I just watched Paul McCartney on Jimmy Fallon...if he can do it at his age, then Guns can too

[Ace Nova]

 

 

Dude is 76 years old.  He's on Jimmy Fallon and coming out with new tracks....this is after he could have easily retired as the frontman of the biggest band ever....but he didn't and he's still at it.

 

Axl & Slash, what is your excuse?

 

Edited September 7, 2018 by Kasanova King

[WhazUp]

Hopefully after Slash's run of shows with The Conspirators something will happen

Paul and Mick are two dudes I greatly admire for their ability to keep it going for so long and so well

Edited September 7, 2018 by WhazUp

[zigzagbigbag]

28 minutes ago, Kasanova King said:

 

 

Dude is 76 years old.  He's on Jimmy Fallon and coming out with new tracks....this is after he could have easily retired as the frontman of the biggest band ever....but he didn't and he's still at it.

 

Axl & Slash, what is your excuse?

 

Well, I don't think Slash needs an excuse. His output is fine (quantity-wise). Same goes for Duff, Izzy and Matt. Even Steven and Dizzy have released a proper amount of albums/contributions to other artists within the last 25 years.

 

Only one person needs an excuse, to speak in your words. 

Edited September 7, 2018 by zigzagbigbag

[Ace Nova]

1 minute ago, zigzagbigbag said:

Well, I don't think Slash needs an excuse. His output is fine (quantity-wise). Same goes for Duff, Izzy and Matt. Even Steven and Dizzy have released a proper amount of albums/contributions to other artists within the last 25 years.

 

Only one person needs an excuse, to speak in your words. 

It's not that complicated.  Really.  These guys could release 20 tracks that would rock the world if it came from their hearts. 

[DeadSlash]

There is a balance, hopefully they will find it together.  Axl doesn't release enough, and honestly I legit believe Slash releases too much.  It's too watered down and means a lot less.  Don't get me wrong, I like Slash, and I don't care that he releases too much, I prefer that over the Axl approach, but I find it hard to believe many people would argue that if you took all of Slash's work Post GnR and boiled it down to the top tier songs, he would be more iconic that he is now.

 

I think the perfect illustration of Slash is that 2006 song he did with Chris Daughtry, I saw an interview where he talked about the record label asking him to do a track on the album, and he was like "Nah, I'm really busy." But he said they kept calling, so he listened to the song once and laid a solo and didn't hear it again until it was on the radio.  That's a little too uncaring about the quality of what you are putting out.   

Edited September 7, 2018 by DeadSlash

[jamillos]

Yet another thread where people won’t understand that the band has hardly even finished the tour, during which it would have been impossible to create and release an album, and that the tour is completely justifiable given it’s one of the biggest reunions in the history...

[Live Like a Suicide]

9 minutes ago, jamillos said:

Yet another thread where people won’t understand that the band has hardly even finished the tour, during which it would have been impossible to create and release an album, and that the tour is completely justifiable given it’s one of the biggest reunions in the history...

Right, but it's been nearly three years now, and Guns has a history of playing new music live before release. We know they've been throwing ideas around while on the road, and Slash seems open to some CD2 stuff. It wouldn't hurt to throw a bone.

[Len Cnut]

1 hour ago, Kasanova King said:

 

 

Dude is 76 years old.  He's on Jimmy Fallon and coming out with new tracks....this is after he could have easily retired as the frontman of the biggest band ever....but he didn't and he's still at it.

 

Axl & Slash, what is your excuse?

 

An IMMENSE gulf in talent levels? 

[SoulMonster]

I have never understood the argument 'just because X does it, why don't Y?'

[WhazUp]

6 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

I have never understood the argument 'just because X does it, why don't Y?'

Right I am with you, just because Paul McCartney has the ability to release 9 albums since 1993 doesn't mean that Axl Rose has the ability to do the same thing apparently 

Edited September 7, 2018 by WhazUp

[Len Cnut]

9 minutes ago, WhazUp said:

Right I am with you, just because Paul McCartney has the ability to release 9 albums since 1993 doesn't mean that Axl Rose has the ability to do the same thing apparently

I think what he was doing was illustrating that high calibre artists don't necessarily have to take a quarter of the average lifespan of a western male to release one album of original material

[CAFC Nick]

55 minutes ago, jamillos said:

Yet another thread where people won’t understand that the band has hardly even finished the tour, during which it would have been impossible to create and release an album, and that the tour is completely justifiable given it’s one of the biggest reunions in the history...

I think most people will agree with the above point, however there are a few things to note:

- Slash has been part of this reunion tour yet is just about to release a new album with his solo project (who he would spend a lot less time around than the Guns guys...)

- Axl has released one album in 25 years. He has had plenty of time off between tours to get stuff together. By all accounts he has another album there-or-there-abouts to go, yet has chosen not to do anything with it.

[soon]

Sometimes I wonder if we should turn the mirror on ourselves. We are major fans of a band of egomaniacal losers. We bought into the layers of bullshit and failure. What is it that attracts each of us to these self sabotaging man babies? 

Edited September 7, 2018 by soon

[SoulMonster]

46 minutes ago, WhazUp said:

Right I am with you, just because Paul McCartney has the ability to release 9 albums since 1993 doesn't mean that Axl Rose has the ability to do the same thing apparently 

Yes, absolutely. We age differently, some lose the mojo, some lose the ambitions, some lose the interest. We cannot expect everybody to continue to sing like Steven Perry, strut like Mick Jagger, and create like McCartney into their 70s. We are all different. There really isn't anything to excuse for the effect of age, but if we want an explanation I suppose you can pick anyone from has enough money already/lost the drive/can't do it any more/change in markets/etc. 

[jamillos]

2 hours ago, CAFC Nick said:

I think most people will agree with the above point, however there are a few things to note:

- Slash has been part of this reunion tour yet is just about to release a new album with his solo project (who he would spend a lot less time around than the Guns guys...)

- Axl has released one album in 25 years. He has had plenty of time off between tours to get stuff together. By all accounts he has another album there-or-there-abouts to go, yet has chosen not to do anything with it.

I understand; however, I maintain that a solo album is a different thing, compared to an album that would potentially have a great impact and could be considered one of the most wanted/anticipated records in the history (haven’t we heard this before though?). It’s just different. And it’s mostly about Slash’s ideas anyway, whereas a GN’R record is putting at least 2–3 guys’ ideas together, not to mention their individual schedules etc. 

As for Axl, he certainly must have tons of material, but I would believe he’s worked on some new stuff too, which takes time (I don’t believe he will just take his vocal recordings from the ChinDem era, have the guys work on it and present it as brand new stuff). Concerning the free time, don’t forget a) he was occupied with Angus, b) I’d say when you get home from a tour, the last thing you would want to immediately start doing would be composing or recording new shit. Slash may be that kind of animal, but the guys are just people, not robots, and they have lives outside the music industry too. Yes, there was this five or six-month break, but I certainly wouldn’t expect too much material to have been created during that period.

I say give it time, that’s all. Look at it from a perspective. 

 

[yourcrazy]

Last time Paul McCartney was on a show singing I had to turn it off.  His voice was really weak and old sounding.  I do applaud him for continuing to make music though.  However, don’t think I want to hear a 76 year old Axl butchering Welcome to the Jungle.   I do think they need to get some new material out over the next few years and eventually retire.  

[YourMother'sDruthers]

To be fair, Paul McCartney's latest album is painful to listen to, putting it nicely. If Axl released anything this subpar, id rather he retire or continue resting on his laurels. 

[Towelie]

Macca has mostly made a load of ropey old shit since leaving The Beatles, bar a handful of good solo tunes 20-30yrs ago. 

I'd rather Axl release nothing than release crap.

[ToonGuns]

The counter argument would be that, even if it were true that Macca has released years of ropey old shit, it hasn't damaged his reputation or legacy whereas releasing nothing potentially will.

[Towelie]

1 hour ago, ToonGuns said:

The counter argument would be that, even if it were true that Macca has released years of ropey old shit, it hasn't damaged his reputation or legacy whereas releasing nothing potentially will.

Guns legacy is set in stone even if they never release another note of new music again.

[Legendador]

6 hours ago, Live Like a Suicide said:

Right, but it's been nearly three years now, and Guns has a history of playing new music live before release. We know they've been throwing ideas around while on the road, and Slash seems open to some CD2 stuff. It wouldn't hurt to throw a bone.

They already did and you didn't even notice, right? They presented most of the riffs in some intros to songs.  

[Legendador]

And then I bet U$ 1 million that when they do release new music people will continue to complain, let me guess:

• Where's the rasp?
• It's not as good as AFD
• Izzy just plays in one song
• Steven just plays in one song
• Where's Ashaba?
• I think Pittman sounded better than Melissa
• Too Pop
• Too Rock
• Too many ballads
• Not enough ballads
• Where's "The General"?
• I wish it could have that ChiDem feel
• It's overproduced
• This song was a Velvet Revolver leftover
• I want the Finck/BucketHead era reunion
• The name of the album sucks
• The pictures in the especial edition CD booklet suck
• It's a double album, it sucks
• It's a single algum, it sucks
• We want a UYI Boxset now!

It is hard to be a GNR fan, it is harder to be a GNR fan on this forum with so many complaints!

Edited September 8, 2018 by Legendador
mispelling

[Tom2112]

Different artists operate in different ways. Guns do not and will not ever release music in a quick, easy way. Thinking that they should just release something is all well and great, but it's just not that simple in their world... and there's a bunch of reasons, but we can only guess to what those reasons are (Yes, Axl is one reason).

Whatever they release will be picked apart endlessly, I'd hope that it isn't but let's face it! I'm confident they have a good record in them, but the problem is that for most the definition of good is in such a grey area. Also, people think they know what a record should sound like before a lick has ever been written, so when they hear the first track and it's not that idea, they write the record off. 

Anyway! When, IF!? a record comes out I'll pick it up, and listen to it, until then I'm not waiting around for it.

[ToonGuns]

1 hour ago, Towelie said:

Guns legacy is set in stone even if they never release another note of new music again.

I'm a huge GnR fan, my favourite band, but legacies are a difficult thing. I don't disagree with you. The fact they will leave a rock legacy is set in stone. But exactly what that legacy could become is a different thing. All bands leave a legacy to a certain extent. I worry that in 50 years time people will look back on GnR as a one album wonder with a legacy that reflects that, and consequently they pale compared to equivalent bands like Zep, ACDC, Deep Purple, Black Sabbath, and so many more. Slash is the only main individual who has a mainstream industry-wide respected talent and legacy. Unlike someone like the Sex Pistols, who shone brightly but ever so briefly, Guns have had a 30+ year career... But not much product to show for it.

The future won't remember the "not in this lifetime" endless reminiscence tours, regardless of who is in the band at the time.

Edited September 7, 2018 by ToonGuns
spelling

[Ace Nova]

56 minutes ago, Tom2112 said:

Different artists operate in different ways. Guns do not and will not ever release music in a quick, easy way. Thinking that they should just release something is all well and great, but it's just not that simple.

Err....they released in excess of 40+ songs from 1989-1991. That's a ton of songs in a pretty short period of time.  They have it in them to do it, or at least they did.