19AT5

16 minutes ago, Gordon Comstock said:

 

I don't care about "what GNR was" lol. Of course they didn't make AFD 2.0 (honestly, who would want that?) but Axl and Buckethead sounded good together and I'd like to hear more of their songs. Stuff like The General or Prom Violence with vocals would be interesting to hear, plus whatever else is in the vault.

What GNR became around 2002 was a joke. The VMAs was a disaster. And Chinese Democracy became the longest running joke in the rock press. You have 3 songs (I think) on CD which were co-written with Buckethead, one of which is a bloody car crash (Scraped, albeit cool solo), another of which has a catchy hook to it, but is neither one thing or another (Shackler's Revenge) and another which sounds like a Bond theme (If The World, which I actually don't mind). This is hardly a great selling point here! 

1 hour ago, Gordon Comstock said:

If "Dummy" is actually Cuban Skies, I wanna hear that one... and any more solos like TWAT or ITW would be nice.

Perhaps just go and listen to a Buckethead album then!? You have several hundred options to choose from.... which is actually mental in itself! Agree both solos in those songs are really good. But, as good as Buckethead is, he didn't fit into GNR... for what GNR was. 

8 minutes ago, Gordon Comstock said:

Plus I want as much music from Axl and Buckethead as possible.

Fingers crossed there is more stellar material in the vault like Scraped!!!!!!  

Some of the selects are bloody awful. The version of Paradise City actually astounded me how crap it was! However, I really enjoyed hearing Locomotive. Out Ta Get Me was a blast too. I mean overall, it's not great. But there are a few decent moments in there like. 

There's a helluva lot of imagining having to go on here really ain't there!

8 hours ago, megaguns1982 said:

My dream is for Gnr to make a Netflix deal for a 10 part series of the perfect crime. 

My dream is for the legendary 2002 GNR lineup to get back together and re-record the Use Your Illusion albums in their entirety. That's my dream!

4 minutes ago, jamillos said:

I have no problem with this (the question is whether the US can be compared to the rest of the world, but even if it was the case), but I maintain that if I don’t get a physical CD, I’m pirating it, definitely not moving to streaming services or whatever the hell. There’s still money in it (they can make preliminary surveys, can’t they), and records will be records – or do you expect grandfathers to go fully online? 
Once again – other bands do it (without getting financially ruined), so can this one. 
 

Christ, you are making me work here! Hahaha! Again, fair point. So short answer is no, US is not comparable to other countries other than perhaps UK in terms of digital uplift. However, the US market value is just slightly smaller than the combined other 4 spots in the top 5 across the globe. I couldn't get a breakdown of the physical purchases as to whether they were CD or vinyl. But we can reasonably assume, that the uptake in physical will be vinyl... I think. 

Just now, jamillos said:

Don’t know about “most people”, but the fact remains that a lot of people still do and are going to, especially older generations. And even if most people streamed it or whatever, these “old-timers” won’t switch to this type of sources just because. So if, hypothetically, physical records completely ceased to be released, we’d pirate them and then put them in our hard drives. Meaning the band wouldn’t get the money it normally would have from a physical record. There may be less and less in it, but it’s still something to take into account.  

Not trying to be a pedant here... 

According to the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), CD album sales in the United States have dropped by 97 percent since peaking in 2000 and are currently at their lowest level since 1986, when Whitney Houston's self-titled debut album topped the Billboard charts.

Having been hit by the rise of filesharing and MP3 players in the early 2000s, CD sales nearly halved between 2000 and 2007, which is when smartphones and the first music streaming services emerged to put the final nail in the compact disc’s little round coffin.

In 2020, 31.6 million CD albums were sold in the United States, accounting for less than 4 percent if music industry revenues.

1 minute ago, Rovim said:

sidenote: you like 8 Chinese tunes out of the 15 released. Exactly 39.26 minutes of Chinese you enjoy out of the full album which is 1:11:18.

 

I promise you that was completely unintentional! 

Just now, ToonGuns said:

I'd rather have a double album with filler than a streamlined single album of c. 30 mins.

Well, Chinese Democracy should meet that requirement nicely then! :):):) 

1 minute ago, Rovim said:

do you consider Chinese a classic album? are there fillers in The White album in your opinion? The Wall or Physical Graphitti? do you prefer short tunes or long tunes? I like it when the musical statement is maybe not perfect, but you gain a more adventurous approach. In fact, I like when bands get the chance to do both.

 

All good questions! 

1. Chinese Democracy - I generally think the album is an utter mess with a few notable exceptions (Better, There Was a Time, Madagascar, and Sorry all being really good tracks in my ears). I also don't mind things Street of Dreams (title is terrible though), If The World (guilty pleasure), and Shackler's Revenge. The title track is cool too. But all the rest is pretty lame to my ears.

2. The White Album - I thought you might hit me with this! Hahaha! Yes, there is a lot of filler on it I think. But obviously some outrageously fantastic tracks as well. Likely would be a better single album, or 1.5 album!

3. The Wall - Actually, this one does flow pretty well and generally doesn't have too many shit points! So yep, I'd say this is a decent double album. 

4. Physical Graffiti - I'm a huge Zep fan and I've never gotten along with this album all that well for some reason. It obviously has some bloody fantastic songs on it, but most of them are just tooooooo long, in my view. 

I'd throw in Exile On Main Street as being the best double album, possibly. I think strictly speaking, both Illusion albums were doubles when they were released originally on vinyl. Had this been condensed into one double album, it would be the best one I'd say! But alas. 

I do take your last point, and get what you're saying. And sometimes it works. But mostly not, in my opinion.

Just now, PatrickS77 said:

Disagree. The only way I ever buy music is physcial. Never ever will I buy a download. And I know plenty of people who feel the same. As for album length. I love me a long album. I don't advocate for an album to be short. I just don't see why anyone would release a double album at this time.

Yes, fair point. I shouldn't have said 'nobody'. Instead 'few people'. But the way people consume music has now changed and it is digital more than anything else, with vinyl a very distant second place. 

3 minutes ago, jamillos said:

Not all of us are 20-year old, smartphone-dependent fools. I’m 39, and while I have a general idea as to what Spotify is, I’d never listen to music from my favourite band just through some streaming service. I like being offline too, and I dislike always having to rely on internet connection, wi-fi signal, phone data, and all this crap. That doesn’t make me an outlier, by the way. If I really like a band, I buy their CD. Not to stick it in the drive each time, but to grab the mp3 to put it in my PC, to have the original including the booklet, and above all, to support the band. 
As for the "how profitable is it" talks, the principle still stands: music bands release records. Other mainstream rock bands do it, so why the hell should GN’R be an exception? You may go see a gig, but I want something more lasting, permanent – and a shitty Youtube video doesn’t meet this need of mine. Bottom line: albums will always be released, one way or the other, no matter how (un)profitable it may be. 

I'm 36, and I haven't bought a CD since 2014 (which was AC/DC's Rock Or Bust album). I have no intention of ever buying another CD but may look at vinyl again at some point. But I like most people, as the stats evidence, use streaming services to access music. 

To answer your question though... feck knows why GNR can't do it! But the reality is they don't and haven't done in a long, long, long time. It's a fair question though! 

9 minutes ago, Rovim said:

what about Iron Maiden's last album though? how many minutes?

the way I look at double albums is if the band has enough of "new" cool musical ideas to share and it paints a picture, go ahead, go all out.

in Gn'R's case even more warranted imo with their experience of releasing the Illusions, Gn'R's challenging live vocals, and the supposed shitload of material Axl got in his hard drives.

Okay, how many top to bottom classic double albums can you name? And on a side note, have you ever considered that perhaps all this alleged material hasn't been released, because it isn't finished or isn't good enough? Very few artists having treasure troves of unreleased quality material lying in the vaults. Just, like, because. 

3 minutes ago, Rovim said:

but it's not going to sell huge anyway even if it's just 1 record? AC/DC's Power Up, did it sell millions? what was the point in releasing it from a commercial standpoint? still, fans seems to be digging it. Roger is old and has made a ton of great records and the difference in sales between 2016 and 2021 is marginal enough to not be relevant imo when it comes to double albums.

The cost: Axl and the record company have already paid for at least the recording of CD ll. The band is rich as fuck.

music fans come in all kinds of shapes and sizes. Box sets are in it seems. Some people will always have enough attention span to listen to long records similar to how they like to read very long fantasy books for example, even if the pace of life in the modern world is faster.

AC/DC's last 2 albums... lasted less than 40 minutes. Foo Fighters last album... lasted less than 40 minutes. These are bands GNR would be hypothetically competing with. Sure, some artists will release slightly longer albums, and some people will listen. But there are few major artists putting out double albums just now due to the very fact... nobody buys the physical product. Also, one of the major criticisms of the CD-era, was that bands released albums that were waaaaaaaay too long. Metallica's Load and Re-Load albums being two example, clocking in at 70 minutes. Most RHCP albums also fell into the same trap. All you are getting in this instance is quantity over quality. The Illusion albums even have been criticised, with some degree of justification, for being too chunky. To summarise:

1. CD sales are low (and have actually halved in the US alone since 2015). 

2. Double albums are generally full of fat, and lean on quality. 

3. GNR have released 1 single album in almost 30 years.

All in, I don't see the appeal from a fan or band's perspective. 

19 minutes ago, Rovim said:

it's not like a double album is such a weird concept in today's musical landscape, especially for less prolific bands is it?

Metallica fans and critics seemed to have embraced Hardwired To Self Destruct. I wonder if people that like this album think it would've been a better record had they released only half of it and somehow made it cohesive.

if Axl got the tunes, I can't think of a better candidate for the double album approach than Gn'R.

I'll give you this... you're keen on the double album! In today's musical landscape, where streaming is king, it makes absolutely zero sense from a commercial perspective to release a double album. Regardless of how prolific one is. Just this week, Roger Daltery from The Who questioned whether it is worth releasing another single album, let alone double magnum opus. Why? Because it costs too much. Metallica's last album came out in 2016 when CD sales were slightly higher than they are today. I'm not sure that would happen now. But regardless, Metallica are an active creative outlet. GNR are absolutely not. 

3 minutes ago, vloors said:

When Susan Mckagan said the new albums coming maybe she got confused and it was just Duffs pre gnr band.....

At this stage I am beginning to hope Velvet Revolver reunite (along with Izzy taking Kushners spot) with a decent new singer (not myles) instead because I have no faith in Axl releasing anything.

Myles Kennedy!

3 minutes ago, DurhamGirl said:

I cant help but think Slash and Dufff reunited for the money not making new music, unfortunately, they have their own bands to do that with.

Well after 5 years you could be forgiven for thinking that!

41 minutes ago, DurhamGirl said:

From 2010 onwards one would be forgiven for thinking they are actually recent threads as exactly the same refrain is being repeated over and over again:  new music, new music, new music and same old reasons as to why we may  not be getting any yet but it will come.  Twelve years on does anybody, in their hearts, really believe there is going to any new music released.

Nope! Not at all. All faith has been lost in that regard.

56 minutes ago, jamillos said:

There are many options. Axl could use just the lyrics. Maybe show them to the boys and let them start from scratch with the music. Etc. 

There are indeed many options. Including one that nothing is ever released! 

1 minute ago, Rovim said:

stop being so simple. Why would Axl relinquish control? how does that serve him? "there's no fuckin' deadline" Axl once said if I'm not mistaken. Unrealistic to expect Axl to agree to this contract imo.

To be fair mate... Equally unrealistic is your belief he should or will release a double album.

Perhaps GNR should consider releasing a quadruple album. Seems a good shout. 

1 minute ago, Rovim said:

which is exactly why I think he should release 2 albums in 1 day.

Right. So... the dude releases one single in almost thirty years, and here we are discussing the possibility of a double album in one day. In an age where people don't consume music the way they did when this band was last relevant! Okie dokie. 

Just now, Rovim said:

possible, but not likely. Especially since Axl said CD ll was completed "a long time ago" and that was about 8 years ago iirc.

it's just so many people have said Axl got a lot of finished material. He had most of the tunes that made it on Chinese and the 2019 leaks as far back as 1999. Brian May talked about it saying the songs had vocals.

 

He may well do. But reality is... one album in almost 30 years, and he ain't getting any younger. 

2 minutes ago, Rovim said:

Axl had a very long time to finish a lot of great tunes and I think that's exactly what he did so it would be ideal for me if he just released as many Guns tunes as possible but would still make it feel like a cohesive album. It's possible.

I admire your faith, but I'm not sure it is realistic. Unfortunately. 

6 minutes ago, Rovim said:

but this way Axl can just change his mind after he releases just 1 album for many reasons. They can rotate the songs like they did in the past and the NITL lineup sometimes played 8 Chinese tunes in 1 show. They can play 5 new tunes every night from the new album.

Are we listening/talking about the same band here?! The typical GNR set list has been pretty much static bar the odd surprise here and there for the past few years! (NOTE: I did however welcome with open arms the addition of Locomotive back in the set!) 

1 minute ago, Rovim said:

look at it this way: Chinese was supposed to be a double album (or at least more than 1 cd according to Tommy)

Duff has said more than once that Axl got a ton of unreleased material and by now I believe most of it is already completed (Chinese era version)

also only 1 album released in 30 years and Axl is not getting any younger. The advantage of releasing double the amount of material could be significant to the live shows too instead of waiting 5 or 10 more years to release another album that might never come and Axl could be too old to sing the shit out of it live like he did in 2006, 2007, and 2010 with Chinese.

it's not like they have to write another album just to make it a double release so if Axl releases just 1, it probably means a lot of great tunes would be just left in his hard drives.

 

Artists are tending to release albums that are shorter in length these days. Case in point - latest Foo Fighters album; clocks in at just under 40 minutes. Just like the old days. Young folk are not buying CDs and whilst there is an increase in vinyl, it doesn't compete against streaming services. Saturation is generally not a good idea. The idea that GNR can release a double album and succeed commercially in today's climate is not all that aligned to reality, in my view. Personally I hate double albums for the very reason that they are just too bloody long! 

In all honesty, do you see GNR touring in 10 years time? It had not occurred to me until now that he will be approaching 70!