Jump to content

Is it worth it for GNR to release new music?


Recommended Posts

Saw this on an MJ board I visit, and thought you could apply it pretty much word for word to GNR.

What do you reckon?

Original thread: http://mymjjforum.boards.net/thread/114/worth-legendary-artists-release-albums

Quote

 

Hear me out. Sometimes I feel short changed as an MJ fan, that his career and life was cut short and I can't help but wonder what else he could've gone onto create. And then I think of artists like Prince, Madonna and Janet -- Michael's contemporaries - and I think of their output over the last decade. Did anything they released have the same kind of impact or power of their classic 80s/90s works? Undoubtedly the answer is a resounding no.

So I guess the question is, do albums like MDNA, Rebel Heart, Discipline, Unbreakable, Art Official Age and PlectrumElectrum add anything to these artists canon of work? Even putting aside commercial and cultural impact, just strictly speaking in terms of creativity, are their back catalogues any the richer for the existence of these albums?

I've lost count of the amount of times a legendary artist or band has put out a new album only for fans to bemoan that it pales in comparison to their earlier works. Practically every artist who has enjoyed longevity in their career has faced these kind of comments from their audience and critics. Look at Invincible for example.

So is it better to burn out than to fade away? Would you like MJ to have continued making albums that weren't necessarily up to the impossible standards he set for himself back in his creative and commercial peak? Is something better than nothing? Or is it better not to have diluted the quality of his back catalogue with underpar releases?

This thread isn't strictly about MJ, more legendary artists in general. I'd be curious to hear your thoughts.
 

 

 

Edited by Towelie
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a big Jacko fan but he could've vanished after...shit, he could've vanished early on and his legacy was set in stone, he could've vanished after Thriller and still been thought of as the bollocks...and he made some top drawer shit, very top drawer shit after that, I don't think you can reasonably look at a career like Jackos and feel short changed.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If GNR plan on keepin the stadiums full they better release some before it gets to the point of playin fuckin weddings again. Cause it may take 5 or 6 years but the buzz of a reunion will be over.
After that whats going to be their secret weapons to fill the stadiums again? Izzy "Who?" Stradlin? As much as important the guy is, Izzy doesnt help filling stadiums. 

And about music... It depends on the artist or band, AC/DC and Black Sabbath for exemple, their last efforts were great and fans gave em a warm welcome. 

Edited by default_
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's always worth releasing music as long as you have an audience. There will always be people that prefer your later work, so even if you're not pleasing the majority of your fans, you will make some people happy... subjectivity is great.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Short answer is yes.. Music is a voice or a language, you should always keep making music, screw the commercial appeal and legacy.

Especially for a band like GNR, fans will always come around to listen to your music. Will it sell as well or make an impact like past records? No, but that's the way the industry works now.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way i see it is bands, boxers, football players, film directors, artists, they all have a prime and while you're in that prime you gotta exploit it.  Do whatever you can do to hold the fuckin' formula together and move it forward, particularly in a band where you got a bunch of personalities to cater to.  And I don't mean exploit for money, I mean for all the mileage you can get out of your creative output.  GnR unfortunately didn't do that. 

Edited by Len Cnut
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is never better to burn out, or stop producing music early on.  It is always better to keep releasing music for as long as the artist is happy and excited to do so. 

Fans like choice.  So what if an artist releases some sub-par music later in their career, some fans will buy this, some won't.  Music is subjective anyway, and for every fan who thinks an album is 'not up to scratch' another will think it's the 'best thing ever.'  I mean, look at how UYI divides us fans.  Some of us think the albums are full of filler, some of us think it's the best thing ever.  Many think CD should never have seen the light of day; I think it's amazing and am grateful to Axl for its existence.

Artists should never do what Guns did: break up early, don't speak to each other for 20 years, then get back together in their twilight, when time is against them, and I guess I'm speaking specifically of Axl.  Time is definitely against his ability to keeping singing live.  He has effectively wasted his prime years.  It's really sad.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, AncientEvil80 said:

When youth and hunger/anger are no longer there, especially in this genre of music, the quality of the creative production tends to fade and be vastly inferior.

Well, yeah, their youth is gone... it's wasted on the young, right? But you can still be angry no matter what age you are. There are so many artists that released great music in their 40s, 50s or even later. You can be too old for a lot of things, but why should anyone be too old for music? As long as you can play your instrument.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, default_ said:

If GNR plan on keepin the stadiums full they better release some before it gets to the point of playin fuckin weddings again. Cause it may take 5 or 6 years but the buzz of a reunion will be over.

After that whats going to be their secret weapons to fill the stadiums again? Izzy "Who?" Stradlin? 

As much as important the guy is, Izzy doesnt help filling stadiums. 

And about music... It depends on the artist or band, AC/DC and Black Sabbath for exemple, their last efforts were great and fans gave em a warm welcome. 

''The Farewell Tour'' line. You can spin a farewell tour for ten years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've not listened to em without Moon.  Not a single song, except one called Real Good Lookin' Boy which came out a lot after the Kenny Jones era.  In fact I think it was after even Entwhistles death.  Not cuz of some sort of righteous indignation regarding cash grabs, I just can't bring myself to fuckin' do it, in the same way I've never watched Ali vs Berbick properly, it's just emotionally troubling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

I've not listened to em without Moon.  Not a single song, except one called Real Good Lookin' Boy which came out a lot after the Kenny Jones era.  In fact I think it was after even Entwhistles death.  Not cuz of some sort of righteous indignation regarding cash grabs, I just can't bring myself to fuckin' do it, in the same way I've never watched Ali vs Berbick properly, it's just emotionally troubling.

Eminence Front is a good song

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

I've watched both (Ali v) Berbick and Holmes. What sort of idiot allowed Ali in the ring for those?

Ive seen Holmes, seen bits and pieces of Berbick.  As for who allowed him in, mate, if there were money in it we'd see retard wrestling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's worth making a new album. Yeah the money is in touring and if there's a new album to promote it'll keep people coming back for more shows and will also mean you will be seeing a certain percentage of songs on the show being played by the people who wrote the songs ( if the line up stays the same ). 

Will the album come close to AFD ? No , UYI 's ? Maybe. There's a saying in football " your only as good as your last game " well if the same applies to bands and albums then TSI or CD ( depending how you view Guns post 96) is that last effort and would be a poor way to end a legacy if nothing got realesed. IMO an album by this line up would be a major improvement over those 2 albums and allow the band to go out on a bit of a high. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, EvanG said:

Well, yeah, their youth is gone... it's wasted on the young, right? But you can still be angry no matter what age you are. There are so many artists that released great music in their 40s, 50s or even later. You can be too old for a lot of things, but why should anyone be too old for music? As long as you can play your instrument.

I didn't say they're too old for music. I meant without a combination of different factors (youth, hunger, anger etc), the creativity lacks quality. Usually. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, AncientEvil80 said:

I didn't say they're too old for music. I meant without a combination of different factors (youth, hunger, anger etc), the creativity lacks quality. Usually. 

Lack of hunger and ambition, yeah, that's a killer for sure.  But the other factors?  You don't have to be angry to produce kickass music.  Ambitious, excited, motivated.  Those factors wouldn't hurt.  

If anything, I would expect new music from these guys to be better because they've all honed their skills, improved their knowledge of the writing and recording process, are more aware of the creative process and what works, what doesn't.  They've all worked with other artists now and learned from them.  The wisdom and experienced gained over 30 years of making music should prove an advantage.

Edited by MyPrettyTiedUpMichelle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course they should release new music. Is it "worth it" in that they'd make as much money as just touring AFD for the thousandth time? Probably not. But it's "worth it" if they don't want to go back to smaller venues and less mainstream appeal - they can't keep playing stadiums each year because "OMG Axel and Sluff are on stage!!1?!1?!"

An album, even if it's not as widely acclaimed as AFD or UYI, would still be a good way to keep them on top of the rock world. Even just a single would buy them a fair amount of time IMO - rock radio stations would jizz themselves if they could play a new GNR song with Axl and Slash on it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they can make good music and release it in less than a year, then they should.

If they are just going to release some garbage for the hell of it then no.

If they are going to take until Axl is on Medicare to release it then no.

Release something good in 2018 so we can have what we should have had in 1995 then do a last worldwide stadium tour and retire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...