themadcaplaughs

Stunning response

Thanks! I had never seen this. Again, maybe Fernando is being 100% sincere and honest with these comments. Given what we know about Fernando, however, I tend to take everything he says with a large grain of sale. Within all these comments, you can see him choosing his words carefully and making huge qualifications on his statements ("the one thing I can say for sure", "I can't comment on what Axl is willing or not willing to do," etc.). We know from others (Skrewel being a notable example) that Fernando just lies to make himself sound more knowledgable on certain things than the may actually be. Reading this, and giving all positive benefits of doub to Fernando, I read this to say that maybe the label did not definitively say "no" to a new record at that time, but that the situation was more complex than "Axl will givem them an album and they'll release it immediately". Like all things, the truth was probably in the middle. Maybe the label was willing to talk about a new album, but would not entertain certain expectations Axl had in how it would be marketed.

Ok. It seems like you're taking my talking in broad strokes and trying to make it sound like seem like I spoke in definites. If you're going to say something like "most non-GNR fans don't know who Slash and Axl Rose are", it doesn't seem like that much of a stretch to say that "most non-Pink Floyd fans don't know who David Gilmour, Roger Waters, Nick Mason, and Rick Wright are". Also, why are you bringing up Oasis? I do not claim to know much about them (I think they are one of the most wildly overhyped bands of all time), but to my knowldge, they were never in a situation where they were releasing music or touring without one of their two most famous members. Regarding "nu-GNR", it kind of only furthers my own point that people see Slash as one of the faces of Guns N' Roses. Look at the history of "nuGNR" in thier home country; they struggled to cosnsitently sell arenas. Their two big arena tours in North America (2002/2011) largley struggled to get anywhere close to fillung arenas. I'm not going to say there weren't certain markets where they did well (MSG in 2002 being a notable example of an arena show that went well), but when they played full tours, they struggled to even sell 1/3 of the tickets at some venues. They really forwent even playing a true "full" North American tour in 2006. By the final year of "nuGNR" (2014), the band was for all purposes really a band that could fill large theaters and the occasional festival in the United States. Yes, there were always going to be ticket sales from: (i) hard core fans and (ii) general audience who would see GN'R under any configuration just to hear Axl sing the songs, but in terms of ticket sales, they weren't close to the classic lineup in the 1990s. The second Slash and Duff stepped back in, the band immediately went back to playing stadiums and the band's press coverage for their shows was immediately expanded. Smashing Pumpkins, in my opinion, represents the closest analogy to "nuGNR" in terms of how things played out. You had a classic band lineup whose image was a huge part of the band's popularity in addition to its music. When the band came back in 2007 with only two member of the band's most well-known lineup, the band managed to get some early buzz based off the name recognition, but were playing smaller and smaller venues with less fully-attended shows. The trend only continued when Billy Corgan continued the band with him as the sole member of the classic lineup. The second the Jimmy Chamberlin and James Iha returned to the band in 2018, there was substantially more interest in the band then there had been in the previous decade. Regarding the music buisness aspect, it's a known fact that music had been in a downward trajectory beginning around the year 2000 due to music piracy. If we go by the rumor that Axl wanted to release a follow-up to Chinese Democracy in 2010/11, that would have really corresponded to the time in the music business when revenue was at an all time low. Admittedly, the music business being at an all time low is much more income than we could ever imagine, but there was still a general feeling that the music industry was decimated and would not take unnecessary risks: particualrly one like releasing another album by "nu-GNR" when the previous one was met with lukwarm sales. It really was not until 2014 that most people see streaming as moving the music buisness regaining much of its income. If you do not think the rumor of "CD2" is true, that's totally fine. But that does mean you have to ignore what objectively true facts regarding the status of Guns N' Roses as certain times. I've found that most people who shoot down this rumor do not do so based on objective facts or statements (like Fernando's comments @Blackstar provided), but simply because they do not like admitting that, based purely on ticket sales and album sales, "nuGNR" was, at best, an experiment with mixed results if not a failure (which, of course is not to downplay it's artistic merit; I love all eras of the band).

Never knew that Fernando directly addressed the Chinese Democracy follow-up rumors. I remember Axl obliquely referenced in a tweet when that supposed PowerPoint about the Chinese Democracy re-release/DJ Ashba version of "Better" was going to leak. What exactly did Fernando say? It's entirely possible Fernando is telling the truth. We know a lot of the rumors from that era of the band were b.s. by certain individuals trying to seek attention, but at the same time, the whole rumor about Axl wanting a new album to drop in 2010/11 always seemed very plausible to me. Also, Fernando is Axl's cheerleader, so even if the label did reject an album, the chances of Fernando openly admitting it seem slim. To be fair, it very well also could have been a situation where the label just did not want to release a record so soon after Chinese Democracy. Chinese Democracy dropped the end of 2008, and the band did not even start touring it until over a year later at the tail end of 2009. Even during 2010, the band's touring schedule was somewhat sporadic and we did not get a true North American tour until the end of 2011. Point being, if Axl really did approach the label in 2010 about a new record, it would not have been unfair for them to say they felt the band was still promoting Chinese Democracy and the sales of Chinese Democracy probably didn't justify rushing a second album into market quickly like with Radiohead and Kid A/Amnesiac or Metallica with Load/ReLoad.

Music business was a LOT different in 1987 (when the Roger Waters/Pink Floyd split was finalized and the band released A Momentary Lapse of Reason) and when a potential follow up to Chinese Democracy would have been released (presumably, if the rumors were true, sometime between 2009-2011). The record companies were playing with a lot more money in 1987and could accept the risk of a Roger Waters-less Pink Floyd album underperforming (although it ended up being very successful). Also, differences in the band and publicity. Although Roger Waters had taken increasing control over the direction and sound of Pink Floyd through the 1970s until the release of The Final Cut in 1983, it's fair to say the majority of the general public was not really aware of the politics within Pink Floyd. After the departure of Syd Barrett, Pink Floyd was always seen as a somewhat "faceless" band by the general audiences. It was not until the band's contentious legal proceedings in 1987 that the issue of who constituted Pink Floyd really entered the public conversation. On the other hand, following the end of the Use Your Illusion tour, I think it's fair to say that Axl and Slash (and to a much lesser extent Duff) were the public "faces" of the band to many. Additionally, Guns N' Roses' internal dramas and personalities had been media fodder since pretty much day one; people always had a vested interest in who was in GN'R. I'd also guess it has to do with the fact that Guns N' Roses has always had larger than life personalities in the band whereas the members of Pink Floyd (again, excepting Syd) always had an "everyman" quality to them.

This. Also, we know that Axl's writing tends to not follow the most conventional methods and be more impressionistic. If the book is what Axl is really doing, I imagine it would be more of Axl reflecting on major events in his life (particularly his childhood and early adulthood) and discussing how those affected him as a person, artist, and songwriter/lyricist. Of course, I'm sure there will be portions about his experience with Guns N' Roses, but I imagine it would be less like Slash, Duff, Steven, or Matt's books which are laid out as "here are the big events during the band's run with my thoughts on them." Also, Axl seems at a relatively peaceful place even compared to where he was at the end of the run of "nuGNR". Obviously, he has mended fences with Duff, Slash and (to a degree) Steven. He seems to be in an amicable place with Erin Everly. Given this and Axl's generally private nature, I do not imagine this will be a book like Matt's (or at least the one that leaked) where the intention seems to be "settling the score" on decades old feuds. Again, we likely have a manuscript to that effect in the "vault", but there'd be no issue in releasing that now given that many of the issues seem to have been resolved.

My understanding, having been present on the message board of certain "insiders" (IYKYK) was that Chinese Democracy, against all odds, set the ledger to zero when it came to production costs. People throw around the $13 million dollar number a lot, but almost all of that was written off over the years through the various mergers and acquisitions of the record labels. Apparently, Universal only footed a small portion of the Chinese Democracy expenses before cutting off Axl in 2004. When Azoff, one of the most powerful managers in the business, negotiated the Best Buy deal, Best Buy covered the portion of the money Universal spent and ordered a million copies of the record. Despite all the money sunk into the project and the jokes made at its expense, Universal essentially went into immediate profit on the album AND got to state that the album debuted as a platinum record. The Azoff thing is tough. I have no doubt Azoff probably used less than truthful tactics with Axl, but at the end of it all, Azoff was probably the only person powerful enough in the business at the time to negotiate the deal he did. I honestly believe, without Azoff, Chinese Democracy would never have been released (at least in a conventional sense). Also worth nothing was that the costs of the Chinese Democracy sessions also (per the same "insider") covered the costs of the CD2 material. So beyond the fact that the record company made all their money back on Chinese Democracy, they also had the recording cots of the next album covered as well. The issue, apparently, came from the fact that the record label, in 2009/10 (when Axl wanted to release the next record), would not release anything unless Slash/Duff were back in the band in some capacity. Despite the majority of CD2's costs for recording having been paid back, the label apparently did not want to spend another dime on other costs (like marketing) for "Axl's band" given the muted reception to Chinese Democracy. So how did we get to where we are now (as @Blackstar laid out). As a former entertainment attorney, my guess would be one of two things: 1. Unlikely: Axl's contract had some kind of reversion right for masters. This would be very unlikely given that this is not something that really got added to contracts until fairly recently. 2. More Likely: Given that things were in a "stalemate", the band probably paid a lump sum to acquire the masters back to the remainder of the songs with the record label having a right of first refusal on a distribution deal. In other words, the band would foot the costs for extra recording, mixing, mastering, videos, and the majority of the marketing. Under the distribution deal, the record label would pay to manufacture the physical product, coordinate getting the song on streaming and download platforms, and (possibly depending on the deal) paying some minor marketing costs. The record label would then take a cut of the money made from these sales/streams/downloads (usually 15% for a distribution deal vs the up to 80% a record label can take under a normal record contract). It's also possible, with a band the size of GN'R, they just paid the label a lump sum for these services and GN'R gets to keep all money from streaming/sales/downloads.

I'm willing to be proven wrong, but I would not expect a book. It seems so out of touch with Axl's desire for (relative) privacy when he's not playing shows. And while I know Baz mentioned Axl having written a book, I felt Axl's comments in the chats back in 2008 suggested that it would be more along the lines of a comprehensive detailing of what Axl saw as the downfall of the "classic" band. I doubt it would be wise to release that in 2024.

Really cool to state the obvious. Beyond the musical performances (which are top notch), it's fun to see the band be so cocky and confrontational on the eve of having signed a record deal.

Gotcha! I feel like, at the time of the rumor, the word was that it would be a GN'R track so I wasn't sure.

If this ever sees the light of day, do you think it would actually be released as a Guns N' Roses track; it seems more like a side project/one-off type thing. I guess I always took this rumor slightly more seriously than some of the "insiders" who lurk message boards since it came from a well-connected source, but damn, I remember this rumor being fairly early in the "NITL" era of the band. Little does Zak know that this post probably delayed the track by another five years.

I saw James Barber speak at a music business seminar just about 9 years ago. He worked A&R with Geffen in the 1990s and the live album and the beginning stages of Chinese Democracy were some of his last projects working at the label. He spoke about both of them briefly. To be fair, I take what he said with a grain of salt as he stated Axl, to his knowledge, did not record any new vocals. I think, objectively, that his been proven incorrect. What he did say was that, when this project got proposed around late 1997/early 1998, it was starting to become clear that a new album was (at least) two or three years away. The label was desperate for anything Guns N' Roses related they could rush to the stores. In order to give the record label something and convince them to keep funding recording sessions for what would become Chinese Democracy, it was apparently Doug Goldstein who suggested the idea of a live album and the record label ate it up (it was an added bonus that the project could be marketed around the "classic" lineups of the band). The label was on-board and Slash/Duff were really stoked on the idea, so it seemed like a win-win. He said even Axl was excited about a live album and thought it would be a good "sendoff" for the older lineups before moving into the "new" era. Barber said the problem was, right after this project got approved, the current band actually started making some substantial progress on writing new songs and dong some preliminary recording on what would become Chinese Democracy. With all that going on, Axl apparently lost all interest in the live album. Axl outsourced all of the work on finding old recordings and working with Duff and Slash's teams to make the final track list to Del James. Barber said he still enjoys the album, but felt it could have been a much more unified product had Axl stayed more focused on it. Instead, he felt (and knew fans felt) that the whole thing had a "slapped together" quality to it. All this is to say, I'd be curious to know how much actual involvement Axl had in how his vocals were presented on the album. On one hand, we know he must have done some re-recording of vocals. Furthermore, it does seem stereotypically "Axl" to go down to the granular level of using different vocal performances for individual phrases in the same song. At the same time, I am inclined to believe Axl really did not give much attention to this project. Even in that Kurt Loder interview from 1999 (the one time I can remember Axl talking about the album), he seems fairly disinterested in it. FYI, Barber said he personally loved Chinese Democracy. He said, to him, it really hit all the goals Axl talked about in the 1990s in terms of how it would sound. While he said he could understand why some people didn't dig it, he also looks at one metric of an album's success being whether or not it reflects the goals of the artist. He says, whether or not you like the album, it seems like the complete statement Axl wanted to make with the record. He also said he had seen GN'R for the first time since the 1990s in Atlanta at the Tabernacle in 2012 and thought it was an excellent show.

I liked it a lot as well. I've always accounted its failure less to the quality of the music and more to the fact that, in 2007, rock bands (other than a very few select legacy acts) were out of vogue and music piracy was at its all-time high. Contraband had been a very weird moment of the world collectively being interested in a new rock band in the early-mid 2000s, but that was also built of the legacy of Guns N' Roses, Stone Temple Pilots, and seeing all of these guys out in the public again (I think people have genuinely forgotten that Slash really had fallen off the radar to the general public in the late 1990s/early 2000s). I think Libertad was just people "moving on." Liking the album a lot, I was always kind of bummed that everyone other than Matt seemed to think it was not a particularly good album.

I know I mention my brief meeting with Tommy before one of his solo shows often, but he specifically mentioned he considered Richard a great friend and that Richard was one of the few people he still talked to from the GN'R camp with any regularity (the others being Frank, Del James, and Dizzy Reed). He also said that while he doesn't really talk to DJ Ashba outside of the occasional social media interaction, he thought DJ was a really nice guy and that he lightened up the mood a lot during those last few years of "NuGNR". Like others have said, my guess was that Tommy was referring more to Buckethead, Bumblefoot, and (maybe) Paul Tobias. Even then, I took his comments to be more along the lines of "I wasn't super close with them like I was with Robin" as opposed to "I absolutely hated them", although Tommy has spoken pretty disparagingly about Buckethead through the years and all signs seem to point that he really did not like Ron that much. As for Paul, he always seems to be the "wild card". The few times Tommy has mentioned him before, he doesn't seem to state he disliked Paul personally, but just did not take him very seriously at first given that he'd never worked on a professionally made record before. But in those interviews, Tommy has also conceded that Paul brought some really good ideas to the table, which is what he seems to be getting at in this interview; you don't have to be best buddies with a bandmates or think they are the most qualified, as it ultimately comes down to what ideas they bring to the music making process.

...and yeah, I remember the local rock station in Atlanta at the time played the title track every hour the first day it got released. After that, I only recall hearing it a handful of times, but they kept the intro each time.

I imagine the band does as it earns them some income: probably not enough to live off of, but a band at their level might actually make some notable income from streaming.

Wow...this went off the rails quick even by MyGNR standards. I think it's pretty obvious that the idea seems to be AI graphics were used to enhance a concept that was developed. Like someone else said, I sincerely doubt they typed "create a Guns N' Roses music video for The General" into Bing chat. There seems to be some real misunderstanding of how AI would/could be used, and a lot of people sounding like Grandpa Simpson yelling at the cloud. For what it's worth, I will judge the video when it comes out and will be honest about it. Like @Blackstar said, I am not the biggest fan of the aesthetic, but to call it devoid of creativity seems harsh. It seems more creative than the "Aburd" or "Perhaps" videos. I think it's cool that, for this batch of songs, we'll have two music videos. One will be a more "traditional" performance video (for the more "classic" sounding song) and one will be something a little weird (for the more idiosyncratic song). If that does not match what GN'R did in the 1990s, I do not know what would.

Too funny. I remember in those 2009 shows, Ashba tried to play the solos - particularly "Better" and "This I Love" closer to how Robin played them on the album. By 2010, you can see DJ had made little changes to all of his solos, but those two in particular were heavily reworked. To be fair to Ashba (and it's tough to admit this), I actually think even his reworked versions of the Chinese Democracy guitar solos were lightyears ahead of how Slash has played them in recent years.

This slipped my mind completely! If I remember correctly, the mayor caught flack for this and had to retract the whole thing later.

While I am aware of clipping in a general sense and know it has been on ongoing issue for years, I typically do not immediately hear it unless someone points it out to me. That being said, the second the chorus kicked in during "The General" I immediately heard it; I thought something was wrong with my headphones for a second. I listened to it on Spotify, Tidal, and Amazon Music and heard it in all versions.

It was not a vinyl exclusive. After a brief delay, the band got the vinyl orders shipped. It is Slash playing on the outro. "Monsters" was not a part of the release. The world turns... Now that we live in a post "The General" world, how do we all feel? I, for one, actually like "The General". I was one of the very few who seemed to enjoy it more than "Monsters" (other than fantastic vocal performance at the end, I found "Monsters" to be a "C-tier" song). Having said that, maybe we, as a society, should no longer ask for Sebastian Bach's opinion on Guns N' Roses music...

Fair enough. I am certainly not going to argue with your opinion and I do not even disagree with some of the points you made. To me, those are all complaints about the band as an entity. For me, that does not affect my enjoyment of the songs (which I do really enjoy). But thanks for explaining your thoughts! As for "Skool", yeah, that's a groaner. But then again, it strikes me as something Axl would think is cool. He uses "n" instead of "and" in public correspondence and posts 25 year old memes on Twitter/X; just reminds me he's a bit of a dork in his old age lol (in a lovable way).

I see so many complaints about the bell at the beginning of "Hard Skool". I understand it is kind of a groaner, but does it really ruin the song that much for people? I am not trying to be sarcastic or condescending; it's a serious question. I guess it makes me roll my eyes a bit, but constitutes such a small part of the song it does not bother me too much. There are weird little insertions on the Use Your Illusion albums that bother me more.

I in no way, shape, or form said it was true or that I believed it without reservation. If you can point out where I said that, I will gladly retract it. My point was simply that this is not exactly something that came entirely out of left field. You are right: it is entirely possible this is a frivolous lawsuit, but you cannot overlook prior history when discussing these things. I wholeheartedly agree in not condemning Axl until this gets resolved, but it's naïve to pretend (as some people did to avoid the cognitive dissonance of this happening to one of their heroes) there is no precedent for Axl being accused of this type of behavior: particularly when this Axl was accused of this type of behavior in the past when it was rarer for such matters to be made public. Admittedly, my last post was a little sarcastic, but my point was simply to emphasize that acting like Axl is a saint was being foolish.

Yeah, surely a complete cash grab: against a man who seems to have been suffering from severe mental health issues at the time, was famous for having a hair-trigger temper, and was shortly thereafter accused of similar things by two other women.