Why No Release? Simple.

[Bobbo]

Teejay,

I respectfully disagree with the failure explanation. Keep in mind, I'm talking about all things overall, not just aspects. The critical reception was decent, but it's difficult for me to attribute its commercial endurance to its overall overview of "success" when everybody and their mother knew it was going to sell a significant amount of copies upon release no matter what. When nearly every retrospective review and article about the album contains the words "underwhelming" and "disappointing" it's hard to not say the album failed.

When there's no demand among the general population for another nu album, and there's a general consensus that the first one was...not that good, it's hard to say the album didn't fail. When nobody could give a wet fart if Axl never played a cd song again, it's hard to say the album didn't fail. When nobody made a peep when cd and the nu guys weren't inducted or even mentioned when Green Day was talking about GNR's legacy, it's hard to say the album made an impression. It didn't connect to an audience and it didn't sway general opinion that Axl could creatively carry GNR without any of the other members who gave weight to the name. If anything, it enforced opinion that he couldn't.

Better was released before the album was released and when hype was still high. It only hit number 3 for a week on the rock charts before falling into the abyss.

But I do agree with a lot of what you said in the latter part of your post. I enjoy the title track, Better, and TWAT. SOD wasn't bad either. I wouldn't like those tracks any more or any less whether the majority people loved or hated the album or whether it sold 100 copies or 100,000,000 copies. I don't know why other people here just can't do the same.

Edited January 4, 2014 by Bobbo

[Rovim]

Teejay,

I respectfully disagree with the failure explanation. Keep in mind, I'm talking about all things overall, not just aspects. The critical reception was decent, but it's difficult for me to attribute its commercial endurance to its overall overview of "success" when everybody and their mother knew it was going to sell a significant amount of copies upon release no matter what. When nearly every retrospective review and article about the album contains the words "underwhelming" and "disappointing" it's hard to not say the album failed.

When there's no demand among the general population for another nu album, and there's a general consensus that the first one was...not that good, it's hard to say the album didn't fail. When nobody could give a wet fart if Axl never played a cd song again, it's hard to say the album didn't fail. When nobody made a peep when cd and the nu guys weren't inducted or even mentioned when Green Day was talking about GNR's legacy, it's hard to say the album made an impression. It didn't connect to an audience and it didn't sway general opinion that Axl could creatively carry GNR without any of the other members who gave weight to the name. If anything, it enforced opinion that he couldn't.

Better was released before the album was released and when hype was still high. It only hit number 3 for a week on the rock charts before falling into the abyss.

But I do agree with a lot of what you said in the latter part of your post. I enjoy the title track, Better, and TWAT. SOD wasn't bad either. I wouldn't like those tracks any more or any less whether the majority people loved or hated the album or whether it sold 100 copies or 100,000,000 copies. I don't know why other people here just can't do the same.

Who are those people you keep talking about? All I see here is the same group of maybe 5 or 6 people that fit your description. The rest just like to listen and discuss the album and as fans of new Guns they seem to want Gn'R to do well commercially, but they don't care about it enough to invest too much energy on convincing everyone it was a huge hit or something.

It sold 3 million copies which is respectable, and didn't set the world on fire. That's pretty much the popular opinion here as far as I can tell.

Edited January 4, 2014 by Rovim

[Bobbo]

Teejay,

I respectfully disagree with the failure explanation. Keep in mind, I'm talking about all things overall, not just aspects. The critical reception was decent, but it's difficult for me to attribute its commercial endurance to its overall overview of "success" when everybody and their mother knew it was going to sell a significant amount of copies upon release no matter what. When nearly every retrospective review and article about the album contains the words "underwhelming" and "disappointing" it's hard to not say the album failed.

When there's no demand among the general population for another nu album, and there's a general consensus that the first one was...not that good, it's hard to say the album didn't fail. When nobody could give a wet fart if Axl never played a cd song again, it's hard to say the album didn't fail. When nobody made a peep when cd and the nu guys weren't inducted or even mentioned when Green Day was talking about GNR's legacy, it's hard to say the album made an impression. It didn't connect to an audience and it didn't sway general opinion that Axl could creatively carry GNR without any of the other members who gave weight to the name. If anything, it enforced opinion that he couldn't.

Better was released before the album was released and when hype was still high. It only hit number 3 for a week on the rock charts before falling into the abyss.

But I do agree with a lot of what you said in the latter part of your post. I enjoy the title track, Better, and TWAT. SOD wasn't bad either. I wouldn't like those tracks any more or any less whether the majority people loved or hated the album or whether it sold 100 copies or 100,000,000 copies. I don't know why other people here just can't do the same.

Who are those people you keep talking about? All I see here is the same group of maybe 5 or 6 people that fit your description. The rest just like to listen and discuss the album and as fans of new Guns they seem to want Gn'R to do well commercially, but they don't care about it enough to invest too much energy on convincing everyone it was a huge hit or something.

It sold 3 million copies which is respectable, and didn't set the world on fire. That's pretty much the popular opinion here as far as I can tell.

These 5 or 6 people are just the examples in this thread. Over the near three years I've been posting at this forum there's been, well, more than enough of these people to warrant a response. Take my word for it ;-).

[Rovim]

I don't need to take your word for it, I was here too. I'm just saying that nowdays, you won't find more then a handful of people that are like that on MyGn'R.

It's not as insane as some people make it out to be imo. Most people here are pretty logical and they just want to discuss the album.

Edited January 4, 2014 by Rovim

[Bobbo]

I was speaking in general terms when talking about "other people". Never said it was the vast majority or anything, but frankly it is a noticeably large amount of people. Just thought I'd ask the questionl when those current types of people bombard those threads with blabbity, blah, blah.

Like we talked about a few days ago, I have absolutely no issue with people loving the album and discussing reasons they love it.

Edited January 4, 2014 by Bobbo

[Bromle]

If you step out of the conspiracy bubble it is obvious, there is no need for new music.

Chinese democracy was released to end the pop culture joke and to pay the record company. There was so little fate in the album sale that they made a deal with pre-sale at Best Buy to reclaim the expenses.

Axl and Guns don't need to release new music like new bands have to. They already have enough songs to tour in infinity. And people will pay to see them since they are a huge part of rock history and has massive hits.

Also there is little money to be made from releasing new music, so why bother, when you can bring in the dough touring?

[John Bonham]

If you step out of the conspiracy bubble it is obvious, there is no need for new music.

Chinese democracy was released to end the pop culture joke and to pay the record company. There was so little faith in the album sale that they made a deal with pre-sale at Best Buy to reclaim the expenses.

Axl and Guns don't need to release new music like new bands have to. They already have enough songs to tour in infinity. And people will pay to see them since they are a huge part of rock history and has massive hits.

Also there is little money to be made from releasing new music, so why bother, when you can bring in the dough touring?

Prefectly summed-up and articulated. Bravo Sir.

[Rovim]

If you step out of the conspiracy bubble it is obvious, there is no need for new music.

Chinese democracy was released to end the pop culture joke and to pay the record company. There was so little fate in the album sale that they made a deal with pre-sale at Best Buy to reclaim the expenses.

Axl and Guns don't need to release new music like new bands have to. They already have enough songs to tour in infinity. And people will pay to see them since they are a huge part of rock history and has massive hits.

Also there is little money to be made from releasing new music, so why bother, when you can bring in the dough touring?

A bit too cynical for me. I agree with most of what you're saying, but Chinese was clearly a labor of love, and I think Axl released it as an artistic statement first, and then all the other shit like paying the record company came later.

[classicrawker]

If you step out of the conspiracy bubble it is obvious, there is no need for new music.

Chinese democracy was released to end the pop culture joke and to pay the record company. There was so little fate in the album sale that they made a deal with pre-sale at Best Buy to reclaim the expenses.

Axl and Guns don't need to release new music like new bands have to. They already have enough songs to tour in infinity. And people will pay to see them since they are a huge part of rock history and has massive hits.

Also there is little money to be made from releasing new music, so why bother, when you can bring in the dough touring?

A bit too cynical for me. I agree with most of what you're saying, but Chinese was clearly a labor of love, and I think Axl released it as an artistic statement first, and then all the other shit like paying the record company came later.

Axl told Marc he wanted to bury the old band and that NuGuns would be better then the old band so I guess you could say it was for artistic reasons but Marc also said Axl did not go solo because he wanted ChiDem to sell 20 million copies and anything less he would consider a failure which is why he released ChiDem as a GnR album............so let's not get too carried away that Axl did it for some romantic reason.........I think the truth lies somewhere in the middle of yours and Bromle's post....

Edited January 4, 2014 by classicrawker

[Mr. Dude]

Just because he wanted it to sell well doesn't strip it of artistic statement.

[Rovim]

If you step out of the conspiracy bubble it is obvious, there is no need for new music.

Chinese democracy was released to end the pop culture joke and to pay the record company. There was so little fate in the album sale that they made a deal with pre-sale at Best Buy to reclaim the expenses.

Axl and Guns don't need to release new music like new bands have to. They already have enough songs to tour in infinity. And people will pay to see them since they are a huge part of rock history and has massive hits.

Also there is little money to be made from releasing new music, so why bother, when you can bring in the dough touring?

A bit too cynical for me. I agree with most of what you're saying, but Chinese was clearly a labor of love, and I think Axl released it as an artistic statement first, and then all the other shit like paying the record company came later.

Axl told Marc he wanted to bury the old band and that NuGuns would be better then the old band so I guess you could say it was for artistic reasons but Marc also said Axl did not go solo because he wanted ChiDem to sell 20 million copies and anything less he would consider a failure which is why he released ChiDem as a GnR album............so let's not get too carried away that Axl did it for some romantic reason.............

But I wasn't talking about the name of the band at all. Just about Axl's motivation to release Chinese as in, the songs and the work as a whole. He wanted to record and release this music. And yes he wanted it to sell a fuckload too. But I think the art came first.

[dalsh327]

If you step out of the conspiracy bubble it is obvious, there is no need for new music.

Chinese democracy was released to end the pop culture joke and to pay the record company. There was so little faith in the album sale that they made a deal with pre-sale at Best Buy to reclaim the expenses.

Axl and Guns don't need to release new music like new bands have to. They already have enough songs to tour in infinity. And people will pay to see them since they are a huge part of rock history and has massive hits.

Also there is little money to be made from releasing new music, so why bother, when you can bring in the dough touring?

Prefectly summed-up and articulated. Bravo Sir.

Axl could just as easily do a "Road Show" where they could do a listening party to unreleased music. He could even do something at Universal Studios.

[Kush]

If Chinese Democracy was such a success, why isn't there any demand for a follow-up?

There is. You obviously chose to ignore the 7 or 8 members here who cry for more.

[IZZYISGNR]

cd was mediocre and any music produced by axl and his hired hands will be mediocre, nobody can change that, that's how it is. the only hope is reunion.

Edited January 4, 2014 by IZZYISGNR

[Damn_Smooth]

Doesn't stop Slash from releasing his less than mediocre bullshit every other year or so. At least Axl has the decency to wait until somebody wants him to release another one. Which is exactly when we'll see him release another one. Probably never.

[gunnari]

CD sold good cause of the NAME the old lineup created..End of story!

I don't think the next album will sell as good..

[classicrawker]

Just because he wanted it to sell well doesn't strip it of artistic statement.

read my post again mate I acknowledged the artistic point but I also think it was driven from Axl's desire to show everyone he could be successful without the old band hence hisexpressing his desire to Marc to bury the old band and be better than them......of course there was artistic desire there otherwise he would have tried to make another AFD which would have been better received and might have gotten more radio play......

[Apollo]

Just because he wanted it to sell well doesn't strip it of artistic statement.

read my post again mate I acknowledged the artistic point but I also think it was driven from Axl's desire to show everyone he could be successful without the old band hence hisexpressing his desire to Marc to bury the old band and be better than them......of course there was artistic desire there otherwise he would have tried to make another AFD which would have been better received and might have gotten more radio play......

And there is a quote from an old documentary where Axl says he can't image ever being a nostalgic act and it would be a nightmare to not create new music and move forward.

I think some people just get a little blinded when it comes to Axl Rose.

Between 1987 and 1991 no GnR fan was saying "Damn Axl, stop releasing so much music. Let's be a little more musically artistic and wait at least another 7-8 years before releasing another album. I really wish you wouldn't have put a double album out so soon after releasing the Lies EP and just a few years after Appetite. Quality over quantity, Axl."

But because Axl pretty much stops releasing music..........now that is praised and implied it should be the norm. And bands that put out music on a regular basis are bashed for not having musical integrity.

Take Axl Rose out of the picture and think about what these people are saying.

They want their favorite artists to NOT release music on a regular basis. And bands that do release music every couple of years are just doing it to make money and have no musical integrity.

It's insane.

Man, I miss the old days. When my favorite bands put out albums every couple of years. Did they do it for the money? Maybe, but who cares. At least I got new music from my favorite bands.

[DieselDaisy]

If you step out of the conspiracy bubble it is obvious, there is no need for new music.

Chinese democracy was released to end the pop culture joke and to pay the record company. There was so little fate in the album sale that they made a deal with pre-sale at Best Buy to reclaim the expenses.

Axl and Guns don't need to release new music like new bands have to. They already have enough songs to tour in infinity. And people will pay to see them since they are a huge part of rock history and has massive hits.

Also there is little money to be made from releasing new music, so why bother, when you can bring in the dough touring?

What a bleak outlook to have if you are correct. Are you saying Axl is only motivated by money? You may be correct, however it is an ugly and cowardly position to have - if it is true. Neil Young releases approx. one album per year as does Slash and Motorhead. Beyonce released a surprise album a few weeks ago. There are enough artists who still cling to the 'album format', whether it be through artistic inclination, or, because they still believe there is a few pounds and pence to be made from it or maybe because they are merely happy to provide a small section of their crowds, new music, regardless of financial reward. It seems to work for them. The last Motorhead got rave reviews, and (this is of course my own personal opinion) the last few releases of Young's have been some of the most interesting and significent of his long career.

Edited January 4, 2014 by DieselDaisy

[DieselDaisy]

I think some people just get a little blinded when it comes to Axl Rose.

Between 1987 and 1991 no GnR fan was saying "Damn Axl, stop releasing so much music. Let's be a little more musically artistic and wait at least another 7-8 years before releasing another album. I really wish you wouldn't have put a double album out so soon after releasing the Lies EP and just a few years after Appetite. Quality over quantity, Axl."

That is a good point. At no point between 1985-1991 did Guns N' Roses ever seem, desperately short of quality material. Having released an album as long and as ambitious as Use Your Illusion, a sort of, 'cleaning of the vaults' in a sense, there still remained - remains - stuff unrealised by the band such as 'Crash Diet' and 'Ain't Going Down.' Also, considering songs songs such as 'Coma' and 'Locomotive' were being written as late as 1990, it is a presumption to assume that this could not have continued upon the conclusion of the Illusion tour. Even with the demise of the old band and the reconstitution of the band in 1998-9, are we meant to believe that Axl suddenly ceased to be a prolific songwriter of quality after 1991?

Edited January 4, 2014 by DieselDaisy

[estrangedtwat]

CD was a complete and utter flop. The ripples from its massive belly flop continue to this day. It was blown out for $1.99 and when that didn't work giant unsold pallets of the CDs were shipped to DOLLAR TREE for chrissake. It's a joke. It's a cautionary tale about hubris and expectations and losing audience interest. It didn't sell "5 millions copies" worldwide. The record company has never released actual verifiable numbers of how many units were actually SOLD worldwide. That is a FACT. Don't believe me? Show me the numbers. Show me the info from Interscope. Give me a solid verifiable number. Didn't think so.

So why no release? Cause Axl doesn't have anything else to release. There is no new music.

Axl Rose is still a personality, despite everything; people are still captivated by him. Look at the fact that a little blurb about him renting an apartment was the trending topic for days on the net. IF there was any new music, or even a live album, outtakes, anything...ANYTHING....the label would release that shit in a second.

There is no new music because Axl doesn't want us to have any new music.

[John Bonham]

CD was a complete and utter flop. The ripples from its massive belly flop continue to this day. It was blown out for $1.99 and when that didn't work giant unsold pallets of the CDs were shipped to DOLLAR TREE for chrissake. It's a joke. It's a cautionary tale about hubris and expectations and losing audience interest.

This is actually true.

[DieselDaisy]

Yet Slash's last two albums do not sell as much as Chinese Democracy yet the guy is already working on a third one and seems content. I do not actually feel Neil Young albums do as well as CD and he releases one album every year. In other words, there is still enough in the market for these two artists to consider releasing albums.

I mean christ, CD is not the world's first flop! Tons of albums have flopped yet is this a reason to go, 'right, I am not releasing an album ever again?' Kiss had a string of flops in the early '80s yet they did not pack it in: they instead reinvented themselves as a hairrock act and focused on European markets.

[chokes]

CD was a complete and utter flop. The ripples from its massive belly flop continue to this day. It was blown out for $1.99 and when that didn't work giant unsold pallets of the CDs were shipped to DOLLAR TREE for chrissake. It's a joke. It's a cautionary tale about hubris and expectations and losing audience interest. It didn't sell "5 millions copies" worldwide. The record company has never released actual verifiable numbers of how many units were actually SOLD worldwide. That is a FACT. Don't believe me? Show me the numbers. Show me the info from Interscope. Give me a solid verifiable number. Didn't think so.

So why no release? Cause Axl doesn't have anything else to release. There is no new music.

Axl Rose is still a personality, despite everything; people are still captivated by him. Look at the fact that a little blurb about him renting an apartment was the trending topic for days on the net. IF there was any new music, or even a live album, outtakes, anything...ANYTHING....the label would release that shit in a second.

There is no new music because Axl doesn't want us to have any new music.

Just because a lie is repeated many times doesn't make it true. According to IFPI CD was 14th best selling album of 2008 despite being released just 5 weeks before the year ended. Numbers say it was a massive commercial success regardless how much you like it or not.

1. Coldplay: Viva La Vida or Death and All His Friends

2. AC/DC: Black Ice

3. Various Artists: Mamma Mia! The Movie Soundtrack

4. Duffy: Rockferry

5. Metallica: Death Magnetic

6. Leona Lewis: Spirit

7. Amy Winehouse: Back to Black

8. Various Aritsts: High School Musical 3: Senior Year

9. Lil Wayne: Tha Carter III

10. Rihanna: Good Girl Gone Bad

11. Madonna: Hard Candy

12. Beyonce: I Am...Sasha Fierce

13. P!ink: Funhouse

14. Guns N' Roses: Chinese Democracy

15: Britney Spears: Circus

16. Jack Johnson: Sleep Through The Static

17. Il Divo: The Promise

18. Taylor Swift: Fearless

19. Jonas Brothers: A Little Bit Longer

20. Various Artists: Camp Rock OST

Did it sell as well as it would have, or another album did in 2005, or 2002, or 1999...of course it didn't, music doesn't sell that much. Don't take my word for it, look at the soundscan data showing physical and digital album sales the past 15 years.

2012: 315.96 million

2011: 330.57 million

2010: 326.15 million

2009: 373.9 million

2008: 428.4 million

2007: 500.5 million

2006: 542.4 million

2005: 618.9 million

2004: 667 million

2003: 687 million

2002: 681 million

2001: 763 million

2000: 785 million

1999: 754.8 million

1998: 711 million

1997: 651.8 million

1996: 616.6 million

[smokingarthur]

CD was a complete and utter flop. The ripples from its massive belly flop continue to this day. It was blown out for $1.99 and when that didn't work giant unsold pallets of the CDs were shipped to DOLLAR TREE for chrissake. It's a joke. It's a cautionary tale about hubris and expectations and losing audience interest. It didn't sell "5 millions copies" worldwide. The record company has never released actual verifiable numbers of how many units were actually SOLD worldwide. That is a FACT. Don't believe me? Show me the numbers. Show me the info from Interscope. Give me a solid verifiable number. Didn't think so.

So why no release? Cause Axl doesn't have anything else to release. There is no new music.

Axl Rose is still a personality, despite everything; people are still captivated by him. Look at the fact that a little blurb about him renting an apartment was the trending topic for days on the net. IF there was any new music, or even a live album, outtakes, anything...ANYTHING....the label would release that shit in a second.

There is no new music because Axl doesn't want us to have any new music.

Just because a lie is repeated many times doesn't make it true. According to IFPI CD was 14th best selling album of 2008 despite being released just 5 weeks before the year ended. Numbers say it was a massive commercial success regardless how much you like it or not.

1. Coldplay: Viva La Vida or Death and All His Friends

2. AC/DC: Black Ice

3. Various Artists: Mamma Mia! The Movie Soundtrack

4. Duffy: Rockferry

5. Metallica: Death Magnetic

6. Leona Lewis: Spirit

7. Amy Winehouse: Back to Black

8. Various Aritsts: High School Musical 3: Senior Year

9. Lil Wayne: Tha Carter III

10. Rihanna: Good Girl Gone Bad

11. Madonna: Hard Candy

12. Beyonce: I Am...Sasha Fierce

13. P!ink: Funhouse

14. Guns N' Roses: Chinese Democracy

15: Britney Spears: Circus

16. Jack Johnson: Sleep Through The Static

17. Il Divo: The Promise

18. Taylor Swift: Fearless

19. Jonas Brothers: A Little Bit Longer

20. Various Artists: Camp Rock OST

Did it sell as well as it would have, or another album did in 2005, or 2002, or 1999...of course it didn't, music doesn't sell that much. Don't take my word for it, look at the soundscan data showing physical and digital album sales the past 15 years.

2012: 315.96 million

2011: 330.57 million

2010: 326.15 million

2009: 373.9 million

2008: 428.4 million

2007: 500.5 million

2006: 542.4 million

2005: 618.9 million

2004: 667 million

2003: 687 million

2002: 681 million

2001: 763 million

2000: 785 million

1999: 754.8 million

1998: 711 million

1997: 651.8 million

1996: 616.6 million

You can post all the esoteric statistics you want. It doesn't take a Monkeys uncle to comprehend under what conditions cd sold even this many copies. Best buy purchased how many? How many copies were sold at door buster prices? Best buy couldn't give that album away. It was a big fat flop.