Jump to content

New Guns N' Roses


rvdseven

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 80
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

You may be a little behind the times as most of those songs leaked last year.

But, yeah for the most part I enjoy them...especially TWAT.

Then again, I am an old school G'n'R fan, and I have been waiting for a new album since 1992 (the Spaghetti Incident doesn't count)....so I will take anything at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw the latest incarnation of GNR a year or two back here in Sheffield - it was th best gig I've ever been to to be honest. Me and my mate went with moderate expectations, but wondered if you'd miss Slash and... well.. you don't. It's weird. You know he's not there but, I dunno, the guys they've got a damned good - and are less sloppy than Slash. lol.

But yeah, they played one new song at the gig. Didn't catch it's name but it was slow and slightly countrified. Was pretty good, but unexpected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Guns N Roses doesn't exist. It's just Axl Rose and whatever bitches he can pay to lay down some tracks over and over until they get sick of him and quit.

Oh, yes, they do. They just have Scott Weiland as their lead singer now and changed their sound a bit as well as their name.

The current "Guns N' Roses" might as well be called "The Axl Rose Band" or "Axl Rose And A Bunch Of Posers Most People Don't Give A Fuck About".

I'm sorry, but the current incarnation of Guns N' Roses > Velvet Revolver.

At the least the former can play... the latter, especially Slash, are sloppy as hell. VR were disappointing at Download last year, whereas GNR were fucking brilliant on tour a couple of years back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guns N Roses doesn't exist. It's just Axl Rose and whatever bitches he can pay to lay down some tracks over and over until they get sick of him and quit.

Oh, yes, they do. They just have Scott Weiland as their lead singer now and changed their sound a bit as well as their name.

The current "Guns N' Roses" might as well be called "The Axl Rose Band" or "Axl Rose And A Bunch Of Posers Most People Don't Give A Fuck About".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The current "Guns N' Roses" might as well be called "The Axl Rose Band" or "Axl Rose And A Bunch Of Posers Most People Don't Give A Fuck About".

The correct name is "Chubby McGee and The Guys Who Aren't Slash."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Guns & Roses" refers to Tracii Guns and Axl Rose, that's where the name came from. They haven't "been Guns & Roses" since before Appetite For Destruction. Bands change their line-ups all the time, and I don't see why people can't accept that; no one argues that Motörhead aren't Motörhead any more, despite having gone through a hell of a lot more changes than G&R ever did. The G&R line-up changed again between Appetite For Destruction and Use Your Illusion, but no one complained that it "wasn't Guns & Roses" then either. Bands progress, bands grow and change, if you just want the same old songs and the same old band, stick to listening to the old albums, you can't expect a band not to grow in time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. To learn more, see our Privacy Policy