Nintari

This poll results so far smack of (no offense to those who voted for the remasters) recency bias and ignorance. Check the dynamic range of these discs. They're crushed. The originals are empirically superior.

The only thing the remasters are good for is for studying textures and the different odds and ends that went into making them.

But the sound quality?

No way.

Wow. A new show. I'm so excited.

Yes. The coolness factor of the band would increase by a approximately 14%. 

On 12/2/2022 at 5:12 PM, Stay.Of.Execution said:

So because 1 whiny bitch got hurt, all other fans have to suffer of potentially catching axl's mic

I hope at least it fucking hurt and her nose is damaged for good

I hope for the rest of the world's sake that this was mostly an embellishment meant to make everyone laugh...

There are a handful of songs that can not be covered correctly... and SCOM is one of them. Stairway to Heaven, Bohemian rhapsody, Dream On etc... there are others. And while some people have tried to cover them (looking at you Panic at the Disco), it's always awful and it's always blasphemous. It's better to find great obscure songs and cover those imo.

Glad Youtube is a thing.

I griped about the banner not long after they reunited back in '16, saying the logo and theme should be changed to match the original band. It was shot down instantly and with a snippy attitude to boot.

When I buy a live album, it's because I want to listen to the band... live. If I wanted a studio take, I would buy the studio record. The fact that this opinion is the minority baffles the fuck out of me and to no end. I mean it too. I literally can not fathom how that is not the mainstream way of thinking. Live album=live. Studio album=studio. That's the way it should have always been. But no... fucking Kiss and their fucking sound-check nonsense... sigh.

They need to sell this as a stand alone. Same with the live tracks.

1 hour ago, James Bond said:

Completely unaltered save for some trimming between tracks (ie. Slash's bum start on Sweet Child at the Ritz has been omitted).

The original post you quoted was a response to someone mentioning they still like Live Era.

Thanks... and that's a relief (for me). I never cared for canned lived albums. Although most of them are. They just don't for work me.

Glad to hear these are the real deal.

13 hours ago, Free Bird said:

He talks about Live Era. The 30 anniversary UYI releases are unaltered. 

All of them?

On 11/14/2022 at 9:12 AM, agustingloger said:

The ones that are original yes, i can't stand the overdubs now

What? Please tell me this isn't true. If it is... sigh. What the hell does this band have against releasing unaltered live music? Are they really that insecure about a missed chord or a bad note here and there? Makes no sense.

Edit.

7 hours ago, Tom-Ass said:

Yeah So Fine is pretty weak.. I used to like it back in the day... I feel people also take My World way more serious than it was meant to be. 

The My World thing around here is weird. When it first came out and me and my friends heard that song, we all use to sit around and literally giggle. Later, around 1999 or so, it was agreed that it was the worst song GNR ever released. Then CD era happened, and suddenly, it was cool? Why? Because Silkworms? It's just strange lol.

So Fine and My World are the only two songs I feel fall into filler territory. The rest is fine with me.

Despite the overuse of piano in the song, I'll choose Bad Apples because I hate the harmonica on Obsession. I like harmonica in some genres (folk, blues and acoustic music, mostly), but not in my GNR. As a matter of fact, I really dislike the sound of anything other than drums, bass, guitar and main vocals in their music. If it's a ballad, like November Rain or whatever, okay. That makes sense to me. But horns on Move to the City? No. Horns can fuck off. And that includes Dark Side of the Moon, and all the other classic records that thought blending Bing Fuckin' Crosby and Jimi Hendrix was a good idea.

15 hours ago, Rovim said:

nah, I don't believe it. It's all sunshine, orgies and icecream. Look: thanks to many good, quality people who are not just focused on themselves and have the motivation to make it better, there is always improvement in many areas in life.

The world was uglier, more racist, sexist and homophobic even 15 years ago not to mention 100 years ago. It doesn't happen by itself. You wouldn't want to live back then. When you want to improve, you have to take responsibility for your actions and own it. I'm talking about the opposite of hiding from whatever truth you want to express but there are ways to do it like a cunt in a crude way like OIAM where Axl basically chose to do it at all costs which I think was juvenile, naive, and selfish and there are ways to, like I've said earlier, find the right balance between speaking your truth and to be at least somewhat sensitive and aware to the implications of your actions. 

the freedom you lose to be a piece of shit like it's 1955 is what happens when the world "grows up" and people sometimes collectively learn from their mistakes. It usually seems to happen slowly and gradually and when it doesn't, it just stagnates or becomes even worse in many cases.

as for your silly little comment at the end there: please.... if you don't have anything of value to say, don't say anything at all cause being a musician shouldn't give you the right to be a shit person or any other profession for that matter imo. "I need the freedom to be racist right now cause I'm an artist that needs to work on some issues". It's just another excuse to act like an angry child.

 

This may shock you, but you absolutely do have a right to be a "shit person". It's not against the law to be mean, racist, bigoted, ignorant or even say hateful things, despite what other online activists may claim... and there's no changing that. You can go online and try wielding your imaginary sword in an attempt to rid the world of bad people all you want. But bad people and bad things date back to the very beginning of time and will continue until the very end of time. And while it may be less bad now... it'll never be even close to the utopian society that the aforementioned activists envision. Human beings are hardwired against it, and there is no undoing that on a mass scale.

Having said all that, I'm done having this discussion with you. It's become clear to me through your tone that you never intended to have a thorough exchange of ideas in the first place. You saw what I wrote, misinterpreted it, then decided to engage in a debate based on that misinterpretation so that you could tell me how wrong I was and how right you were. I'm not interested in that. Find someone else.

6 hours ago, Rovim said:

 No one should have the freedom to spew hateful shit that has the potential to snowball to actual violence and that's why you don't really come across songs like OIAM in the mainstream anymore which must be a good thing imo.

The world is ugly and full of bad things. You can't hide from it. You can't change it. The only thing you can do is learn how to tolerate it and move on.

Also, nice boys don't play rock 'n roll.

22 hours ago, Rovim said:

don't get what you mean by completing the circle and what is the context? if I had a bad experience with a black guy one time and a homosexual man that other time and I was a famous musician who made sure to write a verse at the end there that acts as a disclaimer that I'm not racist and homophobic even though I went all out with using the N word, the F word, the immigrant thing, etc and generalized the shit out of those groups of people then it's fine, I'm not racist and homophobic? even the rest of Axl's own band didn't really get behind the lyrics.

I think some words have the power to spread hate even if I believe that Axl is not that guy anymore and people can change.

racism and homophobia are still real issues irl so it makes sense that there is social presence that condems this shit so society doesn't tolerate it as much anymore. It's progress as I see it and I don't think this song should ever be played in a show, (I still listen to it often cause it's a great song imo and it doesn't offend me, but I think it shows that Axl was in a very negative and ugly place in that aspect back then in his life and maybe confused his own personal experience with entire groups of people and as angry as he was, chose to find release by writing a song that I feel was used in the end by idiots to fuel more hate. 

also this song wasn't erased, and culture is not so easily erased either. you can still listen to it as much as you want but I think I know what it is and it's not an innocent song, no matter how Axl tried to justify it.

I believe it's important to find a healthy balance between freedom to say what you feel and the decency to not be a racist and homophobic piece of shit cause that should be unacceptable, no matter how you try to frame it. 

 

It completes the circle of a human being starting off in once place and then finishing up in another.

As far as context goes, at one point, Axl was just a little boy, free of prejudice and bigotry until his parents, friends, church leaders, people at the grocery store etc. put those ideas into him. He grew up in an environment which harbored such beliefs as fact. So when he hitchhiked to LA, and he saw these things, he connected the dots with all the stuff he was told growing up and believed them to be proof-positive; the black guy selling gold chains; the Indian overcharging things at the convenient store; the press running stories about homosexuals spreading AIDs... it was like, of course. He'd only been warned about this stuff his whole life. So it only made sense at the time, and being a truthful artist, he decided to tell his story about it in a song.

But it was an incomplete story, and as time went by, his intelligence gleaned a broader truth, and he realized the error in his views and changed and became a complete person with a better understanding of the world.

No one is racist or bigoted inherently. They are programmed to be that way. But don't try to tell that to the equally bigoted finger-pointers. They're bigoted, after all. They see things exactly the same way that racially bigoted people do: black and white, evil and righteous, right and wrong. The concept of context does not exist for them, and they don't care because again, they are prejudice. But there is no way they're changing the world with anger and resentment and hostility. Even with love and understanding, there's still almost no chance for the type of change they're calling for--but at least there's some. With hate, there's zero.

Zero.

On 11/12/2022 at 2:27 PM, Rovim said:

and then he apologized for it and never played it again. Still a great song imo.

Right, thus completing the circle. And that's why it's not offensive to me. Everyone online is knee-jerk and idealistic right now. They don't understand context. They don't take into consideration a person's background or point of view. They don't allow for change and growth. It's basically, be perfect and flawless, or be erased. It's absolutely insane and won't last as a concept.

Besides, how many of the finger-pointers are without blame themselves? They're just as nasty, or even more so, than the people they try to destroy.

None. They're dynamically crushed (loudness wars).

20 minutes ago, Sonic Reducer said:

A man can be honest and an asshole at the same time. This is the same thing in song form. Think about a neo-nazi black metal band, they might be honest about killing brown people, but that does not make them great artists, at best it only gets them jumped. If I were a necrophiliac and wrote a song about how much fun I had butt-fucking some dead granny in a funeral home would that make me a great artist? Would you buy my record?

I don't view the song that way. I see it as an account of a young, super-naive white kid from a bigoted background who's scared and trying to make sense of a new world that's overwhelming and threatening. He's paranoid, jumping at shadows, doesn't know who to trust and has thus, forms these base-line, hard-wired, rudimentary judgments. It's the first act of a larger act.

It's fascinating.

8 hours ago, Sonic Reducer said:

yes, the heartfelt sentiment expressed in the song is horrid. It has nothing to do with a "safe space". Art is inherently political, a work can absolutely be judged on its politics.

But that wasn't my point. My point was that art's at its best when its 100% honest. And that song is 100% honest without even a hint of filter. Therefore, it's great art. As a matter of fact, imo, it's art personified. Sure, we can all argue about the subject matter, but as an artistic expression, it doesn't any better.

On a side note, Axl addressed this issue in Don't Damn Me, basically saying that what he sees and how he feels is what he puts into his music, and he's not apologizing for it because his job as an artist is to tell the truth... and that's what he did.

3 hours ago, Sonic Reducer said:

I'd have to say lies simply because of One In A Million and the fake live audience.

One In A Million is the reason why I like the record. It was the coolest song on the record before everyone decided that words do, in fact, break bones, and it's the coolest song now. Art isn't suppose to create a safe space. It's suppose to tell the truth about the world through the eyes of the artist... and what better example of that than One In A Million? That's what Axl saw and felt, and it's about as heartfelt as you can get. Perfect.

As far as the topic goes, I would say Live Era is by far my least favorite. Something about fake live albums just don't do it for me.