koldbeer2

Rightfully so, it's a poor song imo. Monsters is by far the stronger of the two. The live version is a little better but still pretty weak stuff overall

The General just isn't my type of song, hard pass personally. Monsters is an OK song, nothing special but it's listenable enough, great vocals as well.

That solo section was amazing from Paradise City, they were both totally in the zone. Great watch!

I was legitimately thinking this. They made the video because Axl isn't fat anymore.

An actual legitimate video as well with this one. I'm guessing Axl is happy with how he looks now. An OK song, nothing special but it's easy enough listen so it may gain more traction than the others simply due to that.

Perhaps.

Out of their tiny f****** minds to give that a 5 stars. I think its been fairly unanimous that the AM set was boring, with shocking vocals (regardless of cause,on that night its not different to Axl being from his old best) and just a total lack of energy. Yet 5 stars. GnR even taking away Axl issues had more energy in one song than AM entire set qnd had a very engaged crowd. 2 stars. Its absurd, and perhaps they need a hard skool to teach them how to review properly because that shit isn't it.

Yeah I kind of agree, I'd not rule out Axl playing something with Elton on the Sunday, but we will see. McCartney would be a huge duet for sure, though I'm not convinced it's that likely. I'm pretty confident we might get another foo fighters/guns collab mind you...

I'd imagine they would rank it at a similar level to Rock in Rio/Coachella, though perhaps more like the latter due to having done rock in Rio now several times whereas previously having never done Coachella. I think its really the final major festival they've never done. They also know this will get millions of watches just from the BBC alone, yet alone the probable 10s of million cumulative views it will get on youtube for better or worse. They won't get a bigger platform than this. Plus its age as a festival and history brings with it something very few festivals have got as well. I'm not sure if its the highest or not, but this is clearly not a normal gig for this band like your making it out to be. You don't release a 2 and a half minute trailer on youtube for the concert if it isn't a big deal.

Yeah I don't think you publish that video on youtube the night before Glastonbury for no reason. They know its a big deal, we've had Duff describe it as special, etc. Whatever your thought are about Glastobury, its clearly a very big deal for the band.

Yeah thats a fair point, its huge on the British media and the BBC itself is a bit of a famous institution which lends some extra weight to the festival. In many ways its an extension of the BBC itself. I think alot of people are only starting to now know the hugeness of this festival. It absolutely sits alongside the likes of Coachella, etc at the top elite level of festivals. As much as your Downloads, Rock am Ring, etc are big festivals for the genre, this is another league up again.

Rock in Rio possibly? Different crowd to be fair, but thats a very large festival that has live coverage of all bands. I can't think of any other on quite such a scale mind you (I guess 2011 as well but that was without Slash/Duff so it doesn't hold as much weight with the public)

I'd say three main reasons: 1: History, its been going on and off for well over 50 years now, so its a bit of a grand daddy of festivals that are still going today. 2: Size of the festival, 210,000 people last year, it has been even bigger in the past as well (300k in 1994). Those 210,000 tickets all sold out in 33 minutes last year, before any acts were announced. For context, Download this year sold out its 100k tickets a ,month before the event. So Glasto sold twice the amount in a teeny tiny fraction of the time of a large metal festival. I'd imagine Download is comparable to most other festival gigs Guns would do globally. 3: Cultural element. Someone was right earlier when they said its such a massive site that you could literally spend the 5 days there and not see a single music act. Its absolutely a cultural event, and is now far beyond just a music festival. Probably Woodstock is the best comparison I could make to it, though there are other music festivals like Coachella which are probably in the same league as Glastonbury. But this festival really is an elite festival, beyond the norm even for a stadium band like Guns.

Possible, it will probably be just a fluff piece anyway saying how excited they are to be there, etc I'd imagine.

Yeah I've no idea where people ate getting the idea that this isn't a big deal. When you've got foo fighters doing a 'secret set', a band that normally easily headlines festivals in their own right, happy to do a set in this position in itself should tell you why it's so big. It's equally as important as coachella, rock in rio, etc...

I'm talking about pre 2016, they'd never done Coachella before and they never did Glastonbury in their prime either. Whereas they had done Rock in Rio in the past. Obviously after this weekend they've done what you could consider the biggest three festivals in the world, at least on a reputation basis.

I'd be surprised if we don't get at least one big name guest, its kinda like Coachella in that respect. Elton John does feel like a poissiblity though as he is playing the following day appearing on Guns set may lessen the anticipation for his own gig in a funny sort of way. Still that seems an obvious choice given the history. ACDC/Angus is another possiblity again for historical reasons... However Guns are big enough name that some left of field options may well happen. We've seen the likes of Ghrol and Pink afterall come up at seemingly random. Regardless, this is a hugely important set to the band, probably only Coachella and Rock in Rio are probably comparable, but unlike Rock in Rio Guns have never done the other two which gives them even more signficance to the band I'd bet.

Just listened to it on that channel, it sounds really good and vocally it'd be well within Freddie's wheelhouse as well (IE its not super high like some of the CD songs go)

The difference with Axl using what you call as Mickey in ACDC is he chose for it to be that way, he could have rasped all the songs, his voice was clearly able to but for the artistic purposes chose some songs to sound like that. Rightfully so IMO. He was still capable of a great performance though. Listen to thunderstruck from the early European tour of ACDC and then with a straight face tell me thats not a great performance... As for the clean voice in 2001, I legitimately think his voice was just an evolution of 1993, which already had a very similar timbre and feel to it at times, just with more edge to it. He could definitely still do 'it' in 2001 though, a listen to Chibi in August 2001 shows that he could do it. Rocket Queen is legit 1986 sounding at times its bizzare to hear a 2001-2002 gig with such vocals.

I'm fully expecting baritone Axl will be showing up again at some point in this tour.