fantomas

Oof, this list is pretty dire in parts. Sure, I have my own biases for certain bands, but there is a ton of quality music missing. No Nine Inch Nails' Closer? 

I still love finding new music, When I lived in England in the early 90's the Our Price Music near me would blow out CD singles 10 for £1. I'd buy all kinds of random music to figure out what I did and didn't like. Found a lot of shit, but also found a lot of cool stuff. These days I let Spotify suggest new music based on artists I like, and for the past five or six years I have a personal goal of finding one new album/artist a week I've never heard before.  This week, my new band is Bexley.  Particularly "I'm Sorry". 

Dammit, I go on vacation to Cali for three days and miss everything... curse my addiction to soccer.

I'll be there.

1 hour ago, MrDeano said:

Anyone in NZ or aus able to stream it yet??

I'm in Arizona and switched my VPN to Australia and was able to see it on YouTube. Without a VPN you just have to wait.

Missed the midnight play, but can confirm that VPN works for Australia. Listening right now.  

If the definition of insanity is repeating the same task and expecting a different outcome, Gn'R fans must be the most insane of all  It doesn't feel like anything has changed since 1999 and yet here we all are expecting the band to be a normal band doing normal band things

Stop necro-ing crap like this.

On 7/12/2023 at 12:29 AM, Bitchisback said:

I actually love OMG. I wish the whole album sounded like that.  I think it's a great industrial rocker.  And Axl's voice on it is great.

 

This article from September 1999 is fascinating knowing how everything played out  lol 

 

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/good-god-guns-255073/

lol, that's a great article. "a stop gap measure to pacify long-suffering fans who are unlikely to see another studio album from Guns until next summer". aaaaand nine years later...

Just now, Arnuld said:

Demo lol. Axl only acted like it was a “demo” that was ripped from his hands before it could be completed because everyone and I mean everyone in the media thought the song was weird and sucked when it came out in 99. So this it was only a demo narrative got created. It was and is a complete song that was mixed and mastered. And being that it is a C+ B- song at best I cannot imagine why he worked on it again later. 

Man, I remember when they played it on the radio for the first time. I was like "This is their comeback song? This is awful."  It aged better than I expected though, but I certainly wouldn't put it in my top 10, or even top 30 Gn'R songs.

3 hours ago, Coma16 said:

There are some signs that are pointing to this happening in November for CDs 15th anniversary.

Based on what? Is there a new Dr. Pepper flavor coming out then?

Honestly, hearing how ragged and raspy the replaced vocals are, it makes you wonder how he didn't blow his vocal chords years ago. It sounds like he is shredding his throat. And for the record, it sounds way better than the original. This isn't a dig at all. Just interesting hearing current Axl and old Axl side by side. 

Thanks for all of the effort put into this. This has been a fantastic read.

10 hours ago, SoulMonster said:

I don't think Youtube had auto-transcribed these videos. When a Youtube videos don't have transcripts to download, I usually generate my own transcripts using Google voice-to-text function. 

By the way, as a nod to the AI thread, such transcription features are based on AI.

I checked and there is a transcription for that interview. 

Oh, and nice callback

Dumb question, did YouTube allow you to grab the transcript file?

1 hour ago, DeNfr said:

 

yes and I stand by that. there is no "god" or whatever who gives you "special abilities", except physical ones who can gives you certain advantage, for example strong vocal cords, but you don't need them to become Bob Dylan, so that's irrelevant. 

At no point did I ever say god or any other religious entity had anything to do with it.  With how complex the brain works, some people are wired differently. That's genetic, not religious. Explain this link, a five year old piano prodigy playing Carnegie Hall.  This isn't practice. Most five years can't even tie their shoes. Child piano prodigy plays Carnegie Hall - YouTube

7 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

Again, I don't see a problem with AI music. People will want the human component so its applicability will be for stuff like muzak. Kids want to idolize the people behind, kids want to see real musicians on stage. 

But here's the kicker: Even if I am wrong and AI music completely outcompetes human musicians, that just means music has become better, and we all benefit (except musicians at the time who will need to find themselves a different job because they have been made redundant by technology - like so many other orifessuons). That's progress, I suppose. 

Say we do go all in on AI, what happens to the live experience? Sure, we have tools that enhance vocals, like the voice box Slash uses for example. But if an AI application entirely replaces the vocals, is there a need for the vocalist? Can the vocalist give a passionate performance if they aren't singing? I think if we as people are prepared to give up the human element, it speaks a lot to how society sees the arts, and that is the end product we care about and not the heart, soul, pain, love, energy and experiences that go into creating it. Can a computer really explain heartbreak, or anger, or love on a level where humans can relate? If we can relate to a computer, what does this say about us?

I hope you understand these are more general questions and not necessarily aimed directly at you, mate. I think this is a great discussion.

1 minute ago, DeNfr said:

you assume or proclaim a lot of things without backing that's the problem with your demonstration.

sorry but "that's just how it is" is not a valid argument, never was, never will.

 

 

That is just how it is. Not every skill is learnable or teachable. Not everyone is wired the same, or built the same. It's why child prodigy musicians are so rare.  There are some people who are naturally talented. If these skills could all be learned, we wouldn't have standout performers in all types of art. You're saying the only thing preventing people from having the same artistic talents is desire to practice. 

2 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

AI is already being used in numerous applications, for good use. When I was studying, back in the late 90s, we had these distributed software thingies that would use free CPU to try to solve complex problems, like searching for extraterrestrial signals or solve protein folding. Now AI (in the shape of AlphaFold) can predict protein structure from primary sequence easily. What a revolutionary progress! And this is just one example out of thousands of contemporary uses. AI isn't the future - it is now. 

Exactly. I don't think it is a blanket discussion covered under one umbrella. AI really hasn't been the future for a while, it's now just reaching a more commercial market and inevitably that is where the cracks always start to form. That's when the hands who have no rights to touch it start to getting involved. When it starts to move away from science and towards commercial applications.

5 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

As I have stated many times, there were real duds on Chinese Democracy that could easily have been replaced by material from the locker leaks to improve that album. Like Hard School, State of Grace, Perhaps, etc. But Axl, like he also did with Aooetite/UIYs decided to hold over some songs for the next record. Like November Rain, You Could Be Mine, Perfect Crime. That's how he operates. It's all fine and good if you for some reason think everything on the locker leaks is subpar to what ended up on CD (Scraped, Rhiad, If The World, really!?), but obviously that's not how Axl thinks. 

Yeah, a couple of the songs on CD were unforgivable. It soared in places, but crashed and burned on others.

1 hour ago, SoulMonster said:

Except that some people might consider these songs to be "big guns"....and poof went your argument! 

Jesus, if State is a big gun. Although with better musicians it could work. I would be interested to hear Atlas with Duff and Slash as it feels a bit light in its current state.

14 minutes ago, Rovim said:

it's also easier, cheaper, and faster to eventually only use music which is created by an AI program at least for some products. I think some of these questions are interesting, I don't really know, I think that yes, passing laws and ways to protect the process of creating art, maybe redefining it in the process, etc is not going to be easy. Maybe some things are impossible, like you're suggesting, but it's still too early to answer most of the big questions regarding what ai means to art and music currently and what is the best way to move forward with it.

I don't think it's the end of real music, but maybe the definition will change, maybe even the process as well. 

Library of Congress is already putting rules into place for what can and cannot be copyrighted. So there is at least some movement there. The big issue is there are simply too many variables right now, and I worry that by the time we've figured them out, the ability to protect anything will be gone. Again, thanks for the civil discussion on this! Appreciate it.

1 hour ago, Lies They Tell said:

Who says that these songs were ever left unfinished? The demos were obviously unfinished cause they were demos. But we know that for example Atlas was a finished song already when CD was released. There's no reason to believe that these songs were ever supposed to be abandoned.

And there's no reason to abandon them. They are great songs! Are they earthshattering? I don't know about that, but how many GNR songs have ever been earthshattering? Is Nightrain earthshattering? Is Yesterdays earthshattering? I don't think so. They're just great songs and that's more than enough. It would be ridiculous to say that a band shouldn't release music unless it's earthshattering.

Don't know if Hard Skool was ever considered a big gun, but it's certainly a great song. And that's not just my opinion. It's already a more popular song on Spotify than for example Perfect Crime and Dead Horse. People clearly like that song, so why shouldn't GNR release music that people enjoy?

I don't remember exactly what unreleased GNR songs have been called big guns, but at least The General and Seven are supposed to be big guns. Apparently, according to the leaked setlist they might actually release The General this year. That's when we'll hear what a so called big gun is supposed to sound like.

 

I said I liked Hard Skool. It was the unreleased song I'd been waiting for the most, but it did feel a bit cut and paste. Absurd on the other hand was simply dreadful and hardly screamed Gn'R is back. Two very different songs that showcase the range of unreleased songs.  I guess any new music is good news, but what could be sitting in the wings could be a bit dubious based on what we've heard so far.

10 minutes ago, Rovim said:

but I think we should do our best to protect the artists and their work 

And that is a great point. How can we do that? Especially with artists who are dead and have estates that cash in on their legacy. Say a big name band is under contract for 5 albums, but only turns over 3 albums. Will the label produce two more under the bands name using AI tech with existing master recordings? It's a lot easier to train AI with vocals on a standalone track. We know the industry doesn't protect artists anyway.  We need checks and balances in place soon. But I think it's already too late for that.

1 minute ago, DeNfr said:

 

imagine one minute the world you live in is a big lie, a virtual reality generated by a powerful AI, and GNR music is too, would it diminished its qualities because it's not "human"?
I don't think so.

there's nothing as "gifts". you have interests, and you work hard to develop skills. every child draws. most stops, some continues : they become visual artists, painters, etc. that's my case.

do I use AI? yes, that's a fantastic way to create new stuff, is it easy to obtain what you want? no. give an AI to someone who has no artistic background, no imagination, no sense of composition or color, you obtain shit, bad images, there's a lot online, you can see them. now give the same AI to an artist, you'll find some amazing things who "connects people".

it's just a tool, and writing a perfect prompt is not an easy task.

for a musician, it can helps you to generate very quickly different parts. it's not that different that having a bunch of studio musicians who tries 15 solos for on track. 
except with AI you can have 150 solos in minutes.

way to increase Axl's productivity...

 

 

 

There is a difference between augmentation and creation. Using AI to supplement existing art is different than allowing it to create it from scratch. When you can skip the human middleman, you have tech creating tech and by it's very definition it is soulless. 

I disagree as far as talent not being a gift or skills. You can learn the fundamentals, but if you don't have the natural eye for scale, depth, perspective or the ear for pitch, tune or tone. you won't fully hone your craft.  Not everyone can act, or write or produce music. That's just how it is. We will always need entertainers. But if everyone can create, where is the need for us to gather in communities to celebrate it? It would remove uniqueness and the social need for art and talents that brings us together.

As far as needing talent to create AI art, I'm guessing you haven't used Midjourney yet? If you can string five words together it will create your vision. It's lazy. And in an era where we suffer from massive plagiarism, this will make things even worse.