Forbes - 4 Reasons a New GNR Album Would be a Success

[TheGeneral]

I think the song "Chinese Democracy" would have fitted Velvet Revolver. I could imagine Scotts voice on it.

I also think they matured a bit and that Axl is ready to compromise with Slash and the other way around. You can make old fashioned RnR and also newer stuff. Combine it. Doesn't matter if it's 5 songs Axls way and 5 songs Slashs way and 4 songs they did together.

I actually don't think they should do a "back to the roots" AFD album. Does anybody remember Aerosmith's "back to the roots" album "Music from another Dimension"? It was okay, but the songs just didn't feel right. Musicians should evolve, that's why I think mixing Axl's 'vision' and Slash's 'old school rock' for all the songs could make one of the best rock albums ever. Modern, yet classic.

[LlamaRenegade]

33 minutes ago, TheGeneral said:

I think the song "Chinese Democracy" would have fitted Velvet Revolver. I could imagine Scotts voice on it.

I also think they matured a bit and that Axl is ready to compromise with Slash and the other way around. You can make old fashioned RnR and also newer stuff. Combine it. Doesn't matter if it's 5 songs Axls way and 5 songs Slashs way and 4 songs they did together.

I actually don't think they should do a "back to the roots" AFD album. Does anybody remember Aerosmith's "back to the roots" album "Music from another Dimension"? It was okay, but the songs just didn't feel right. Musicians should evolve, that's why I think mixing Axl's 'vision' and Slash's 'old school rock' for all the songs could make one of the best rock albums ever. Modern, yet classic.

I feel like if they did a back to the roots album it would be too bland and it wouldn't be progressing the band's sound. I think they should make an album closer to the UYI's.

[Rovim]

22 hours ago, ApacheChief42 said:

I feel like if they did a back to the roots album it would be too bland and it wouldn't be progressing the band's sound. I think they should make an album closer to the UYI's.

yeah, as unbalanced the uyi were in some ways, when it came to a lot of the tunes they did achieve a perfect balance. axl and slash can still basically do the grand epic hard rock thing and with duff it would still sound very gn'r even if the starting point will be cd ll material or lyrics and melodies axl brought it. there will still probably be room left for slash to bring more riff oriented material.

[lame ass security]

20 hours ago, IncitingChaos said:

I think Axl understands the financial gain they could have if they make a new album but also I think the studio is where many of the demons from Axl and Slash’s feud would reappear. 

So possibly for Axl he’s thinking let’s tour this Bc it works for us and hold off on new music until later when we could possibly handle a rift in the studio. 

But as easy as they’ve made this new relationship work it could all unravel in seconds over creative differences.

This, that's a tremendous point.

[Old_school_gnr_fan]

20 hours ago, IncitingChaos said:

Another thing is everyone seems to forget how fragile Axl and Slash’s relationship is. So far everything Axl has said about Slash has been said with caution. He’s said everyone is getting along currently, but he’s said he still finds Slash’s book to have lies and has called him out on it. 

Axl hasn’t been overly optimistic on Slash yet, he was touched that he “came to the CD songs” but even on prospects of a new album said “if they want to be part of it” so all these years of hate and anger towards Slash has left him wary of accepting this new relationship whole heartedly. 

Again I think the studio is a dangerous place for these two to spend time. What Axl thinks gnr should be and what Slash thinks gnr should be are completely different things.

I don't think there's any animosity between Axl and Slash anymore. How could there be, when it was Axl who called Slash to extend the olive branch so the reunion tour could take place? I'd go so far as to say Axl was willing to divide ownership of the GN'R name to get Slash and Duff back, though who knows if that was in any negotiations.

At 56 and 53, respectively, Axl and Slash know each other well enough to determine what will have to happen so a new Guns N' Roses record can come to fruition. Slash works fast; Axl not so much. They'll have to meet each other in the middle. At one time, before the implosion in the mid 90's, the band was releasing material at a somewhat rapid pace. They had the 'Live Like A Suicide' EP in 1986, 'Appetite' in 1987, 'GN'R Lies' in 1988, and were working on a new album for 1989, which then became two albums and didn't appear until '91. However, they still released the studio versions of "Knockin' On Heaven's Door" and "Civil War" (with Adler on drums for both) in 1990. If everyone's on the same page , I think the band can write, record, and have a new album out within 9-12 months.

Edited July 28, 2018 by Old_school_gnr_fan
add more text

[IncitingChaos]

2 minutes ago, Old_school_gnr_fan said:

I don't think there's any animosity between Axl and Slash anymore. How could there be, when it was Axl who called Slash to extend the olive branch so the reunion tour could take place? I'd go so far as to say Axl was willing to divide ownership of the GN'R name to get Slash and Duff back.

At 56 and 53, respectively, Axl and Slash know each other well enough to determine what will have to happen so a new Guns N' Roses record can come to fruition. Slash works fast; Axl not so much. They'll have to meet each other in the middle. At one time, before the implosion in the mid 90's, the band was releasing material at a somewhat rapid pace. They had the 'Live Like A Suicide' EP in 1986, 'Appetite' in 1987, 'GN'R Lies' in 1988, and were working on a new album for 1989, which then became two albums and didn't appear until '91. However, they still released the studio versions of "Knockin' On Heaven's Door" and "Civil War" (with Adler on drums for both) in 1990. If everyone's on the same page , I think the band can write, record, and have a new album out within 9-12 months.

I think Axl is still bitter that Slash has in his mind been able to paint the public perception of Axl as the bad guy. 

However I have this theory that Axl heard about Slash’s divorce and ultimately that’s what led him to the reunion. I don’t think it had anything to do with promoters presenting an offer Bc they wouldn’t be the first. I think Axl threw out the ultimate olive branch by bringing Slash back and not allowing Perla to take everything from him. Axl essentially saw the ACDC situation similar in that he heard about Brian and says his first thought was on the legal ramifications of canceling a tour and how costly it is, so Axl again came to the rescue...sorry this part is 99% probably not true but would be a cool story. 

As far as Axl relinquishing any control to meet in the middle...I’m not seeing it. It’s possible! Just like my theory but man..that would be the ultimate Axl is a changed man story. 

[gavgnr]

Just release some digital stuff from the Chinese Era until (and if?)the reunited Guns come up with a new album.

 

eveyone’s a winner 

 

[DieselDaisy]

Slash and Duff were signed on for the NITL shows, and everything else is irrelevant.

This ''reunion'' was not a resumption of normal band relations (1985-93 vintage). Slash and Duff basically just signed-off to perform those shows. Why would anyone expect an album from such a clear cut agreement? 

It is how things operate now. This is the ''team brazil way''. Guns are a brand. They are no longer a proper band. 

[donny]

22 minutes ago, gavgnr said:

Just release some digital stuff from the Chinese Era until (and if?)the reunited Guns come up with a new album.

 

eveyone’s a winner 

 

sounds logical but there is probably a mass of red tape in the way.

some bands have put new albums online for free download and never released them in a physical form. 

who owns CD2 ? Axl himself said that 14 million didn't pay for CD1 but 3 albums so who owns CD2 and CD3 if that was ever finished ? 

Axl for all we know might want to put CD2 online but the record label that funded it are saying no.

with a wall of silence we can only speculate. but i don't think Axl or TB are responsible for the lack of new music.

[Blackstar]

2 hours ago, IncitingChaos said:

I think Axl is still bitter that Slash has in his mind been able to paint the public perception of Axl as the bad guy. 

However I have this theory that Axl heard about Slash’s divorce and ultimately that’s what led him to the reunion. I don’t think it had anything to do with promoters presenting an offer Bc they wouldn’t be the first. I think Axl threw out the ultimate olive branch by bringing Slash back and not allowing Perla to take everything from him. Axl essentially saw the ACDC situation similar in that he heard about Brian and says his first thought was on the legal ramifications of canceling a tour and how costly it is, so Axl again came to the rescue...sorry this part is 99% probably not true but would be a cool story. 

As far as Axl relinquishing any control to meet in the middle...I’m not seeing it. It’s possible! Just like my theory but man..that would be the ultimate Axl is a changed man story. 

They have certainly discussed the past. We don't know what has been said in these discussions (and probably we never will). From various bits and pieces I gather that they're both blaming a lot on third parties, Doug Goldstein in particular, that "got in the middle" and caused the miscommunication and the "misunderstandings". They are on the same page about this now and it's convenient for both of them.

I don't think Axl would give up the rights to the name either, but other than that he doesn't have full control anyway. They have a business partnership since 1992 that never ceased to exist.

About your theory: If Slash's divorce was 10 years ago, would Axl call him? I don't think so, it just probably would be "I told you so"/"you made your bed". I think the divorce was a factor, but there were other factors too.

 

Edited July 29, 2018 by Blackstar

[Blackstar]

15 minutes ago, donny said:

sounds logical but there is probably a mass of red tape in the way.

some bands have put new albums online for free download and never released them in a physical form. 

who owns CD2 ? Axl himself said that 14 million didn't pay for CD1 but 3 albums so who owns CD2 and CD3 if that was ever finished ? 

Axl for all we know might want to put CD2 online but the record label that funded it are saying no.

with a wall of silence we can only speculate. but i don't think Axl or TB are responsible for the lack of new music.

With the money Axl has made from the tour, maybe he can buy the rights to the unreleased songs from the label. The label probably is not interested in releasing this stuff anyway.

The question is if he thinks it's worth doing it.

[donny]

4 minutes ago, Blackstar said:

With the money Axl has made from the tour, maybe he can buy the rights to the unreleased songs from the label. The label probably is not interested in releasing this stuff anyway.

The question is if he thinks it's worth doing it.

two key parts to that "he can buy the rights" he probably thinks why the fuck should i ? i've gone to the studio and done my job. if the fans are not happy about no new music they can vent their anger at the label.

and "the label is probably not interested" that begs the question, what really happened in 2010 ? if the rumours are true and CD2 was handed in and rejected then that leads back to my original point. Axl and TB are not responsible for lack of new music.

i think us forum members have been pointing our anger at the wrong person/people for a long time. Axls silence on the matter has obviously not helped himself or TB in any way whatsoever. 

time someone spoke up. 

[Azifwekare]

1 hour ago, donny said:

sounds logical but there is probably a mass of red tape in the way.

some bands have put new albums online for free download and never released them in a physical form. 

who owns CD2 ? Axl himself said that 14 million didn't pay for CD1 but 3 albums so who owns CD2 and CD3 if that was ever finished ? 

Axl for all we know might want to put CD2 online but the record label that funded it are saying no.

with a wall of silence we can only speculate. but i don't think Axl or TB are responsible for the lack of new music.

I've always gone with this theory, but if that's the case, Universal must be run by a bunch of dumbasses. If you spend 14 mil on 3 albums, why the hell would you only release 1? It would be easy profit when they've got a pair of extra albums done and ready to go, especially nowadays when you can just slap it on Spotify without having to worry about manufacturing costs etc.

Edited July 29, 2018 by Azifwekare

[donny]

3 minutes ago, Azifwekare said:

I've always gone with this theory, but if that's the case, Universal must be run by a bunch of dumbasses. If you spend 14 mil on 3 albums, why the hell would you only release 1? It would be easy profit when all you've got a pair of extra albums done and ready to go, especially nowadays when you can just slap it on Spotify without having to worry about manufacturing costs etc.

i think universal is a big company, very big. a lot of people in charge. hand an album in one day and a long haired manager will rock out to it and want it released. hand an album in the following day and it will fall in the hands of an old grey haired demis roussos fan that thinks "we cant subject the kids to this".

i hope after seeing a half billion dollar tour the record label want that old CD2 released. thats if the rumour is true. 

[Gunsdrummer63]

4 hours ago, IncitingChaos said:

I think Axl is still bitter that Slash has in his mind been able to paint the public perception of Axl as the bad guy. 

However I have this theory that Axl heard about Slash’s divorce and ultimately that’s what led him to the reunion. I don’t think it had anything to do with promoters presenting an offer Bc they wouldn’t be the first. I think Axl threw out the ultimate olive branch by bringing Slash back and not allowing Perla to take everything from him. Axl essentially saw the ACDC situation similar in that he heard about Brian and says his first thought was on the legal ramifications of canceling a tour and how costly it is, so Axl again came to the rescue...sorry this part is 99% probably not true but would be a cool story. 

As far as Axl relinquishing any control to meet in the middle...I’m not seeing it. It’s possible! Just like my theory but man..that would be the ultimate Axl is a changed man story. 

I agree with the Perla part. The divorce played a huge part in the reunion. I think a new Axl/DC album would  rejuvenate the chance for a GNR album. I’m still convinced a new album would include Izzy in someway shape or form. 

[Ace Nova]

2 hours ago, donny said:

sounds logical but there is probably a mass of red tape in the way.

some bands have put new albums online for free download and never released them in a physical form. 

who owns CD2 ? Axl himself said that 14 million didn't pay for CD1 but 3 albums so who owns CD2 and CD3 if that was ever finished ? 

Axl for all we know might want to put CD2 online but the record label that funded it are saying no.

with a wall of silence we can only speculate. but i don't think Axl or TB are responsible for the lack of new music.

Nah.  I vaguely remember Axl saying something along the lines that there wasn't "3 full albums" worth of material after Sebastian Bach said he thought there was....or something along those lines. 

 And let's say there's enough for a CD II, I GUARANTEE it's nowhere near finished because if it was, the record label would be the ones pushing it out since they have the most to gain with basically nothing to lose.

 

[donny]

3 minutes ago, Kasanova King said:

Nah.  I vaguely remember Axl saying something along the lines that there wasn't "3 full albums" worth of material after Sebastian Bach said he thought there was....or something along those lines. 

 And let's say there's enough for a CD II, I GUARANTEE it's nowhere near finished because if it was, the record label would be the ones pushing it out since they have the most to gain with basically nothing to lose.

 

so you are basically saying the 2010 rejection is not true ? 

or maybe 2010 could have been the remix and not CD2 ? 

[Ace Nova]

3 minutes ago, donny said:

so you are basically saying the 2010 rejection is not true ? 

or maybe 2010 could have been the remix and not CD2 ? 

I have no idea but if GN'R had a finished album and they wanted to release it in 2010 I'd be shocked if it wasn't.    So I'm sure there's something way off with those rumors. 

 

[downzy]

17 minutes ago, Kasanova King said:

I have no idea but if GN'R had a finished album and they wanted to release it in 2010 I'd be shocked if it wasn't.    So I'm sure there's something way off with those rumors. 

 

The problem is we don't really know what that album consisted of with respect to original songs versus remixes.  

I do not know with any certainty and speaking extemporaneously, but if the album was heavy on CD remixes, the label might have rejected it on the basis that Guns contractually owes them a certain number of albums.  Perhaps a remix heavy album was considered by the band as a qualifying album that would satisfy the merits of the contract?  Perhaps the label thought otherwise?  

Again, I speak with no personal knowledge and only raising a possibility.  

I do agree that I have a hard time believing that the label would turn down a new GNR album were that album comprised of previously unreleased material.  That doesn't seem plausible at all unless it's Axl banging on a bongo for 67 minutes.  

[Old_school_gnr_fan]

1 hour ago, donny said:

i think universal is a big company, very big. a lot of people in charge. hand an album in one day and a long haired manager will rock out to it and want it released. hand an album in the following day and it will fall in the hands of an old grey haired demis roussos fan that thinks "we cant subject the kids to this".

i hope after seeing a half billion dollar tour the record label want that old CD2 released. thats if the rumour is true. 

The record label will insist any new Guns N' Roses material has to have Slash and Duff on it. They won't allow Axl to release an album that was recorded before Slash and Duff returned to the band. It's not what the public wants. If it's re-recorded with them, fine. No record company will ever give Axl millions upon millions of dollars again to spend on making a Guns album without them.

[Rovim]

no way slash and duff are not on the next guns album should there be one. axl will be a fool to not include both of them. creatively and also cause that's what most of the fans want. axl seemed let down by people not embracing his cleaner voice on chinese. perhaps on a potential new album axl will choose to sing with more rasp.

[Jw224]

I hope to god they don't try to do an AFD type album. They would definitely be criticised for it being boring and retread of an old album.

[Azifwekare]

8 hours ago, Kasanova King said:

Nah.  I vaguely remember Axl saying something along the lines that there wasn't "3 full albums" worth of material after Sebastian Bach said he thought there was....or something along those lines. 

 And let's say there's enough for a CD II, I GUARANTEE it's nowhere near finished because if it was, the record label would be the ones pushing it out since they have the most to gain with basically nothing to lose.

 

I don't know about CD3, but Axl said in 2014 that both CD2 and the remix album were done and ready to go. Seeing as another album release would probably end up getting Guns out of their contract, I can only assume Universal were holding out for a reunion for obvious reasons. 

[gavgnr]

It is incredibly baffling why:

1. No new music appears to be forthcoming when we *know* that an album was ready years ago

2. No explanation is forthcoming to the fans who adore this band as to why no new music appears to be forthcoming

Why does it have to be such an issue?

[Jw224]

17 minutes ago, Azifwekare said:

I don't know about CD3, but Axl said in 2014 that both CD2 and the remix album were done and ready to go. Seeing as another album release would probably end up getting Guns out of their contract, I can only assume Universal were holding out for a reunion for obvious reasons. 

They probably should have just released it because it doesn't look this lineup will be producing music any time soon.