GNR jumped the dolphin (finally)

[SoulMonster]

2 minutes ago, donny said:

does it not contain photo's from Axl's personal collection in some book that came with it ?

if so then the band must have had a good bit of involvement in it. 

I was a bit disappointed with that book. Some of the photos may have been from Axl's collection, I don't know. It doesn't necessarily imply that Axl has been involved with putting together the products and deciding the prices, though. I find the scenario where the label asks TB for anything personal that can be included in the AFD reissue, whereby Beta asks Axl if he can think of something and some old photos are dug up, as quite plausible. That could be the end of Axl's involvement.

[ludurigan]

21 hours ago, RONIN said:

I wish he had done that. Imagine how much cooler it would have all been. Axl would have been frozen in time at his prime. No "Fat Elvis" phase where he's stumbling about on stage with cookie crumbs on his face in a yellow raincoat. Or Predator Axl in 2002. I started a thread some time back on this - what if Rose had basically retired in December 1994 after SFTD or even after those Vegas warmup shows in 2001/RIR 3. Honestly, the guy would have been a living legend. He already is, but his reputation would have been largely untarnished. The more time that goes by, the more the nu-guns years feels like a complete travesty.

yeah...

you know man if axl had just called his solo career "my solo career" or if he had given any other name for his solo band instead of "Guns n Roses"...

i couldnt care less about fat elvis, mickey voice, yellow rain coat... i mean all of that would be sad and pathetic and his solo music with his unlistenable clean voice would still be unlistenable

BUT at least it would be respectable

i actually would go even further as to say that axl should have avoided most GNR songs on his solo tours except the songs he mainly wrote himself (november rain, estranged) and the songs he truly loves performing (i think he has a particular love for nightrain, for example, but i could be wrong).

i think his solo shows would be way more interesting if the setlist had like 10 axl solo songs, 5 guns n roses songs and 8-10 songs that axl rose loves playing but was never able to play in GNR because no one would play them or for whatever other reason

how about having axl playing billy joel, elton john, elo, thin lizzy, acdc, ramones etc every night instead of playing 8 songs of appetite for destruction AGAIN?

THAT would be much better

about the fake reunion, i still think it would suck just the same even with the "alternate scenario" where axl disappears

because it is not GNR and it doesnt sound like GNR and it doesnt feel like GNR

it is a mountain of crap. there is no way this can be good without izzy and having these aliens franky, ricky and melissa onstage

Edited August 4, 2018 by ludurigan

[SoNobodyToldYaBaby]

 I still find it hilarious people actually spent 1000 euro.. ONE THOUSAND EURO on that box set. What's the saying a fool and his gold are easily parted? 

No wonder this band won't make new music- why bother when we have fat rich middle aged fans ready to drop a grand on some shitty box set.

[zombux]

2 minutes ago, SoNobodyToldYaBaby said:

 I still find it hilarious people actually spent 1000 euro.. ONE THOUSAND EURO on that box set. What's the saying a fool and his gold are easily parted? 

No wonder this band won't make new music- why bother when we have fat rich middle aged fans ready to drop a grand on some shitty box set.

I think it was a thousand US dollars, which is somewhat less in euros, but nevermind, you of course are totally right.

[Jw224]

I've always looked at any purchases I've made as I wanted it so I'm willing to pay for it. I didn't buy this box set but I can see why someone who had the funds and wanted it would. 

[baje]

On 8/2/2018 at 8:09 PM, WhazUp said:

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-45042838

There actually are many reports of the last few years that streaming services have been on the rise and illegal downloading on the fall.  Music and video streaming services are so easy and convenient that they have been the biggest helper for decreasing torrenting

Personally, I would say the reason why a lot of people aren't buying the SDE is because of the fact it is so expensive.  That edition was not made for regular CD buying folks who want the remastered Appetite, that is the 2 CD version.  The fact that many hardcore GNR collectors and fans here including myself won't buy something that pricey, in my opinion speaks volumes.

If GNR did price it high because of illegal downloaders, they are shooting themselves in the foot.  Now they will get people not purchasing that because it is too expensive, and it will do nothing to help combat whatever problem they think they have

 

If it was up to me, I would have added a 4 CD cardboard CD case edition with just the music and liner notes like the 2 CD version.  I would have bought that.  But at least over 100 bucks for 4 CD's?  Spotify to the rescue.

This! No artist is selling 3 million of anything unless their name is Adele. Streaming is where it's at. Just look at the Billboard charts. Why buy the physical copy of an album if you already pay for streaming? Especially if it's overpriced. 

[zombux]

On 8/3/2018 at 2:09 AM, WhazUp said:

Personally, I would say the reason why a lot of people aren't buying the SDE is because of the fact it is so expensive.  That edition was not made for regular CD buying folks who want the remastered Appetite, that is the 2 CD version.  The fact that many hardcore GNR collectors and fans here including myself won't buy something that pricey, in my opinion speaks volumes.

If GNR did price it high because of illegal downloaders, they are shooting themselves in the foot.  Now they will get people not purchasing that because it is too expensive, and it will do nothing to help combat whatever problem they think they have

 

If it was up to me, I would have added a 4 CD cardboard CD case edition with just the music and liner notes like the 2 CD version.  I would have bought that.  But at least over 100 bucks for 4 CD's?  Spotify to the rescue.

SDE digital version (just 4 discs, no Blu-ray) costs $67 in 24/192 quality. that's not what you'd call "so expensive". it's okay price if you want to buy it.

[ChristmasFnatic]

If the pics are signed by the band, why not? Otherwise, eh... will probably just look at them once then put them away, only to be looked at once every 5 years.

[WhazUp]

On 8/2/2018 at 7:00 AM, cineater said:

All things considered, it's very gracious of GNR to look into the recent fan concerns with bootlegs, don't you think?

Considering how non-communicative they have been for this entire time pretty much, and compared to how so many other bands are with fans, I would say looking into concerns about threats and whatnot would be among the very least they can do lol.  I don't know if "gracious" is the world, but hopefully they pull through and we can get this BS resolved

[Gackt]

Guys, GNR has always been about the fashion.
Labels are expensive, and Fernando was feeling the pulse of the Guns community by making reproduced photographs available to the starved consumers needing more after impulsively dropping a grand on a box.  

[Blackstar]

I came across this article about the box set with comments from various people related to the music industry. It gives a good insight of the way these people think

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/24/why-guns-n-roses-fans-may-be-willing-to-part-with-1000.html

It looks like the Locked N' Loaded box is seen as the beginning for this kind of very high-priced boxes with a lot of non musical "collectable" things as the new "norm":

Quote

"It's no doubt a high-priced item, but this is more of an experience being purchased as opposed to just another collector's box set," Somach said. Consumers should get used to seeing more such high-end collector's sets. "These kinds of products will become more commonplace as acts look to market their legacy," he said.

The -simple- reasoning seems to be this:

- "There are hundreds of thousands or millions of people, to whom this album was very important".

- "The majority of these people are now adults with an income".

- "At least 10.000 of these people don't have just an income, but they're rich, hence capable and willing to pay this amount of cash for something special by the band they love, based also on how well the most expensive tickets for the NITL shows sold".

- "There will be cheaper versions of it for the rest who can't afford it, so everyone will be happy and the endeavour will be a success".

So, likely, that's how it was presented to the management/band (supposing that the band participated on this level) and they said "yeah, sure, sounds good".

What they don't get -or maybe they do but don't care- is:

1) That the fans don't think like this. Fans who can't afford the big box, i.e. the vast majority, feel equally entitled to it since the album and the band have been equally important to them too. Other fans, even among those who could technically afford it, feel insulted by the high price and the way this thing is marketed.

2) That it hurts the profile of the band as a "band of the people". Even fans who are well off have found the band appealing because of that.

[username]

6 minutes ago, Blackstar said:

I came across this article about the box set with comments from various people related to the music industry. It gives a good insight of the way these people think

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/24/why-guns-n-roses-fans-may-be-willing-to-part-with-1000.html

It looks like the Locked N' Loaded box is seen as the beginning for this kind of very high-priced boxes with a lot of non musical "collectable" things as the new "norm":

The -simple- reasoning seems to be this:

- "There are hundreds of thousands or millions of people, to whom this album was very important".

- "The majority of these people are now adults with an income".

- "At least 10.000 of these people don't have just an income, but they're rich, hence capable and willing to pay this amount of cash for something special by the band they love, based also on how well the most expensive tickets for the NITL shows sold".

- "There will be cheaper versions of it for the rest who can't afford it, so everyone will be happy and the endeavour will be a success".

So, likely, that's how it was presented to the management/band (supposing that the band participated on this level) and they said "yeah, sure, sounds good".

What they don't get -or maybe they do but don't care- is:

1) That the fans don't think like this. Fans who can't afford the big box, i.e. the vast majority, feel equally entitled to it since the album and the band have been equally important to them too. Other fans, even among those who could technically afford it, feel insulted by the high price and the way this thing is marketed.

2) That it hurts the profile of the band as a "band of the people". Even fans who are well off have found the band appealing because of that.

I hate this way of thinking. It's horrible really. I strongly agree with you on both your points. 

But what I hate even more is that they're basically right. People shouldn't buy this overpriced shit. If you buy it, you're the reason these things keep being made and keep getting more expensive. 

It's one of the reasons I'm boycotting this whole re-release. And it's definitely making me hate GnR and their management (especially their management, who weren't popular to begin with) more. 

Edited August 6, 2018 by username

[DieselDaisy]

I'm starting to question whether they ever were infact a ''band of the people''? You also see McKagan, Mr ''Punk as Fuck'' himself, weighed down by designer bags.

[killuridols]

12 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

I'm starting to question whether they ever were infact a ''band of the people''? You also see McKagan, Mr ''Punk as Fuck'' himself, weighed down by designer bags.

They were "band of the people" for a few years, maybe the club years. As soon as the UYI tour started, Axl was spotted in limos, wearing fur coats and dating supermodels.

After that, he became even more of a fat rich asshole: his Versace jackets, shirts, the expensive boots, cars, all the jewelry....... He always wanted to be a millionaire, that's clear and that's why he didn't gel with any of the grunge bands. McKagan and Slash camouflage themselves better but we all know behind the scenes they eat caviar and stay at 5 stars hotels, plus their lifestyle is nowhere close to "working class".

On 3/8/2018 at 2:59 AM, RONIN said:

I wish he had done that. Imagine how much cooler it would have all been. Axl would have been frozen in time at his prime. No "Fat Elvis" phase where he's stumbling about on stage with cookie crumbs on his face in a yellow raincoat.

Yes and no. LOL.

I know what you mean but sometimes I think that if Axl had not gone out after 1993, he would have been even more clueless than he is now. The yellow raincoat and the porn mustache are cringy but I guess they were a reality check for him as well. Just like the "fat meme" picture. Those things, at least, gave him a sense of reality that he was not the sexy attractive symbol from the 90s and that he needed to lose some weight.

Not that he lost all the weight that he should have and not that his image now is the best, but I wonder if he had stayed untouchable in his mansion, listening to TB and the rest of Yes Men, I think he would have returned fatter and crazier.

He needed to suffer and go through what he went through during the "dark years", to realize that he needed Slash and to reunite the band. Better sooner than later, I dont know

[DieselDaisy]

They were only ever in it for the money to begin with.

 

[guitarpatch]

14 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

I'm starting to question whether they ever were infact a ''band of the people''? You also see McKagan, Mr ''Punk as Fuck'' himself, weighed down by designer bags.

Band of the people? I don’t think I’ve ever heard that term used w them. GNR did whatever the hell they wanted. That was their appeal

They went on stage late hammered and put on a performance that always seemed to be on the brink. They bundled a previously released EP with 4 acoustic session songs as a release to tie things over. They had an extravagant stage show w backup singers and scantedly dressed woman who also happened to play horn. They took a double album project that could have been bundled into 1 release and released them separately at full MSRP. They took 18 years to release the most expensive album ever made. 

Should we really be shocked at one of the most expensive box sets out for sale? 

[zigzagbigbag]

1 minute ago, username said:

From the bottom of my heart, I can honestly say I'm not jealous of either. 

But you are a little bit of a hypocrite for buying into one huge money making scheme and then getting offended when they fire a second one at you. 

No, of course you're not. 

[DieselDaisy]

''Band of the people'' conjures up images of Springsteenean blue-collar rock. 

[guitarpatch]

43 minutes ago, Blackstar said:

I came across this article about the box set with comments from various people related to the music industry. It gives a good insight of the way these people think

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/24/why-guns-n-roses-fans-may-be-willing-to-part-with-1000.html

It looks like the Locked N' Loaded box is seen as the beginning for this kind of very high-priced boxes with a lot of non musical "collectable" things as the new "norm":

The -simple- reasoning seems to be this:

- "There are hundreds of thousands or millions of people, to whom this album was very important".

- "The majority of these people are now adults with an income".

- "At least 10.000 of these people don't have just an income, but they're rich, hence capable and willing to pay this amount of cash for something special by the band they love, based also on how well the most expensive tickets for the NITL shows sold".

- "There will be cheaper versions of it for the rest who can't afford it, so everyone will be happy and the endeavour will be a success".

So, likely, that's how it was presented to the management/band (supposing that the band participated on this level) and they said "yeah, sure, sounds good".

What they don't get -or maybe they do but don't care- is:

1) That the fans don't think like this. Fans who can't afford the big box, i.e. the vast majority, feel equally entitled to it since the album and the band have been equally important to them too. Other fans, even among those who could technically afford it, feel insulted by the high price and the way this thing is marketed.

2) That it hurts the profile of the band as a "band of the people". Even fans who are well off have found the band appealing because of that.

Yep, this is exactly how major labels think. The fan base is a pyramid with each section more willing to spend $ on specialized product than the one on the bottom. Not surprising it correlates to the most engaged/crazed fan also being at the top.

They are now targeting the top as their business model of selling a large volume of cheap plastic across the entire pyramid generates less revenue. It is in their best interests to take advantage of those types of fans at the top now. 

  

[DieselDaisy]

It is all very cynical and premeditated. 

[Blackstar]

26 minutes ago, guitarpatch said:

Band of the people? I don’t think I’ve ever heard that term used w them. GNR did whatever the hell they wanted. That was their appeal

They went on stage late hammered and put on a performance that always seemed to be on the brink. They bundled a previously released EP with 4 acoustic session songs as a release to tie things over. They had an extravagant stage show w backup singers and scantedly dressed woman who also happened to play horn. They took a double album project that could have been bundled into 1 release and released them separately at full MSRP. They took 18 years to release the most expensive album ever made.

Yeah, I agree. I didn't have the term in mind as in a consciously "working class" band. They were never that. They always wanted to "make" it and they never pretended otherwise.

They were, however, a very popular band, and their audience consisted mostly of youths from the low social strata.

They were also a kind of populistic band, at least to a point, with Axl acting onstage as a spoke person for the misfits etc.

Edited August 6, 2018 by Blackstar

[Nicklord]

19 minutes ago, killuridols said:

They were "band of the people" for a few years, maybe the club years. As soon as the UYI tour started, Axl was spotted in limos, wearing fur coats and dating supermodels.

After that, he became even more of a fat rich asshole: his Versace jackets, shirts, the expensive boots, cars, all the jewelry....... He always wanted to be a millionaire, that's clear and that's why he didn't gel with any of the grunge bands. McKagan and Slash camouflage themselves better but we all know behind the scenes they eat caviar and stay at 5 stars hotels, plus their lifestyle is nowhere close to "working class".

Yes and no. LOL.

I know what you mean but sometimes I think that if Axl had not gone out after 1993, he would have been even more clueless than he is now. The yellow raincoat and the porn mustache are cringy but I guess they were a reality check for him as well. Just like the "fat meme" picture. Those things, at least, gave him a sense of reality that he was not the sexy attractive symbol from the 90s and that he needed to lose some weight.

Not that he lost all the weight that he should have and not that his image now is the best, but I wonder if he had stayed untouchable in his mansion, listening to TB and the rest of Yes Men, I think he would have returned fatter and crazier.

He needed to suffer and go through what he went through during the "dark years", to realize that he needed Slash and to reunite the band. Better sooner than later, I dont know

I don't think it's a cover from Slash's and Duff's side. They're rich and live rich lives and they're not hiding it. But there's a difference between being rich and acting like you own the world cause of it like Axl did in the 90s

[guitarpatch]

39 minutes ago, killuridols said:

They were "band of the people" for a few years, maybe the club years. As soon as the UYI tour started, Axl was spotted in limos, wearing fur coats and dating supermodels.

After that, he became even more of a fat rich asshole: his Versace jackets, shirts, the expensive boots, cars, all the jewelry....... He always wanted to be a millionaire, that's clear and that's why he didn't gel with any of the grunge bands. McKagan and Slash camouflage themselves better but we all know behind the scenes they eat caviar and stay at 5 stars hotels, plus their lifestyle is nowhere close to "working class".

Yes and no. LOL.

I know what you mean but sometimes I think that if Axl had not gone out after 1993, he would have been even more clueless than he is now. The yellow raincoat and the porn mustache are cringy but I guess they were a reality check for him as well. Just like the "fat meme" picture. Those things, at least, gave him a sense of reality that he was not the sexy attractive symbol from the 90s and that he needed to lose some weight.

Not that he lost all the weight that he should have and not that his image now is the best, but I wonder if he had stayed untouchable in his mansion, listening to TB and the rest of Yes Men, I think he would have returned fatter and crazier.

He needed to suffer and go through what he went through during the "dark years", to realize that he needed Slash and to reunite the band. Better sooner than later, I dont know

You say all of this as it relates to $, but he was also poor as hell wearing cowboy boots and dressed drag in the street in the mid 80's in LA. The guy wore assless chaps. They were all sort of misfits who dressed weird, listened to weird bands and looked a little out of the norm. You could say all of that came from some tangent

Edited August 6, 2018 by guitarpatch

[killuridols]

19 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

''Band of the people'' conjures up images of Springsteenean blue-collar rock. 

In my country, none of their fans were/are working class people. Understanding English requires a level of education working class doesn't have, so the fans from here are middle-upper class.

1 minute ago, guitarpatch said:

You say all of this as it relates to $, but he was also poor as hell wearing cowboy boots and dressed drag in the street in the mid 80's in LA. They were all sort of misfits who dressed weird, listened to weird bands and looked a little out of the norm. You could say all of that came some tangent from 

Yeah but one thing is what you were before and then what your band turned out to be.

Im not sure Axl was that poor. He went to school, right? Had a plate of food everyday, I assume.... at least, never heard him say anything about being too poor. It doesn't look to me like the rest of the guys were living in poverty either.... they just came from broken homes.

[DieselDaisy]

10 minutes ago, killuridols said:

 

In my country, none of their fans were/are working class people. Understanding English requires a level of education working class doesn't have, so the fans from here are middle-upper class.

Guns are a band for River Plate supporting fannies.