Tell Me :  Talk
Talk about your favorite band. 

Previous page Next page First page IORR home

For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.

Goto Page: Previous123
Current Page: 3 of 3
Re: Guns and Roses and the Stones
Posted by: MILKYWAY ()
Date: June 7, 2014 02:50

In any event, as many people here have noted, G&R was great in the late 1980s & early 1990s. Then something happened.

But between 1988 to 1992, G&R was believed by many to be the true successor to the Stones. The band that goes by the moniker G&R now is nothing compared to what G&R used to be. Nothing.





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-06-07 02:51 by MILKYWAY.

Re: Guns and Roses and the Stones
Date: June 7, 2014 03:35

Quote
gibsonman
Quote
keefriffhard4life
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Quote
keefriffhard4life
Quote
gibsonman
G&R is the only band from the 80s I listen to. Great rocknroll and in the 80s they were true rockers. The original guitarplayer Slash is a great guitarist and often plays wearing a Stones t-shirt.

Nowadays G&R is only a parody of what they used to be. And Axl Rose seem to care nothing about his fans. But their music from the early days still stands out as great rocknroll.....

you mean tracii guns?

Yep, Tracii, whom I once had the pleasure touring with. Such a sweet guy thumbs up

wow really? he is one of my favorite guitar players. very underrated and much more versatile then slash

Have to admit I was wrong here. But Slash was the original guitarplayer in their commercial succsess, right? I saw a documentary about g&r a while ago. Must remember their story wrong. Anyway, Slash is a very good guitarplayer in my opinion ....smileys with beer

tracii guns was fired very early on but said the band had already written 3 of the songs that appeared on AFD while he was there. funny enough he was fired by axl for missing or being late to some shows

Re: Guns and Roses and the Stones
Posted by: His Majesty ()
Date: June 7, 2014 05:18

Quote
MILKYWAY
In any event, as many people here have noted, G&R was great in the late 1980s & early 1990s. Then something happened.

... The band that goes by the moniker G&R now is nothing compared to what G&R used to be. Nothing.

Sounds familiar.

Re: Guns and Roses and the Stones
Posted by: 71Tele ()
Date: June 7, 2014 05:41

As if we needed more proof that Nic Cage is an idiot,

Re: Guns and Roses and the Stones
Date: June 7, 2014 11:36

Quote
His Majesty
Quote
MILKYWAY
In any event, as many people here have noted, G&R was great in the late 1980s & early 1990s. Then something happened.

... The band that goes by the moniker G&R now is nothing compared to what G&R used to be. Nothing.

Sounds familiar.

The paralell would be Mick and Chuck touring as the Stones (Axl and Dizzy)...

Re: Guns and Roses and the Stones
Posted by: Torres ()
Date: June 7, 2014 11:51

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Quote
His Majesty
Quote
MILKYWAY
In any event, as many people here have noted, G&R was great in the late 1980s & early 1990s. Then something happened.

... The band that goes by the moniker G&R now is nothing compared to what G&R used to be. Nothing.

Sounds familiar.

The paralell would be Mick and Chuck touring as the Stones (Axl and Dizzy)...

We'll get there...

Re: Guns and Roses and the Stones
Posted by: TooTough ()
Date: June 7, 2014 12:36

They surely were the hot act/best rock band for 3 years (89/90/91).
But their career is just like the line that Slash wore on a t-shirt
(he wore great shirts by the way): "Live fast, die young".

Those "Stones successors" are missing one thing: staying power.
Most of them are gone like a fart in the wind.

Re: Guns and Roses and the Stones
Posted by: RollingFreak ()
Date: June 7, 2014 15:08

Quote
TooTough
They surely were the hot act/best rock band for 3 years (89/90/91).
But their career is just like the line that Slash wore on a t-shirt
(he wore great shirts by the way): "Live fast, die young".

Those "Stones successors" are missing one thing: staying power.
Most of them are gone like a fart in the wind.
Slash, and the rest of the original band, have always said that its amazing Guns lasted as long as it did. They were all so @#$%& up that it was bound to be a trainwreck from the beginning, but everything before it would be awesome cause the band clicked so much.

I love all their albums, even Chinese Democracy despite it being an Axl Rose solo album, but its pretty amazing that they are basically remembered for 2 albums, Appetite and Use Your Illusion. 3 hours worth of music and they are still a huge name and known around the world. They were a flash in the pan as a band, but for influence its pretty amazing what they accomplished with such little work. They are THAT good.

Re: Guns and Roses and the Stones
Posted by: Wroclaw ()
Date: June 7, 2014 15:52

Quote
MILKYWAY
Quote
keefriffhard4life
Quote
MILKYWAY
Quote
Wroclaw
I just recalled that back in 1989 I read in some newspaper about the Stones tour of North America where G&R were the opening act. The article said that "by choosing them (G&R) as their opening act the Rolling Stones are crowning them as their inheritors, just as Cream did with Yes".

Oh my. I am absolutely speechless. Sunshine of Your Love compared with Take the Long Way Home.

take the long way home is supertramp

Of course. I knew that. Sorry. I meant Owner of a Lonely Heart. What's wrong with me tonight?

Off topic: Has anyone ever get warning that says something like, POSSIBLE HACKING ATTEMPT?

Say what you want about Yes but... "Owner of the Lonley Heart" represents the Yes sound prerry much like Anybody Seen My Baby represents the Stones... (and both are post peak songs - issued for the charts).

Re: Guns and Roses and the Stones
Date: June 7, 2014 16:22

Up until Izzy left a great band. Like DP says, you have to take into account that it was late 80's; so rules were of the times. They were all essentially Bules rockers, a la Stones. But they also wanted to top the charts. IMO they weighes it out just right; up through Illusion 1 and 2, and Lies.
I did not like Gilby Clarke. No, I can;t even say I didn't like him because he was such a non entity. rarely have I seen a guitarist in a major band with less personality. Matt Sorum IMo was great; probably more inventive than Adler, but he was part of the erosion of the Gunner's spirit.

Re: Guns and Roses and the Stones
Posted by: whitem8 ()
Date: June 7, 2014 18:49

Gs and Rs the newly anointed Stones? Ridiculous. They were a shallow 80s hard rock hair band copying the stones with their own 80s schlock production and one of the worst lead singers in a rock band. Like listening to a dying cat on steroids. And case in point where are they now? No where. Well in Vegas with fake dreads wearing a girdle to hide his middle age paunch.

Re: Guns and Roses and the Stones
Posted by: tussler ()
Date: June 7, 2014 19:40

Quote
whitem8
Gs and Rs the newly anointed Stones? Ridiculous. They were a shallow 80s hard rock hair band copying the stones with their own 80s schlock production and one of the worst lead singers in a rock band. Like listening to a dying cat on steroids. And case in point where are they now? No where. Well in Vegas with fake dreads wearing a girdle to hide his middle age paunch.

I really don`t care how cool or uncool or how ridiculous people in a band are as long they make good music and have good performance. To compare GNR with Poison, Motley Crue and other hairbands is wrong. Almost as wrong as compare The Clash with King Crimson. Two completly different styles. About copying, Keith Richards did says that everybody since Adam and Eve did sing for the first time, someone else have "stolen" or copying frome eachother. When you say that Axl is the worst leadsinger ever, I don`t agree with you, but of course it`s your opinion. I also heard from others that Steven Taylor, Mick Jagger, Robert Plant are the worst lead singers, I don`t agree with they either.
In the end, differences are good smiling smiley
Btw. Appetite for destruction did use a whole year to reach number one at the charts, none or almost no commercials at all. Not sure but I believe that GNR have to give credits to Aerosmith who did use them as warm up acts thru their world tour in 87.

Re: Guns and Roses and the Stones
Posted by: RollingFreak ()
Date: June 7, 2014 20:18

Quote
tussler
Quote
whitem8
Gs and Rs the newly anointed Stones? Ridiculous. They were a shallow 80s hard rock hair band copying the stones with their own 80s schlock production and one of the worst lead singers in a rock band. Like listening to a dying cat on steroids. And case in point where are they now? No where. Well in Vegas with fake dreads wearing a girdle to hide his middle age paunch.

I really don`t care how cool or uncool or how ridiculous people in a band are as long they make good music and have good performance. To compare GNR with Poison, Motley Crue and other hairbands is wrong. Almost as wrong as compare The Clash with King Crimson. Two completly different styles. About copying, Keith Richards did says that everybody since Adam and Eve did sing for the first time, someone else have "stolen" or copying frome eachother. When you say that Axl is the worst leadsinger ever, I don`t agree with you, but of course it`s your opinion. I also heard from others that Steven Taylor, Mick Jagger, Robert Plant are the worst lead singers, I don`t agree with they either.
In the end, differences are good smiling smiley
Btw. Appetite for destruction did use a whole year to reach number one at the charts, none or almost no commercials at all. Not sure but I believe that GNR have to give credits to Aerosmith who did use them as warm up acts thru their world tour in 87.

I'm literally reading Slash's book at the moment and this is very much true, especially the last part. It took a full year for Appetite to find an audience, and while they were on tour with Aerosmith they were blowing Aerosmith off the stage. That was a big boost for them, as was touring with Motley Crue right before then. Combined with Sweet Child O Mine coming out as a single around the same time, it was all a very quick whirlwind of success.

And again, they were never concerned with success. They just wanted to make music. They never thought they'd have a #1 record and didn't plan on it with Appetite. They were as surprised as anyone by the success and were completely different from the other hair metal bands like Poison, etc. Honestly, they were kind of different than anyone else in the 80s.

Re: Guns and Roses and the Stones
Posted by: jazzbass ()
Date: June 8, 2014 00:35

The original line up of GnR was actually quite formidable IMO. Izzy and Slash made a fine guitar duo. Duff, a solid "Fender-ey" sounding bass. Axl... meh.

Re: Guns and Roses and the Stones
Posted by: muffie ()
Date: June 8, 2014 00:55

Quote
whitem8
Gs and Rs the newly anointed Stones? Ridiculous. They were a shallow 80s hard rock hair band copying the stones with their own 80s schlock production and one of the worst lead singers in a rock band. Like listening to a dying cat on steroids. And case in point where are they now? No where. Well in Vegas with fake dreads wearing a girdle to hide his middle age paunch.

Technically, Axl Rose pips Mick Jagger. He has a 5-octave range whereas Mick Jagger has 3. Though what he does with the range is a matter of taste.

REF: [www.vintagevinylnews.com]

Re: Guns and Roses and the Stones
Posted by: shadooby ()
Date: June 8, 2014 01:16

Always loved Izzy Stradlin, seemed to be the most level headed guy in the (original) band who just wanted to make great music. Loved the Ju Ju Hounds album...check it out.







Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-06-08 01:25 by shadooby.

Re: Guns and Roses and the Stones
Posted by: shadooby ()
Date: June 8, 2014 01:28

Quote
jazzbass
The original line up of GnR was actually quite formidable IMO. Izzy and Slash made a fine guitar duo. Duff, a solid "Fender-ey" sounding bass. Axl... meh.

Very true...one can only stand so many "whoa, wow"s and "eye yie"s.

Re: Guns and Roses and the Stones
Posted by: GasLightStreet ()
Date: June 8, 2014 07:18

That version of Sway is just insanely awful. WOW.

Re: Guns and Roses and the Stones
Posted by: RollingFreak ()
Date: June 8, 2014 09:00

Izzy rules:






Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-06-08 09:00 by RollingFreak.

Re: Guns and Roses and the Stones
Posted by: jammingedward ()
Date: June 8, 2014 13:49

Both Ronnie Wood and Nicky Hopkins played on Izzy's first (and fantastic) solo album!

Re: Guns and Roses and the Stones
Date: June 8, 2014 13:56

Quote
jammingedward
Both Ronnie Wood and Nicky Hopkins played on Izzy's first (and fantastic) solo album!

izzy's 2nd solo album 117 degrees is also great. the albums after that one vary in terms of quality. i wish duff's 2nd solo album Beautiful Disease would get an official release

Re: Guns and Roses and the Stones
Posted by: dcba ()
Date: June 8, 2014 17:07

Quote
keefriffhard4life
i wish duff's 2nd solo album Beautiful Disease would get an official release

Do you know if we can get it in FLAC format?

Re: Guns and Roses and the Stones
Date: June 8, 2014 21:31

Quote
dcba
Quote
keefriffhard4life
i wish duff's 2nd solo album Beautiful Disease would get an official release

Do you know if we can get it in FLAC format?

i mean i think most of it is on youtube.

Goto Page: Previous123
Current Page: 3 of 3


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Online Users

Guests: 1523
Record Number of Users: 206 on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests: 9627 on January 2, 2024 23:10

Previous page Next page First page IORR home