Guns n' Roses "small catalogue" is a myth

[Rovim]

20 hours ago, Apollo said:

Rovim -

How much money do you think Axl and the boys have to make before they can go into the studio?

I don't think there's a specific figure they have to reach before they can get into a studio. I guess they just want to satisfy demand, tour pretty much everywhere, which makes sense. They got together, they want to cash in on it while there is still hunger for the comeback tour.

So I'm guessing at least a year, maybe late 2018, early 2019 they will switch to writing/recording mode. (Angus can delay Gn'R plans though)

Slash, Duff, and Fortus are trying some things in soundchecks and rehearsals. I think Axl will listen to what they'll want to play him. Even if he said he prefers to start from lyrics/melodies first, that doesn't mean all of it will be new.

It's possible Axl wrote some things that he'll want to use and Slash will update it with what he can bring to the table.

We have very little to go by. A few interviews here and there. Truth is anything can happen if someone comes up with a good idea. For example Slash can come up with an idea that will spark something in Axl and he'll turn it into a song which in turn will make him explore that direction more. He is very good at taking a good idea and making it great. Slash as well.

It may be obvious to most fans, but these are 3 Gunners that had perfect musical chemistry and an excited as fuck Fortus. After 20 years of not doing anything creative together I believe the will and potential to deliver is there to make a great Hard Rock album in the style of maybe UYI but a bit more modern. I think Axl will choose rasp, I think it will take a while, and I trust Axl to know what works and how to piece it all together.

Production still a question mark, Axl actually releasing it even if they manage to get to the finish line still a concern.

 

 

Edited January 14, 2017 by Rovim

[Apollo]

58 minutes ago, Padme said:

This post you made is the funniest thing ever! You are a veteran here. You have talked about wanting a new album like a million times. And you know it better than anyone

This post right here just contradict all you have said above 

Now it's a million times? Look at my post count. It's 14,500. That's less than 2% of what you just claimed. First it was 24/7 and every post. Now it's a million posts.  Do you want to have a legit discussion or are you just going to keep lying about What I've posted?

And how does asking Rovin a question contradict anything I've posted? Please explain. He literally just posted - on this page - that statement. So I asked him how much money he thought they needed. What in the world is a contradiction about that?

Honest question. Are you here to have a GnR discussion or are you purposely just being silly towards me?

[Rovim]

1 hour ago, Zurimor said:

You don't need that much money to record an album. Actually, with today's technolgy you could home record very well.

But you lose money if you don't strike while the iron is shit hot. It will be foolish not to just tour right now and cash in. They're making a lot of money. Why make an album now and lose the chance to make more money when they can do an album later, after making more money? it doesn't make sense financially, and they seem to care very much about the business side of the band.

Art comes next.

Edited January 13, 2017 by Rovim

[Rovim]

2 hours ago, Zurimor said:

with today's technolgy you could home record very well.

Not really. You can't home record a Guns album very well. You can't home record an Axl Rose solo album. The blip in Scraped, but Chinese does sound like the cost of making it was in the millions.

Besides, not how Axl does things. Even if it's possible, it's probably not gonna happen as long as Axl is the frontman of Guns N' Roses. At least I can't see it.

He's using multiple studios, the best equipment in the world, and you honestly believe he'll record in a home studio? I very much doubt that. I mean... he toured some more in 2006 to fund more Chinese recordings. Doesn't sound like his method at all.

Maybe if Axl builds an Electric Ginger Land, a state of the art recording studio with space for landing planes on the roof, but not like... a Bumble-esque one in the basement.

Edited January 13, 2017 by Rovim

[Padme]

22 minutes ago, Apollo said:

Now it's a million times? Look at my post count. It's 14,500. That's less than 2% of what you just claimed. First it was 24/7 and every post. Now it's a million posts.  Do you want to have a legit discussion or are you just going to keep lying about What I've posted?

And how does asking Rovin a question contradict anything I've posted? Please explain. He literally just posted - on this page - that statement. So I asked him how much money he thought they needed. What in the world is a contradiction about that?

Honest question. Are you here to have a GnR discussion or are you purposely just being silly towards me?

Jeez!!! I say a million in a figurative way. It never meant to be literal. People do it all the time. Don't be a smart ass 

And stop being in denial. You've been here for a long time. And everyone knows your favorite topic is to complain about the lack of music. We get it! But just going over the issue again and again it's not gonna get you any new album. You even get pissed off when other people say a new album is not their priority.

[alfierose]

Let's stay on topic please.

Whatever that originally was! 

[Zurimor]

28 minutes ago, Rovim said:

Not really. You can't home record a Guns album very well. You can't home record an Axl Rose solo album. The blip in Scraped, but Chinese does sound like the cost of making it was in the millions.

Besides, not how Axl does things. Even if it's possible, it's probably not gonna happen as long as Axl is the frontman of Guns N' Roses. At least I can't see it.

He's using multiple studios, the best equipment in the world, and you honestly believe he'll record in a home studio? I very much doubt that. I mean... he toured some more in 2006 to fund more Chinese recordings. Doesn't sound like his method at all.

Maybe if Axl builds an Electric Ginger Land, a state of the art recording studio with space for landing planes on the roof, but not like... a Bumble-esque one in the basement.

Listen to some hobby bands records on youtube, some of them sound awesome. It really doesn't need much money to create a good sound, most of it is done with software which you could use at home. Of course there are things like acoustic, but that's not the main reason to visit a studio anymore.

 

Edited January 13, 2017 by Zurimor

[Rovim]

20 minutes ago, Zurimor said:

Listen to some hobby bands records on youtube, some of them sound awesome. It really doesn't need much money to create a good sound, most of it is done with software which you could use at home. Of course there are things like acoustic, but that's not the main reason to visit a studio anymore.

A lot of shit can be done in home studios nowdays. But think about what money can buy you: best shit on the market, top crew, best studios to record in, you don't like it, you just record someplace else.

You don't want to record the whole album in one place? no problem! you record in 10 different studios. And it sounds different as well. Even a small difference is a difference and some improvements can only be bought by a lot of money and the hiring of a lot of employees.

Great sounding music could come from a home studio, sure. But if you've already got the money and know what it's like to record in top studios with top equipment... why in the hell would you want to go back? and Axl doesn't seem to be the type of musician that will record a Guns album in a home studio.

It's gotta be something that would not stand in his way so to speak. All the problems money can solve could be erased so why not.

Edited January 13, 2017 by Rovim

[Zurimor]

17 minutes ago, Rovim said:

A lot of shit can be done in home studios nowdays. But think about what money can buy you: best shit on the market, top crew, best studios to record in, you don't like it, you just record someplace else.

You don't want to record the whole album in one place? no problem! you just record in 10 different studios. And it sounds different as well. Even a small difference is a difference and some improvements can only be bought by a lot of money and the hiring of a lot of employees.

Great sounding music could come from a home studio, sure. But if you've already got the money and know what it's like to record in top studios with top equipment... why in the hell would you want to do that? and Axl doesn't seem to be the type of musician that will record a Guns album in a home studio.

It's gotta be something that would not stand in his way so to speak. All the problems money can solve could be erased so why not. In scope it's gotta be monumental. King Dick studios.

The whole point is, they don't need to tour to get money to get into full studio mode, it's not that expensive, even if you visit a top studio.

Standard Demo

$495

Acoustic Guitar, Electric Guitar, Bass, Drums.

Includes up to 3 hours of studio time to sing and mix, 3 free CDs upon request, and an email with full quality WAV file mixes. 

 

"Limited Pressing Session Package

$3,400

This option allows you to sell your songs (up to 10,000 copies) for up to 5 songs.

3 Hour Limited Pressing Recording Session with 6 Piece Band.

Up to 15 hours of Studio Time included for vocals and mixing.  Additional studio time, if needed,  is $90 per hour (including engineer).

 

Master Session Package

Call For Price – 3 Hour Master Recording Session with 6 Piece Band.

Up to 15 hours of Studio Time included for vocals and mixing.  Additional studio time, if needed,  is $110 per hour (including engineer).

This option allows for unlimited number of units sold."

 

http://www.beairdmusicgroup.com/prices/

 

Those prices are from a studio in Nashville, can't imagine it to get much more expensive than that.

 

For why you would want to do that, there are plenty of reasons. It sounds more down to earth, more vivid, it doesn't sound overproduced, you feel more comfortable playing in your common place...

It's not about if Axl would do that, but even if he wouldn't, he easily had the money to visit a studio before the tour began if he'd wanted to, it's not like he's poor.

 

 

 

Edited January 13, 2017 by Zurimor

[Rovim]

4 minutes ago, Zurimor said:

The whole point is, they don't need to tour to get money to get into full studio mode, it's not that expensive, even if you visit a top studio.

 

"Limited Pressing Session Package

$3,400

This option allows you to sell your songs (up to 10,000 copies) for up to 5 songs.

3 Hour Limited Pressing Recording Session with 6 Piece Band.

Up to 15 hours of Studio Time included for vocals and mixing.  Additional studio time, if needed,  is $90 per hour (including engineer).

 

Master Session Package

Call For Price – 3 Hour Master Recording Session with 6 Piece Band.

Up to 15 hours of Studio Time included for vocals and mixing.  Additional studio time, if needed,  is $110 per hour (including engineer).

This option allows for unlimited number of units sold."

 

http://www.beairdmusicgroup.com/prices/

 

Those prices are from a studio in Nashville, can't imagine it to get much more expensive than that.

 

For why you would want to do that, there are plenty of reasons. It sounds more down to earth, more vivid, it doesn't sound overproduced, you feel more comfortable playing in your common place...

It's not about if Axl would do that, but even if he wouldn't, he easily had the money to visit a studio before the tour began if he'd wanted to, it's not like he's poor.

 

 

 

Well... we're talking about a Guns album and Axl is in charge so I think it is relevant to take into consideration how he approached it in the past. He never cared about down to earth. It doesn't sound overproduced? I don't think that's his main priority.

And I didn't mean they're touring cause he's too poor to fund it or that he would even need to fund it himself. They're making money cause they can (except Slash, he needs to pay a whore) and it's a golden opportunity right now. The timing is perfect. Demand won't stay like this forever. They can make an album later.

Plus you know... it's not accurate to say everything that can be done in a state of the art recording studio can be replicated in a home studio, or just in one studio.

Many ways to capture sound, many cool studios you can go in for the acoustics or just the way it sounds as a whole with the crew and equipment they've set up in that specific place. So you can go in to do just a couple of tracks and then move on to a different place.

There is a freedom that comes with this approach. Organic is not the only way to go and not every musician's goal is to make it the most natural it can be. Some just want to make it sound huge for example. Epic.

[DieselDaisy]

How much does a Pitman bleep or fart cost?

[BorderlineCrazy]

3 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

How much does a Pitman bleep or fart cost?

It doesn't matter because Axl just tells him "I'll pay ya' later".

[Zurimor]

13 minutes ago, Rovim said:

 Some just want to make it sound huge for example. Epic.

The other points you mentioned, okay, that's about personal preferences, but you don't need a studio for an epic album nowdays.

You can replicate a lot at home, some software allows you to replicate the sound of distinct places, you have tons of features available to adjust/ change the sound of an instrument or add effects to it. There are also tons of midi files on the web, sure you have to pay for them, but I dare to say you can replicate pretty much everything at home nowadays.

It's about personal preference, that's fine.

Edited January 13, 2017 by Zurimor

[DieselDaisy]

My favourite Pitman bleep is on Riad which is an exceptionally bad song in itself but this one overdub seems so extraordinarily pointless. It goes, ''bleep-bleep-bleep-bleep...'' extremely fast. Rose probably spent a million quid on this one bleep fx.

[Rovim]

18 minutes ago, Zurimor said:

The other points you mentioned, okay, that's about presonal preferences, but you don't need a studio for an epic album nowdays.

You can replicate a lot at home, some software allows you to replicate the sound of distinct places, you have tons of features available to adjust/ change the sound of an instrument or add effects to it. There are also tons of midi files on the web, sure you have to pay for them, but I dare to say you can replicate pretty much everything at home nowadays.

It's about personal preference, that's fine.

Can't replicate the real thing though. You can do  a ton of shit to make it sound huge and tweak the fuck out of it with software, but you do that anyway and on top of it, if you have the badget, you take advantage of multiple studios or really a good one with a stellar reputation and that's ideal I think.

No one said you have to do all of it to make it happen, to capture magic. But it could help. Especially for a band like Guns N' Roses where bigger was often better or considered ideal by Axl, and sometimes not just by him.

You keep saying it's about personal preference, but for Guns when did they ever choose to record in a way that even sounds remotely as humble as what you're suggesting? there are advantages to making it sparse like Jack White likes to do sometimes for example. But not for Axl, not for Guns.

And if you think expensive equipment and expensive studios are not that different compared to home studios and both options can get you the same results or it's only marginally different than I respectfully disagree.

 

Edited January 13, 2017 by Rovim

[Zurimor]

6 minutes ago, Rovim said:

Can't replicate the real thing though. You can do  a ton of shit to make it sound huge and tweak the fuck out of it with software, but you do that anyway and on top of it, if you have the badget, you take advantage of multiple studios or really a good one with a stellar reputation and that's ideal I think.

No one said you have to do all of it to make it happen, to capture magic. But it could help. Especially for a band like Guns N' Roses where bigger was often better or considered ideal by Axl, and sometimes not just by him.

You keep saying it's about personal preference, but for Guns when did they ever choose to record on something that even sounds remotely as humble as what you're suggesting? there are advantages to making it sparse like Jack White likes to do sometimes for example. But not for Axl, not for Guns.

And if you think expensive equipment and expensive studios are not that different compared to home studios and both options can get you the same results or it's only marginally different than I respectfully disagree.

 

I think you have no idea of what you can achieve with some good music software and not too bad equipment....

Edited January 13, 2017 by Zurimor

[Rovim]

41 minutes ago, Zurimor said:

I think you have no idea of what you can achieve with some good music software and not too bad equipment....

Maybe. I just think you can achieve a lot with a good recording software in addition to every piece of vintage/state of the art equipment you can possibly imagine at your disposal hiring pros to engineer and produce your shit while it's all being captured in cherry picked studios that have their own unique sound. When space and money to record are not an issue.

You know... kinda like how Axl approached it. And countless others.

Edited January 13, 2017 by Rovim

[Zurimor]

I'm out of this.

It's nothing bad to do stuff because of personal preferences, it's fine, everyone should do that! I don't know why you keep arguing with me.

 

Edited January 13, 2017 by Zurimor

[-W.A.R-]

*doesn't want to milk fans for money by releasing new music*

*charges $300 a ticket to play 30 year old songs*

some logic there  

[wasted]

Firstly I don't think it's my place to tell people what they do. I want CD II or any new material as much as the next guy. It's not something I can control and crying about it won't help. 

But I try to understand why that doesn't happen. I look at what happened to GNR. I look at the cds and impact they had. The huge expectations vs. Rebuilding the band vs the feud/media. 

I guess it could just be Axl hates his fans but I doubt that. But he might put his well being ahead of ours. 

I guess it's partly about maintaining the profile of GNR. But also with being such a huge band they could tour off their success for 8 years without releasing an album. 

I guess I personally didn't want to see GNR release a bad album. They had that perfect start, they had that danger and mystique. So I'm kind of happy for 1 cd in the 00s which is as strong as the best of UYI in my opinion. 

If they have CD II just sitting there, I'd like to hear it but I understand there are other factors business and artistic. 

I think what we are saying is we will all be happy if Axl puts out more material. We will support GNR almost no matter what. So don't worry about that. 

But maybe when Axl was isolated without Slash/Duff and basically being blamed for ruining GNR and any release would be rejected because it's "not GNR", maybe that did make him think twice about releasing stuff. Maybe the reception CD released proved him right really. They want Slash, but I can't give them that. Like Axl said it's more about survival. 

I'm not sure that is praising Axl really. 

Edited January 14, 2017 by wasted

[wasted]

3 hours ago, -W.A.R- said:

*doesn't want to milk fans for money by releasing new music*

*charges $300 a ticket to play 30 year old songs*

some logic there  

The shows are worth $300. It's what the fans have wanted. 

It's vastly different from putting out mediocre hard rock copies of old GNR material without Slash. 

I like that they tried to make a real GNR record with Finck and Bucket. The intentions were right. 

I guess the difference is knowingly releasing a bad album to please the fans (which might back fire). And doing great shows and getting paid what you can. 

Edited January 14, 2017 by wasted

[wasted]

7 hours ago, Rovim said:

But you lose money if you don't strike while the iron is shit hot. It will be foolish not to just tour right now and cash in. They're making a lot of money. Why make an album now and lose the chance to make more money when they can do an album later, after making more money? it doesn't make sense financially, and they seem to care very much about the business side of the band.

Art comes next.

I think it's more about making a great record. I respect that they want to take their time. Don't rush release something because you can't go back and re do it. 

I think they will find a way to do it. 

[wasted]

Technical difficulties.

Edited January 14, 2017 by wasted

[Free Bird]

5 hours ago, wasted said:

Firstly I don't think it's my place to tell people what they do. I want CD II or any new material as much as the next guy. It's not something I can control and crying about it won't help. 

But I try to understand why that doesn't happen. I look at what happened to GNR. I look at the cds and impact they had. The huge expectations vs. Rebuilding the band vs the feud/media. 

I guess it could just be Axl hates his fans but I doubt that. But he might put his well being ahead of ours. 

I guess it's partly about maintaining the profile of GNR. But also with being such a huge band they could tour off their success for 8 years without releasing an album. 

I guess I personally didn't want to see GNR release a bad album. They had that perfect start, they had that danger and mystique. So I'm kind of happy for 1 cd in the 00s which is as strong as the best of UYI in my opinion. 

If they have CD II just sitting there, I'd like to hear it but I understand there are other factors business and artistic. 

I think what we are saying is we will all be happy if Axl puts out more material. We will support GNR almost no matter what. So don't worry about that. 

But maybe when Axl was isolated without Slash/Duff and basically being blamed for ruining GNR and any release would be rejected because it's "not GNR", maybe that did make him think twice about releasing stuff. Maybe the reception CD released proved him right really. They want Slash, but I can't give them that. Like Axl said it's more about survival. 

I'm not sure that is praising Axl really. 

Aren't you one of those who claimed Axl IS Guns N' Roses?

If that's true what you have posted, wouldn't that prove you wrong? You and everybody who's claiming Axl alone is GNR? 

That's my point. A band like GNR can't be kept running without 4/5 of their members.

Hell, we don't even know if it's possible with 3/5 back together.

[DieselDaisy]

Other bands, when they release albums at a good rate, do not consciously set out to make ''bad albums''. They, I suspect, are as keen to make a great album and are as perfectionist about proceedings as Axl has ever been (if that is even true, Axl being a perfectionist and caring about not releasing a bad album). You are trying to make out that Guns are somehow exceptional and deserve an exceptional criteria with which to judge them.