Sprite Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 I'm not trying to be pro/anti anything here, just asking a genuinely curious question. Why does there seem to be a large group who are anti new gnr because it doesn't have Slash and company. Not saying all, but there is a sizeable group who think that way. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't Malcom and Angus Young done the exact same thing? Both AC/DC and GNR have sold a similar number of records since 1987, their timespan of releasing records has been similar as well. Both are bands that even casual fans of the genre know. Both have songs everyone knows the lyrics. Both have a certain member(s) who seems to really control things. Why is Axl criticized for using the GNR name, yet I never hear a peep of complaints about Malcom or Angus Young?Is it because AC/DC had a member die? Is it because Guns N'Roses were more "pop culture" in their time? Is it the anticipation/buildup/line up changes/ the let downs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bacardimayne Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 If I'm right, AC/DC still has Brian Johnson, Angus and Malcolm Young in its lineup. That core lineup has released successful albums and been around for like 35 years. This thread is awful and I hate AC/DC. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayster138 Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 so why does Motorhead get a pass then? the line up that made their classic albums arent no longer around, its pretty much Lemmy and his pals...ditto to Megadeath.....and Smashing Pumpkins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post bacardimayne Posted October 23, 2013 Popular Post Share Posted October 23, 2013 Because no one gives a shit about anyone in Motorhead/Megadeth/Smashing Pumpkins besides Lemmy, Mustaine and that bald guy. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2x4 Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 Because no one gives a shit about anyone in Motorhead/Megadeth/Smashing Pumpkins besides Lemmy, Mustaine and that bald guy.Reading a bunch of posts on this forum would lead one to believe no one gives a shit about GN'R too. I've always wondered this. Why do other bands get a pass but GN'R have copped it since 1996? It's not like Guns N' Roses losing and gaining members is a new thing. It's been happening since 1990 (not including the lineup changes of the pre AFD days) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasted Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 The main reason i think is sometimes the other guy died. So its more accept. If Slash died, they could carry dedicating Coma to him every nite. But basically each member that left pointed the finger at Axl. I think with Izzy it was everything. With Slash and Duff they had problems of they own. But after the media wash, its just Axl is the bad guy. Maybe with GNR its like Zepp without one guy its not the same. Or the beatles. You sell 100 million records its a different. Whats up with ACDc and Metallica are their fans more realistic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
classicguns4life Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 Now THIS is a dumb thread. AC/DC does everything right, and even 10 years older than Axl they put on a better show than Axl wishes he could do. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magisme Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 This is so fucking stupid. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bacardimayne Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 Because no one gives a shit about anyone in Motorhead/Megadeth/Smashing Pumpkins besides Lemmy, Mustaine and that bald guy. Reading a bunch of posts on this forum would lead one to believe no one gives a shit about GN'R too. I've always wondered this. Why do other bands get a pass but GN'R have copped it since 1996? It's not like Guns N' Roses losing and gaining members is a new thing. It's been happening since 1990 (not including the lineup changes of the pre AFD days) Axl and Slash are the constant, the image, and the sound of classic GNR. Bands like Motorhead and Megadeth base their image mostly on one guy, hence why people don't care. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
izzygirl Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 The 2 most known guys of early AC/DC and the charismatic ones were Angus and Bon. And then Bon died. So they didn't replace him because he wanted to sing about his ex girlfriend while Angus wanted to keep on making classic rock. There was no other way. With GNR there is a nother way and that way is called reunion. Also, they have a proper management. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasted Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 GNR maybe more comparable to aerosmith. Tyler and Perry. Mick n Keef. Axl and Slash. Axl is way less affable than Tyler or Mick? Slash is more stubborn. GNR turned into a collective like Megadave, NIN or QOTSA. Another aspect is GNR went out on top. Almost perfect. That secured their legend. But it also made them kind of inhuman. Although they did do most of the UYI tour without the classic line up and record Spag incident without Izzy. And nobody said shit. So in some ways its kind of tough shit for purists, this is life. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coma16 Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 Because a certain ex-band member who quit manipulated the media. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Estranged Reality Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 Billy Corgan DOES get a lot of shit for his new Pumpkins revolving line-ups, but more and more fans have accepted it because:- He still releases music;- Even the former bandmembers pretty much admit Corgan was always basically the driving vision behind the band, in terms of it being a little bit more of a one-man-show than GN'R ever was;That being said, he still gets a lot of derision from fans. The truth is that Billy and Pumpkins were never quite as iconic as GN'R - they were a big alt rock band and "1979" is gonna be played on the radio for years to come, but they didn't singularly take the world by storm quite as much as GN'R did, and Billy himself was never quite as high profile as Axl, nor did he draw as much negative attention during the peak of his fame. Axl's been known for his erratic behaviour since he made it big, so the 'Axl took over the band' narrative is a convenient fit for most people with passing knowledge of the band, even though there's obviously more to it than that.I will say this though, if Axl had actually released music in the '90s and early '2000s after the band split up (as Corgan did when his lineup dissolved) he'd be in a much different boat than he is now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom2112 Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 The main reason i think is sometimes the other guy died. So its more accept. If Slash died, they could carry dedicating Coma to him every nite.But basically each member that left pointed the finger at Axl. I think with Izzy it was everything. With Slash and Duff they had problems of they own.But after the media wash, its just Axl is the bad guy.Maybe with GNR its like Zepp without one guy its not the same. Or the beatles. You sell 100 million records its a different.Whats up with ACDc and Metallica are their fans more realistic?AC/DC have their classic line up from back in black, Metallica have been together 30+ years with the same 3 and 3 bassists... it's not quite the same thing. Whitesnake, megadeth, Kiss, Motorhead all good examples. they get a pass as the members of the band were not as popular as the singer (maybe Ace and peter were equally popular). Slash was the face of gnr along with Axl it wasn't 50/50 Axl was focussed on more, but it was enough that for 20+ years after he's quit the band people still aren't over it. that's why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DR DOOM Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 ACDC replaced Dave Evans (bass) in 76 or so, Cliff Williams has been there ever since.Bon died and they got Brian...who is probably the greatest "replacement" in rock and rollPhil Rudd left, they got Simon Wright, he left and they got the bald guy from The Firm/Manfred Man and then replaced him with Phil Rudd in 95 and that's it.So they have 4 former members in 40 years, and one of them only left cause he died.Now have a look at GNR... 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
highvoltage Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 ACDC replaced Dave Evans (bass) in 76 or so, Cliff Williams has been there ever since.Bon died and they got Brian...who is probably the greatest "replacement" in rock and rollPhil Rudd left, they got Simon Wright, he left and they got the bald guy from The Firm/Manfred Man and then replaced him with Phil Rudd in 95 and that's it.So they have 4 former members in 40 years, and one of them only left cause he died.Now have a look at GNR...Exactly. 4 of the 5 members still in the band were part of golden era with Bon.AC/DC were able to keep going because Malcolm started the band and Angus has always been the "frontman". Bon was drafted in months after the band started when things didn't work out with their original vocalist (Dave Evans). Bon died right when they picked up steam internationally (it was a few months after Highway To Hell) so naturally they wanted to press on... and they had every right to. Brian was someone Bon had previously expressed admiration for and Back In Black was acclaimed as a near flawless album. All these things mattered in terms of fans being able to accept a new singer in Brian.The situation with GN'R is light years apart. There are very few (if any) bands you can really compare their situation with fairly, every band contains different personalities and relationships so the situations are always different too. With Guns, I don't see the current band as the same band that got things started and don't hold the two on the same level. I'm still glad I got to see Axl perform Guns N' Roses songs and I'm glad we've had some new music... so with regards to the name "some kind" of GN'R is better than "no kind" IMO. The fact that Axl fought so hard for the name to keep the band going but does so little with it is what's disappointing. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DR DOOM Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 Mark Evans (bass)-oops Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ManetsBR Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 Bacardi won the thread, close it now, mods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ITG Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 If he's so smart then how come he's dead? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SweetRose Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 Axl hasn't kept the band going,he's kept the name going. If Axl had kept the band going,he would have tried even harder to keep the old band together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoolRanchDressing Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 Because they went on to make great music. Guns didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daedalus Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 When Steven Adler and Izzy were replaced it wasn't such a big deal. But you can't replace Slash just like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasted Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 The main reason i think is sometimes the other guy died. So its more accept. If Slash died, they could carry dedicating Coma to him every nite.But basically each member that left pointed the finger at Axl. I think with Izzy it was everything. With Slash and Duff they had problems of they own.But after the media wash, its just Axl is the bad guy.Maybe with GNR its like Zepp without one guy its not the same. Or the beatles. You sell 100 million records its a different.Whats up with ACDc and Metallica are their fans more realistic?AC/DC have their classic line up from back in black, Metallica have been together 30+ years with the same 3 and 3 bassists... it's not quite the same thing. Whitesnake, megadeth, Kiss, Motorhead all good examples. they get a pass as the members of the band were not as popular as the singer (maybe Ace and peter were equally popular). Slash was the face of gnr along with Axl it wasn't 50/50 Axl was focussed on more, but it was enough that for 20+ years after he's quit the band people still aren't over it. that's why.I don't think people would really accept just Axl, Slash, Stinson, Fortus and Frank as GNR. People won't be happy til it's the classic 5. It's not realistic. It's more of a Beatles or Zepp situation to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazey Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 (edited) The simple answer is that the other bands in general would replace one member at a time while continuing to record, release and tour music. They didn't drop off the radar and replace every single member in one go before re-emerging under the same name years later and trading on the old band's songs to play nostalgia shows. Edited October 23, 2013 by Dazey 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teroz Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 Look:- AC/DC has not gone disco, numetal, industrial- AC/DC has integrity: no greatest hits album in a 40 year career- Their latest studio album was a huge success (with a 8 year break between albums)- Their last tour was a stadium tour- They have 3/5 members from the first album (1974) still in the band- They have the same lineup as in 1980- Cliff entered the band in 1976 or 77 and Brian in 1980- Sure Phil was out of the band between 1983-1994, but having the original drummer back is way cooler than having one on mysterious leave of absence- It is a shame what happened to Bon, he was and is superb! But you really can't hold that event against the band and they recovered with grace- And they do not shit their fans around, if the ball is moving it is all out: album, videos, huge tour, promotion, interviews and still keeping a awesome attitude and respect towards the fans- And like said in this thread: do count the band members that AC/DC has had in 40 years and compare it with GNR's 25 year records, you'll be stunned 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts