|
Post by stolenleopard on Nov 25, 2015 18:27:49 GMT -5
John said warm things about Andy at the last Newcastle gig. Wonder what, if anything, is said this time.
|
|
|
Post by bwkk on Nov 25, 2015 18:53:30 GMT -5
I had the same feeling too, zealous, but I like to think that "if Andy was still in the band...." should be read as "if the line-up was complete, DD would stick to their format and experiment less". I don't want to think it has to do with Andy personally, but with the fact that no permanent guitarist, let alone Andy, would allow this kind of experimentation, like calling Dom, Nile or John F. to play guitar parts. At least this is my interpretation at 6 a.m.! I agree with that interpretation, but it bothers me the way John put a positive spin on it. There is no way that leaving his spot (or a guitarist spot) open so they can experiment is better than having a permanent guitarist. It's almost like he is trying to sell to the fans how convenient not having a permanent guitarist is, and that is total crap.
|
|
|
Post by mynick7 on Nov 25, 2015 18:57:46 GMT -5
Personally, I don't see the issue about having a permanent guitarist or not. Big deal. They've been doing very well, as far as I'm concerned!
|
|
|
Post by zealous on Nov 25, 2015 19:28:15 GMT -5
I had the same feeling too, zealous, but I like to think that "if Andy was still in the band...." should be read as "if the line-up was complete, DD would stick to their format and experiment less". I don't want to think it has to do with Andy personally, but with the fact that no permanent guitarist, let alone Andy, would allow this kind of experimentation, like calling Dom, Nile or John F. to play guitar parts. At least this is my interpretation at 6 a.m.! I agree with that interpretation, but it bothers me the way John put a positive spin on it. There is no way that leaving his spot (or a guitarist spot) open so they can experiment is better than having a permanent guitarist. It's almost like he is trying to sell to the fans how convenient not having a permanent guitarist is, and that is total crap. I agree with this. And I didn't mean to come across as implying it was personally about Andy and/or his contribution. For me it's completely about the idea of not having a permanent guitarist being a good thing for the band. I also feel like someone's trying to sell me nonsense. No one's going to convince me that it's better for them to not have a guitarist. Not even the band members themselves will convince me. The proof is in the pudding and, for me, the evidence tells me they NEED a guitarist. Clearly it's not what it tells them though. I just hope their next collaborator is a good guitarist.
|
|
|
Post by intravenus on Nov 26, 2015 1:07:57 GMT -5
I still find it exciting that Duran Duran were able to have John Frusciante, Steve Jones and Nile Rodgers all playing guitar on the same album! For me that trumps any other guitar possibilities short of Andy returning in some capacity. It also opens up exciting possibilities for the future, possible 2-3 song collaborations with Andy and/or Warren and who knows who else?
Ideally they would write more songs from the ground up with guitarists for the next album (as they did with Nile) rather than giving them works in progress... I'd be ecstatic to hear the fruits of a genuine songwriting collaboration with John Frusciante, Steve Jones etc. That said, I love their contributions to Paper Gods and am glad they all worked so well together!
|
|
|
Post by bwkk on Nov 26, 2015 12:27:06 GMT -5
I agree with that interpretation, but it bothers me the way John put a positive spin on it. There is no way that leaving his spot (or a guitarist spot) open so they can experiment is better than having a permanent guitarist. It's almost like he is trying to sell to the fans how convenient not having a permanent guitarist is, and that is total crap. I agree with this. And I didn't mean to come across as implying it was personally about Andy and/or his contribution. For me it's completely about the idea of not having a permanent guitarist being a good thing for the band. I also feel like someone's trying to sell me nonsense. No one's going to convince me that it's better for them to not have a guitarist. Not even the band members themselves will convince me. The proof is in the pudding and, for me, the evidence tells me they NEED a guitarist. Clearly it's not what it tells them though. I just hope their next collaborator is a good guitarist. Duran have a history of putting a positive spin on less than desireable situations. An example is when John quit the group during the recording of Medazzaland. Nick at the time said "That is one less person he needs to argue with". Now I know that Nick was devasted and would have had John back in a heartbeat, but that was his idea of a positive spin and I thought that statement was very telling. Nick is extremely opinionated regarding their musical direction, and he is forceful in terms of having his way. There I go on a rant again...my bad.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2015 15:06:10 GMT -5
John Taylor is seldom convincing when he speaks, so it was not a surprise to read words that lend themselves to different interpretations. About guitarists, I honestly have no hopes for a permanent guitarist, and would there be one, his playing would not likely stand out in the mix anyway. I prefer to concentrate on other aspects, for instance some arrangements on the PG album are quite interesting.
|
|