Duff were replacements" logic,

Nobody's using that logic so the rest of your post is irrelevant.

Nobody ever said that the AFD line up wasn't more successful than the one with Tracii. Nobody really made any comments about anybody being replacements. Nobody said Tracii was a huge influence on GN'R's sound or image. Nobody claimed Ole or Rab made the band. None of that has happened.

The only thing people have pointed out to you, and others like you who don't like to be reminded of it, is that Guns N' Roses' history is one thing and what people choose to remember is something else.
You can't change history. You can't change the fact that LA Guns and Hollywood Rose became Guns N' Roses with a different line up than what recorded the first album. Hello, McFly?

I do not know why that upsets you to the point that you need to be defending the Appetite line up against this "attack".

You're one calling people sad, and ironically enough here you are trying to defend people who chose to ignore a fact because it doesn't sit well with the idea that the band was nothing until certain people joined... Well, it was Guns N' Roses. That's something... Sorry. Keep arguing that it wasn't until you turn blue, won't change the fact.



/jarmo

There's facts that are pretty much utterly irrelevant though. The only reason people bring up Tracii, Ole or Rob is to justify the new band.

The band may have been performing to a few small audiences for 4 shows as "Guns N' Roses" for a couple of months in 1985 with some combo of those guys...But the fact still remains that in terms of the public at large they WERE nothing - they were a totally unknown band outside of the Sunset Strip - until June 1985 after Slash and Duff had solidified the lineup. The few months Tracii was in the band are factual - no one is denying that reality - but they're irrelevant. They added nothing to the band's history; they're good for a round of GN'R inspired trivial pursuit but little else.

"The only thing people have pointed out to you, and others like you who don't like to be reminded of it, is that Guns N' Roses' history is one thing and what people choose to remember is something else."

Others like me? Explain. You mean people who are fans of every era of the band and don't lap up everything Axl (or Slash) says? Is that what you mean by 'people like me'? If you've noticed I'm not a blind apologist or follower for either side. Slash was a control freak...But so was Axl. It doesn't make a person any less of a fan to admit their heroes have flaws like everyone else.

But, Tracii's involvement with Guns is utterly irrelevant both in the band's history and pop culture. It's just used to diminish Slash and Duff, "See, the band existed before them, which means it was Axl's band from day one, and so could exist and still be Guns after them." That's the line of thinking I've seen "from others like you".

[jarmo]

There's facts that are pretty much utterly irrelevant though. The only reason people bring up Tracii, Ole or Rob is to justify the new band.

Well, I can only speak for myself.

When I started this site in 1996, over 19 years ago. There was really no "new band" at that moment.
But you know what? I was still interested in the band's history and how it all came to be, hence this section: http://www.heretodaygonetohell.com/history/index.html

Now, go ahead and tell me with a straight face about how that is only there to "justify the new band". Go ahead!

But, Tracii's involvement with Guns is utterly irrelevant both in the band's history and pop culture. It's just used to diminish Slash and Duff, "See, the band existed before them, which means it was Axl's band from day one, and so could exist and still be Guns after them." That's the line of thinking I've seen "from others like you".

No, it's used to tell the actual history of the band. As it happened...
Kinda like evolution..... Not like "and then one day Adam..."

You start to look like one of those sad AFD apologists who can't take the fact that GN'R started before that line up! Oh the horror.... 





/jarmo

[norway]

Slash was a control freak...But so was Axl. It doesn't make a person any less of a fan to admit their heroes have flaws like everyone else.

I think they were (are) stubborn peeps with diferent wills.

[CherryGarcia]

There's facts that are pretty much utterly irrelevant though. The only reason people bring up Tracii, Ole or Rob is to justify the new band.

Well, I can only speak for myself.

When I started this site in 1996, over 19 years ago. There was really no "new band" at that moment.
But you know what? I was still interested in the band's history and how it all came to be, hence this section: http://www.heretodaygonetohell.com/history/index.html

Now, go ahead and tell me with a straight face about how that is only there to "justify the new band". Go ahead!

But, Tracii's involvement with Guns is utterly irrelevant both in the band's history and pop culture. It's just used to diminish Slash and Duff, "See, the band existed before them, which means it was Axl's band from day one, and so could exist and still be Guns after them." That's the line of thinking I've seen "from others like you".

No, it's used to tell the actual history of the band. As it happened...
Kinda like evolution..... Not like "and then one day Adam..."

You start to look like one of those sad AFD apologists who can't take the fact that GN'R started before that line up! Oh the horror.... 





/jarmo

Let's compare Guns to the car.
Axl and Izzy laid down the foundation and the battery to the car in early 1985.
Tracii, Ole and Beich were windshield wipers. A part of the car and its design, but easily replaceable.
Duff and Slash came in and were the car's engine and overall body. Steven was the braking system, and this model remained the model from 1985 through 1990.

Steven became dysfunctional, and was replaced for the 1990 model year with autolock breaks called Matt Sorum. The 1990 model year also added power windows in the form of Dizzy Reed.

In 1991, the car was revamped a bit again, this time, the battery was replaced with Gilby Clarke for the '92 model year.

A deluxe model with a bunch of luxury stuff was rolled out for 1992-1993 with the additions of Teddy Zigzag, the horns, Tracy and Roberta.

Then, the battery was changed again in 1994 with Paul Tobias.

Then, in 1996-1997, the engine and body were overhauled as Slash, Duff and Matt quit/were fired and replaced. The foundation remained, but everything else was different (except for the cool powered windows). It was still a cool car, just not in any real way the same car as the 1985-1997 model years.

[jarmo]

Bad analogy.

You can start a car without windshield wipers, but the band Guns N' Roses started with those guys...
Sorry.


Question, does it bother you that Slash played in Hollywood Rose with Axl, but it wasn't called Guns N' Roses? And why does it upset you that GN'R started without Slash, Duff and Steven?



/jarmo

[Wooody]

Bad analogy.

You can start a car without windshield wipers, but the band Guns N' Roses started with those guys...
Sorry.


Question, does it bother you that Slash played in Hollywood Rose with Axl, but it wasn't called Guns N' Roses? And why does it upset you that GN'R started without Slash, Duff and Steven?



/jarmo

I for once didnt know that, I thought it was LA GUNS HOLLYWOOD ROSE that became GUNS N ROSES And that SLash came when the name GUNS N ROSES was already there?

[jarmo]

Yes, but he also played in Hollywood Rose for a short while. Then that band broke up, and later started again.




/jarmo

[carmiedisco12]

Geez this is the most inane and boring topic.  Can we all just agree that:

GNR by name and earliest fledgling incarnation did not include Slash.

By any practical definition the 'original band' did include Slash etc. As this is the first configuration that wrote, toured what no doubt is the original album in AFD. If you did a random poll at a GNR concert and asked who is the 'original band' chances are 99% would say the AFD line up. As nothing of any real practical worth preceded that line up then I think it's absolutely reasonable to consider them the 'original' line up.

This argument back and forth seems to be to be so clearly agenda driven on both sides. The debate over the definition of original in an exercise in semantics and simply a disagreement on definition.

[jarmo]

Yes, I admit. My agenda is to stick to facts....


/jarmo

[CherryGarcia]

Bad analogy.

You can start a car without windshield wipers, but the band Guns N' Roses started with those guys...
Sorry.


Question, does it bother you that Slash played in Hollywood Rose with Axl, but it wasn't called Guns N' Roses? And why does it upset you that GN'R started without Slash, Duff and Steven?

/jarmo

You can start a car without windshield wipers, but they're not important ingredients to go forward.
Slash and Duff were. Or are you going to deny that Slash and Duff were important to Guns N' Roses' success? It wasn't a solo project until 1997.

Does it bother you that new GN'R will never be as successful as Slash and Duff era Guns was?