thunderram

8 minutes ago, Appetiteyourillusion said:

Love how much Coma is respected! In my opinion it is the dicussion for the best overall GNR song ever.

I didn't vote for Coma but strongly considered it. It's so hard to pick just one. As somebody else said, a lot of it depends upon the day you ask me the question. UYI 1 is hard for me because I find it much superior to UYI 2 with more great songs on it.

I inevitably went with Don't Cry (even though the DEMO version is truly my favorite) for a couple different reasons, but easily could have went with Coma, Perfect Crime, Garden of Eden or Don't Damn Me.

1 hour ago, dcon said:

Hard to choose between crazy and oiam on lies.  Love the vocals on those. Especially the small town white boy part through the end when axl is just on fire.

Man, someone else I am totally in agreement with. As much I love Reckless, Patience and UTLH -- those two songs are the crown jewels for me. I'm not sure that Axl's voice has ever sounded better (even though he disagrees).

Love seeing these results to see how I compare to other hardcore fans. We all know the results would be drastically different if polling casual GN'R fans. For example, no chance Rocket Queen would be close to Jungle, Sweet Child or Paradise City.

Honestly, I was actually surprised to see how many did vote for RQ. I thought I'd be in the minority on that one. It was hard to pick just one song, but I went with that RQ because, to me, it is encapsulates everything that is GN'R.

22 minutes ago, Jw224 said:

This is the best I could do with that.

http://chirb.it/tntKvm

That actually helped. I heard a few more things in it. Thx.

10 hours ago, Tom-Ass said:

They should sound just as good or even better than they did back then and they don't.

To you. To others, they sound great.

Personally, I'm a strong advocate of the original 5. That's my dream scenario. But I was fine with the makeup of the band with Gilby and Matt. They still sounded fantastic, albeit slightly different.

Same logic applies now with Fortus and Ferrer. The band still sounds fantastic, albeit slightly different.

The one thing I do agree with you on is Ferrer not being as strong as Steven or Matt. I'm not saying he's horrible like you do, but I definitely notice more of a difference with him versus Steven/Matt than I do with Fortus versus Izzy/Gilby.

27 minutes ago, Jw224 said:

I tried messing around with the audio of this, my aim was to take a lot of the mud away and make the vocals a bit clearer. don't know if it sounds better per say but it's clearer.

http://chirb.it/nI9x63

 

Yeah, the Thunderstruck audio isn't a problem for me. I can hear Axl in it, no doubt. Especially the ending. It was the BIB video I was questioning.

27 minutes ago, James Bond said:

The instrumentals give it away more than anything. All the drum fills are Slade's takes on the songs, the endings are the endings that Angus changed on the ROB tour (Hells Bells, for example, ending with a return to the intro riff which Angus only started doing during the early shows this year), and so on. None of which matches any possible early versions with Brian (where Back in Black used to end with an extended Angus jam like the studio version). You can now believe even more.

See, I wouldn't have known any of the AC/DC tell-tell stuff you mentioned. I mean, I'm a fan going back to the late 70's. I was 8 or 9 when I first heard Highway to Hell. My first memories of listening and identifying to "my own" music apart from my parents was AC/DC and Van Halen. Admittedly, I am by far more of a Bon Scott era fan than Brian Johnson. And I haven't seen the band live since the 90's

Having said all that, the info you added to the mix makes it seem a bit more obvious.

4 minutes ago, James Bond said:

Not to mention Brian always added all kinds of "Back, mama" ad-libs to the live versions from the BIB tour onwards. There's none of that here. The tonal quality is consistent among all the videos so far so I'm confident it's Axl. Brian never went for most of those highs live - he always played it a little safer.

I just wish I heard some of the tell-tell things I heard in the Thunderstruck audio in the others too. But you guys are slowly convincing me.

Like Mulder from the X-Files says "I want to believe!"

4 minutes ago, andyshores said:

EDIT - I meant those times on Thunderstruck lol.  Been listening to these on a loop too long, back to work hahaha

For me, I can tell at the very end of Thunderstruck. The way he carries the final note (3:40). That's vintage Axl.

Just now, andyshores said:

No I get it, and I'm not deriding you at all.  Just listen to how he ends words/notes, it trails off in that certain manner.  Annunciation is slightly different than Johnson on certain things too, such as the word black.  I will say he sounds more akin to Johnson on BIB than Thunderstruck (which is cool either way) so I get where it could be questionable.  

Thanks for understanding.

I will say this, if you guys are right and ALL these audios are legit --- it's unbelievable. Even without clear audio, it sounds spot on classic AC/DC. The AC/DC Axl haters can suck it.

9 minutes ago, andyshores said:

I don't know exactly what to point to, but I mean we've all listened to Axl far more than is healthy and its all in the subtleties.  Similarities to Johnson or no, you can just tell when its Axl singing.  It could be Estranged, Back In Black, the fucking alphabet song, when its Axl you just hear it.  BIB is unquestionably Axl.  

Hey, I hope you are right. I've been listenting to Axl since '87 and I'm still not sure. The audio isn't clear enough for me to know on that 2nd video -- not enough to hear any of Axl's trademark vocals anyway. People hear what they want to hear, I guess.

I hear it in parts of the Thunderstruck audio, but not on the other one. And it's far from far-fetched to think that someone could come up with the idea of trolling.

If you want to buy in 100% to all the audios that have come forth thus far, more power to you. I certainly am not saying that you are wrong nor poking fun at anybody. I'm just not 100% sure, that's all.

5 minutes ago, The Archer said:

 I lol'd at this one. You're joking, right ?

Please let me in on the joke. Tell me how you are 100% certain that the specific youtube audio I mentioned is really Axl. The audio isn't all that clear and it does sound a lot like Brian Johnson. I agree w/ IncitingChaos that the Thunderstruck audio is much easier to tell. The other -- not so much.

Again, maybe you like being duped. I don't. I'm not buying 100% into all of these youtube leaks just yet. Thunderstruck is the only one I'm confident about right now.

I'm not at all wanting to be debbie downer, but are we certain all of these supposed leaks are legit and that's really Axl -- and not an attempt at trolling? I'm specifically thinking of the Hell Ain't a Bad Place to Be and Back in Black video. It's a hard to tell if that's really Axl or an old band rehearsal w/ Brian Johnson someone dug up and pawned off as a new leak.

I'm skeptical, yet cautiously optimistic. If these are all legit, Axl sounds more like Brian Johnson than Brian Johnson does.

1 hour ago, BadApples87 said:

So true, Millennials  that don't know who GNR is, LOL.  I guess some millennials know who they are, so kudos to the few that do.  But most of them were there for other acts.

Not so on Saturday night. According this LA Weekly article, while the other simultaneous acts were well attended, GN'R had the largest turnout by far.

1 hour ago, BadApples87 said:

They waited until Coachella was done to add an LA show.  Marketing ploy to make sure Coachella sold well.

That doesn't make sense to me since a majority of the Coachella tix were sold out last May during the pre-sale prior to any performers being announced. And, then, the remainder of the tix sold out in January once the lineup was announced.

So what was there to wait on?

11 hours ago, BorderlineCrazy said:

He can't prove his point but you can't prove him wrong either, that's why this sort of questions are kinda pointless. I think the answer would be there's no such thing as a best frontman and everyone's entitled to their own opinion.

This was exactly my point and essentially what I stated in the very first reply. Furthermore, it's silly to position an opinion as absolute or fact. As said before, it's all subjective. But Axl certainly checks off enough boxes to warrant consideration.

4 hours ago, John Daker said:

Short answer.....no

Long answer.....nope

Prove it.

You can't.

But nice try positioning your opinion as an absolute.

1 hour ago, bigpoop said:

The best frontman ever was Diamond David Lee Roth.

Roth was certainly an excellent front man. As much as I like Hagar era Van Halen, I'll always be much more a fan of the Roth era -- same goes for Bon Scott era AC/DC.

Having said that, not many music fans today know who the hell the guy is despite the fact that he's been back in Van Halen. On the other hand, Axl is still widely known. There are many reasons for that.

Comparing the two, Roth is one of the few that could match Axl's energy on stage. But he couldn't come close in the vocal department nor was he anywhere near as controversial and dangerous. He also couldn't write and create near the same level.

But no doubt that, in his prime, Roth was certainly in the discussion.

3 hours ago, xBrownstonex said:

Growing Up Guns: A Second-Generation Fan Describes Her First Guns N' Roses Show

http://www.laweekly.com/music/growing-up-guns-a-second-generation-fan-describes-her-first-guns-n-roses-show-6859308

Good read. However, I think the writer might have one part of the story a bit mixed up. It confuses me, at least.

She claims that her parents didn't arrive in time to catch GN'R in a 1992 show at the Coliseum, but did manage to see Metallica. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm fairly certain that GN'R closed all of those shows with Metallica. They never went on first.

Even if there were a few instances when they did, she later mentions driving north to the " Winchester Mystery House" -- which is in Northern CA -- so I naturally assume she was referring to the show at the Oakland Coliseum in September 1992. I attended that show and know for certain that Metallica went on first (and after Body Count). So I'm not sure how they could have missed Guns unless they left early rather than arriving too late.

Not a big deal with regard to the point of her story, but something trivial I noticed since I went to that show.

I thought it was cool that Axl used his famous introduction of Slash (whatever it is, it's weird and pissed off and calls itself Slash) for the opening Vegas show that I attended. I don't believe he's used it since. He even followed up later in the show with the "needs no introduction but gets one anyway".

I really don't understand the negativity over this. I get that AC/DC fans would prefer to hear/see Brian Johnson front the band just as GN'R fans would love to see Izzy and Steven back in the band rather than their replacements. However, isn't it a better option than never touring again? If the answer is yes, are there many better options than Axl?? In short, it's this or nothing.

2 hours ago, GNRfan2008 said:

Maybe they will do a Prince song. 

This writer seems to believe in her sources indicating that something is indeed in the works. We'll see.

http://hollywoodlife.com/2016/04/23/guns-n-roses-prince-tribute-purple-rain-coachella-dead/

Anybody believing that the majority of convert goers-- paying upwards of $300 per ticket to see this band --  aren't familiar with most songs is delusional. I'm not saying there aren't ANY casual and clueless fans going, but they are in the vast minority. I see that being the case more so for Coachella, but not at all for the Vegas and Mexico City shows or the upcoming US tour.

I feel fairly certain that the majority of concert goers know ALL of the 87-93 era stuff, with the exception of New Rose from TSI. The CD tunes might be more hit and miss since not all old school GN'R fans followed NuGuns.