Bono

3 hours ago, downzy said:

Really?  You think most people are heading to a U2 concert to hear Get On Your Boots?  Do you think 90 percent of those who attend a U2 concert could name a song released after Achtung Baby (other than, maybe, Beautiful Day)?  When bands perform in stadiums, they're playing largely to casual fans, which make up 75-90 percent of attendance.  I'm a U2 fan but I couldn't name one song from their last album (and I believed I listened to it two or three times before giving up on it).  

The Rolling Stones haven't put out a decent album since 1985.  Billy Joel stopped producing new material in 1993.  Both artists continue to sell out arenas and stadiums.  

I'm not saying that new music is a bad thing, but the argument that Metallica and U2 "took up the mantle" because they produced new material whereas GNR has large not is absurd.  U2 and Metallica sellout stadiums for the same reason GNR sells out stadiums.  Do you honestly think a subpar to average GNR album would allow the band to add additional nights in NYC or Paris?  Please.

But maybe I'm wrong.  Maybe in 17 years U2 will do a Songs of Innocence 20th anniversary tour...  LOL.

Unreal.  Trust me when I say this, most people at the U2 shows know the material new and old. You're arguing a losing argument here dude. U2's new albums are much more well known by the average U2 concert goer than CD is to the average GnR concert goer. Hate all you want. GnR's career since 1991 has been a fucking joke. The fact you're even remotely suggesting 2 and Metallica haven't gone about business better is insane.

3 hours ago, downzy said:

Didn't read your entire post because you're missing my point.  It's not a matter of quantity.  Quantity of material doesn't grant relevance or artistic credibility.  Admiration, credibility, and reverence comes from producing quality.  The material from AFD, Lies, and UYI was great, which allows GNR to sell out stadiums.  I'm not saying it's not a shame that GNR didn't produce more material, but if it didn't measure up to its previous efforts, it's not going to do much to the band's stature in the music world.  

As I stated before, bands like the Rolling Stones, U2, Metallica and artists like Elton John and Billy Joel aren't considered the giants of music because of anything they've produced in the last 20 years.  Their legendary status was burnished by their peak work.  I don't discount that had GNR produce a few more great albums over the last 20 years they would be considered an even greater musical act than they are today.  But I have a hard time believing that anything produced by Metallica or U2 since the mid 90s has done anything to enhance their stature in the music world.  Unless they, along with any other iconic act, can produce music that resonates with both hardcore and casual fans alike than it's not going to do much for their careers.  

But again, this is just my opinion.  Maybe I'm wrong and bands like the Rolling Stones or U2 are winning over new fans or further cementing their iconic status by releasing new subpar or lacklustre material.  I just don't see much evidence of that.  

You're completely wrong. U2 looked to be at a crossroads after Pop. The album wasn't received well at the time, the tour struggled at times, Bono had serious throat issues, but they reinvigorated their career with All That You Can't Leave Behind. They released songs like Beautiful Day, Elevation and Walk On. Elevation and Beautiful Day get some of the best reactions in their live shows. Vertigo introduced them to a whole new generation and it also gets one of the best reactions live. Stop with this nonsense that U2 hasn't done anything musically to elevate their status since 1991. This whole notion that they've released nothing but subpar, lackluster material since 1991 also makes you sound delusional. You can think that but if everything they've released was as you say they'd be completely washed up. U2 release albums, do promotion, hell they're even performing on Jimmy Fallon tonight. Yet you sit there and act like the 6 studio albums they've released since 1991 and the forthcoming album have done and will do NOTHING to contribute to building them into what they are now? Of course what they did in the past is the major reason they became icons but so fucking what? Why does that matter to you? At least they don't tour off the back of nostalgia and at least they feature new material heavily each time they tour in support of an album.  
Again who gives a shit why people are turning up to their shows. Fact is being a U2 fan is way more fun and fulfilling than being a GnR fan. I know, I'm both.  

And newsflash, U2 has released a much higher quantity of music than GnR has since 1991 and also much higher quality.  Unless of course you're actually gonna sit there and try to argue that in the grand scheme of things CD trumps everything U2 has done since 1991 in terms of artistic integrity, building reverence, admiration and credibility among casuals and hardcores, and adding to the legacy. Argue that GnR with one fucking album since 1991 has done that better than U2(or Metallica) and I'll roll my eyes and move along. 

1 hour ago, downzy said:

I'm not sure point to Metallica or U2 with respect to new music since the early to mid 90s is the best proof that those bands did it better than GNR.  While it's exciting to get new music from your favourite band, there's almost nothing in Metallica or U2's discography since the mid 90s that I'd consider comparable to their earlier material.  For me, it's mostly forgettable.  

Not saying that had Axl released new albums at the same rate that they would be any good, but ask yourself how many people going to see Metallica or U2 are there for their post 1991 material?  

That is an absolute nonsense post. Pure garbage. Who gives a flying fuck why people are going to the shows? Fact is fans are going to the shows but I don't know any fan who prefers ZERO albums as opposed to 5, 6 or 7 or even 1. Only on a  GnR board would you read such crap. Such a desperate attempt to prop GnR up by knocking other bands down. If Guns N Roses fans could still have AFD, LIES, and the Illusions plus 7 more GnR albums how many do you think would say "nah thanks I'm good. I don't want them risking turning out like U2 or Metallica by releasing forgettable music. What if I don't like the new material?" .  Well then you don't like it but at least there was the opportunity to like it. It's like asking a girl out on a date. You might get shot down but if you don't ask she can never say yes.

As for U2 the songs from Songs of Innocence were incredibly well received by concert goers on U2's last tour. Fans were literally singing along to the newest songs in the catalogue on a nightly basis. I experienced it in Vancouver, Montreal and London. It probably had a lot to do with the method of release which everyone bitched irrationally about but in the end it was a smart move and it resulted in 80 million downloads not to mention countless other listens from people who may not have ever listened to or even heard of U2.  So don't sit there and try to perpetuate this BS that nobody goes to a U2 show to hear new songs. It's bullshit. Of course most wanna hear the hits but to act like nobody is going to a U2 show to hear music from the most recent album is stupid. As for Metallica the new album is kickass so I'm pretty sure there are those who are attending shows who hope to hear newer songs along with the classics. I've always been a casual Metallica fan but I thought the new album was kickass so what did I do? I bought a  ticket to one of their shows for the first time ever. Trust me releasing new albums is not the waste of time GnR fans like to pretend it is just so they can justify in their own minds the complete incompetence GnR has when it comes to such a thing. 

Fact is U2 and Metallica have done it much better post 1991 than GnR. To argue that is asinine. 

5 hours ago, maynard said:

It would be stupid to expect them to leave their comfort zone at this point. It would be stupid to expect U2 to stop focusing on being 'the biggest band in the world' and do something different.

It's weird. NLOTH was an experimental album in a way, it was very bleak. SOI has some cool songs in it. Bomb had an anthemic U2 song (City). But all these post 2000 albums lack something. And I think for the last years U2 has been trying very hard to sound like what's in the radio, instead of working on their own talents and songwriting skills.

And all the Trump talking doesn't really put me in the mood to give this album a chance. Yes, U2 has always been political. But bashing Trump is so obvious, so easy, so unoriginal...

I hope SOE has at least one song that reminds me of the 90s U2, which is my favorite era. I don't like what I've heard so far. If there's any rapping on this album, I think it's time for them to call it quits.

Have you listened to The Blackout yet? To me that's them out of their comfort zone, or calling back to their Achtung Baby days. In fact it sounds like it could almost fit in perfectly on that album.

5 minutes ago, ZoSoRose said:

New song kind of sucks, wow. Not "bad", but boring and forgettable. I dont think Ill listen to it much at all

Everything on SOI destroys it imo

 

Edit- I say this as someone who loves pop rock. I thought Every Breaking Wave was extremely strong and should have been the lead single of SOI. Thats a total pop rock song.

I agree. Totally forgettable. It doesn't suck but it's not good either.  It's mind numbing how they chose this as the lead single. Also agree 100% about Every Breaking Wave. The album version have most definitely been their lead single followed up by California. 

33 minutes ago, EvanG said:

It's a pop song. I know most rock fans are afraid of pop, but if it has a catchy melody and it's overall a good song, I'm hooked.

Never been afraid of pop in my life. This song just doesn't have any of the qualities you speak of in my opinion. The chorus is horrible. Verses are ok but the chorus really ruins the song. It's bland, painfully repetitive and it drags on way too long in my opinion. 

Oh well. Like Meatloaf said; 2 outta 3 ain't bad. 

It's boring, safe and uninspired. 

Reactions to this will be: "Yeah that sounds like U2. It's ok I guess"
Reactions to The Blackout would've been" That's U2?! That's pretty awesome!" 

*sigh*

Exactly what I was worried about.  I'd say my prediction was spot on unfortunately. No idea what they were thinking by having this the lead single over The Blackout. It makes zero sense. On one hand you've got a fresh, up tempo rock, dance hybrid song that doesn't sound anything like what you'd expect U2 to sound like in 2016 and on the other hand you have this safe, almost uninspired, paint by numbers, meh adult contemporary type song. Is it a bad song? No. Is it a good song? Ummm.... no. It's just a song. It's absolutely B-side material compared to The Blackout and The Little Things, which would have also made a much better first single. I don't get them

For me it's less resentment and more of a "Really? Wow.  "  Really it comes off as anger sometimes but it's not really that. People have mistaken calling a  spade a spade for anger and negativity over the years. Guns N' Roses as an organization has in fact disrespected, disregarded and blatantly mislead loyal fans for years. I would understand people who do hold resentment, especially those who defended and worship the ground Axl walked on no matter what but for me it's more like I just think they're pathetic. Music gods but just really pathetic when it comes to everything else. I don't know of any fanbase other than GnR fans that have been treated with..... what seems like contempt almost. I guess I just shake my head. They make every little thing seem impossible yet other bands pull off all the time. Even the simplest of things. 

11 minutes ago, StrangerInThisTown said:

Slash and Duff hopefully only signed a touring contract that runs out soon, so everyone in this lineup can go their seperate ways once this tour is over. Because this would then make room for what should have been done in the first place, a proper GNR reunion. Sort out the Izzy issues and get all in a room together and just WRITE. Get Mike Clink or Mutt Lange to supervise the project. Test the waters with a one off show first perhaps. Axl can release his leftover Ashba/Bumblefoot songs as a solo release and have maybe Slash and Duff guest and help him out on it a bit. Do a proper tour with just the classic guys, and maybe Dizzy.

That would be my perfect scenario of what should happen. What's gonna happen? I think even the band is living day by day show to show and doesn't know. Hopefully they do the right thing

The clock is ticking, thinking about what can happen while this lineup fucks around and endlessly tours makes me shudder, like Izzy or Steven suddenly passing away before a proper reunion happens, would make me extremely mad at the guys for choosing their pockets instead, and would be a real kick in the teeth.

Not Mutt Lange. Maybe Bob Rock but NOT Mutt Lange. We don't need GnR sounding like a hybrid between Def Leppard and Nickelback. 

Just now, AxlRoseCDII said:

I don't see any life for this band after the NITL tour finishes up. I see Guns concluding at the end of 2017, but without officially confirming it kind of like how no one knew what was happening after the UYI tour finished up.

That would not surprise me at all either. 

I don't believe there is a future for this band beyond touring. I really don't. I think when this all runs it's course Axl will run off to AC/DC and actually do an album with Angus, they'll tour that and when that has also run it's course he'll reunite with Slash and Duff and tour with GnR again. I don't believe there will ever be another GnR record. I hope to be proven wrong but that's what my gut tells me. 

Guaranteed the reason has NOTHING to do with saving money. Of all the extravagant things Axl does, there is no way he gives a flying fuck about saving what could amount to a few hundred bucks on a microphone.   What the actual reason is though I don't know but yeah there's no way it's to save a few bucks. 

2 hours ago, double talkin jive mfkr said:

axl loves vancouver and im sure duff/melissa appreciate it 

i rememeber the rumor was that axl had bought a penthouse right on burrard bridge and never lived in it 

Didn't he do the same thing in NYC but as a renter? I thought I read he rented a penthouse in NYC for like 3 years and never once moved in. 

U2 is doing this very thing right now. Every night of their tour the middle portion of the show is them performing The Joshua Tree album in it's entirety in running order. It's really awesome and a great way to celebrate the 30th anniversary of the album, along with the massive box set reissue of the album(hint hint GnR). I saw them on this tour opening night in Vancouver and though as far as U2 shows go that I've been too it isn't in my top 5, it was still really cool to see them perform the entire album which meant a few songs they had never played live before. My only critic of this in U2's case is, I think in a live setting the album would flow much much more effectively in reverse order. 
 

1 hour ago, Powerage5 said:

I got a ticket on StubHub for Buffalo on Tuesday - $19 for GA field. I think I'll manage to have a good time for that price. 

haha that's awesome. Why would someone sell it for that cheap? At least ask for face value. You're right though. $19 for GA at U2. That's a steal! 

Arguably U2's best ballad and yet it's rarely mentioned outside the hardcore fanbase. It was released as a single but it was quickly forgotten and doesn't get any radio play anymore compared to With or Without You and One.  The song is one of my absolute favourites to listen to while walking at night and yet still a cool night time city driving song.  It's got such a  great mix of melancholy  with a nostalgic vibe and yet there's a tinge of hope in it. It's just an amazing song. 

7 minutes ago, Black Sabbath said:

Yeah, took 5 listens before I realized the clapping and crowd stuff was still audible throughout the song.  So good point.

But I hope they wouldn't be silly enough to release a ballad at the first single in a week, right after this. Unless they both plan on being on the radio, of course.

 

Either way, I wasn't expecting any of this right now. Figured they would finish the Joshua Tree 2017 tour before talking anything about new music. Hoping the new album will be out before the end of the year.

I think that's the plan. I can't see them releasing two songs right now within a week and then not release the album before Christmas. That would be incredibly dumb.  I suppose if You're The Best Thing is a great ballad and they choose to have it and The Blackout on radio at the same time it would be kinda smart. They could run their course till November and then they could release the second(third) single and the album could come out first week in December. I guess the more I think about it if the next one is a great ballad having both a ballad and a rocker/dance song on the radio at the same time as co lead singles would be kinda smart. 

** And with The Blackout, dare I say the younger generation might be into this as well. That course is incredibly catchy, rocky and dancey. 

1 minute ago, Black Sabbath said:

I'm mainly hoping that You're The Best Thing About Me isn't a ballad. If they come out and officially announce the first single as a ballad, that's just stupid on their part.

But, if this song still ends up on the radio, they've got some more relevance back on their hands.

I agree. That's my worry too. It would be insane to release this today on facebook and then next week release a ballad to radio as the lead single. 
I just threw on my headphones and holy shit this song sounds great. I wonder how much of this is studio and how much is actually live. The live vibe comes through so much more with headphones on. I'm interested to hear the straight album track. 

I don't know if in this day and age this is good or not but the facebook video has 400 000 views, 41 000 likes,  17 000 shares and 11 000 comments in 2 hours. Pretty sure they have a mini hit on their hands here. I didn't expect the song to be this good. Now add this to 'The Little Things That Give You Away' and they have 2 really great songs on the album already. If 'You're The Best Thing About Me'  is of the same quality they will have 3 really good songs already off the new album. 

I haven't stopped listening to this. It's badass. Absolutely a rock and dance song mixed together. I can see them opening shows with this but would prefer them to, even though they never would, close the shows with it. Rearrange the ending a tiny bit so it's more of a sudden stop with Bono shouting "WHEN THE LIGHTS GO OUT!!!!" one last time and as he does so all the lights go out at once.  Would definitely end the shows on a high but U2 rarely ever end their shows with a fast song. 

I don't know that it's better than the best on SOI but it's definitely made the anticipation for this album much higher. This is easily the best "lead" singe they've put out since Vertigo and I'd dare say since Beautiful Day because I think I like it better than I liked Vertigo upon first hearing it. 

Is there a reason why I no longer have the option to give other members +1s ? 

I've listened to it 4 times now and it's fucking good. If 'You're The Best Thing About Me' is a ballad they will have made a major mistake having it as the lead single and not this. This song has such a great vibe and groove to it.  If done right it could be amazing live. 

It's pretty damn good. 

On 8/18/2017 at 5:31 PM, jmapelian said:

Ugh,  Whitesnake is reissuing a mediocre album,  guns have been selling out stadiums.  I'm sure if Cloverdale could sell out more than a small club I'm sure he'd rather be doing a stadium tour than a reissue.

U2 did both. They managed to reissue Joshua Tree with a massive box set and sold out a massive stadium tour this summer in support of that. Now they're releasing a new single today and a new single again on September 6th and are getting ready to release a new album all the while still touring their Joshua Tree 30th anniversary stadium tour into the fall. Their new album by the way will be their third new album since CD was released. The fact you or anyone justify and defend GnR at this point is pathetic. Absolutely hilarious that anyone would have an either or attitude as if GnR touring makes it impossible to have reissued and properly celebrated AFD's 30th anniversary. But yeah David Coverdale only reissued Whitesnake's album because he can't tour stadium.... 

16 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

Because he wasn't?

 This type of comment never ceases to amaze me. It's like some pseudo GnR fandom where by saying Adler wasn't the original GnR drummer you've somehow proven your GnR fandom and loyalty to be that of a higher standard than the normal, rational, sane fans. Steven Adler was the original drummer for Guns N Roses no matter how hard people like you wanna pretend anything prior to the AFD fan has any importance and contributed anything to the GnR legacy whatsoever