Sprite

I listened to it again with headphones on last night and it's just fantastic. My favorite album definitely. At least it gets more spins than anything else over the last 8 years. I really love how Axl evolved with the times (albeit by '08 it already had the 90-ish vibe). To me it showed not wanting to be stagnant and wanting to be fluid and creative with the art he puts out. Picaso didn't paint the same picture twice. I know a lot really only want an artist to stick to their niche which for a lot of people is 70's hard rock for Axl, but to criticize him for evolving his sound to match his environment? And to do it from a keyboard? Irony.

It's just great though. I'm really into the vibe of If the World. It's so laid back yet heavy. It's an interesting blend. Scraped gets a bad rap around here. That might be the most Appetite track there if you scrape away the "polish". It's got a heavy rhythm section and great lead guitar.. what more could you ask for from Axl in 2008? Somewhere out there exists a raw, raspy version. 

Riad works and might be the heaviest song on the album. I think the noodling style solo works well with the vocals that interlude between clean and raspy. 

Sorry is Axl's take on the Wall, from outer space. It's completely psychedelic and I like to think that video was real because it really captured the eeriness quite well. 

The lyrics are so perfectly GNR too.

It's just a great album for me. 5/5 stars. 

That's about as deep in the "what if" drawer as you can get haha..

4 hours ago, wasted said:

I think problem is when you isolate a quote or section from the book and base a reaction off just that. 

Slash also said it was a legal faux pas (mistake?) and that he never thought Axl would continue GNR without them. So when he signed it was like whatever who cares. 

People make too much of a big deal over the name though. I checked a Van Hagar album out and didn't like it, I liked Brian Johnson DC in fact more than Bon era, I love CD era Guns, that Motely Crue album without Vince was great. I'm not going to focus on stuff I don't like. 

I think if there is enough interest to dissect the book than the opinion is already made up. At this point we just want confirmation of what we already think vis-a-vis the Axl v. Slash argument. It's masturbation really.

As for the naming rights it feels a little like getting into the neighbors marriage life. But I tend to side with the Axl point of the contract would have been null and void had the threat of not going onstage in front of thousands if Slash & Duff didn't sign. I feel like I could argue this is court. Imagine a real lawyer? That's almost like getting a false confession. Ok he said it, but what was the circumstance? I don't think wet blankets work all the time and I don't think that was very likely to have happened between the 3 of them.

The way I see it is it's not mine, I'm only a fan. And I don't have the experience to say what I would have or what could have been done differently. I just enjoy the music and like listening to professional musicians. It is possible to like Buckethead and Steven Adler at once. I know.... I'm going rogue. 

9 hours ago, wasted said:

wonder why it was leaked?

Was it Tommy and Ron's parting shot?

Why did this leak and not other stuff? 

I wonder this too. Didn't Ron sort of confirm it's authenticity too by sending a tweet shortly after with the #goingdown hash tag? It sounds like a song off Village Gorilla Head which makes me think it started as a Tommy song and was GNR-ified. I think Ron did a great job and I really like the subtle backing vocals. It sounds like Tommy Stinson lyrics.  

Why did this one leak? Good question. It is sort of amazing that we got a decent quality version of that randomly but that 17 second Jackie Chan clip has been around for 15 years now and nothing. How would you feel if there were more CD-era songs in this style that Axl wants to release?

On 6/12/2016 at 3:02 AM, Rovim said:

Yeah it sucks. Not worthy. Doesn't sound truly Chinese. Tommy Stinson tune that wasn't good enough to be included on one of his solo albums.

I don't think it sucked and we don't really know what the rest of the Chinese leftovers sound like so maybe there is more in this direction? Or even if it's a one off song, it works.  It's got a similar vibe to me that the 1999 demos had. I'm a huge Tommy fan though and I'd love to see Tommy release it if Guns weren't doing anything with it. Tommy and Izzy have had the best solo careers of anyone in Guns in my opinion.  

Sorry to bump this but I was listening to the song and forgot how great it is.

It makes you wonder if we'll ever see it officially released because it was well received for the most part. Axl did sort of allude to he might still release GNR stuff without Slash at the China exchange recently didn't he? Or is Tommy and Bumble being gone officially put an end to that era of nu guns? 

I think it's a great song and I'd love to hear a finished version without the vocals buried in the mix. It has an earthy, catcher in the eye/ IRS demo vibe to me. It would have been cool to see  that style of album. 

3 hours ago, wasted said:

I think most of the songs are perfect. It's just the difference in production between Shackler's, Sorry and IRS is a lot to take in. The demos are just demos they just don't have the punch of the final versions. But if you find CD too glitzy then maybe the demos are less annoying. They sound like potential UYI tracks. The songs are still great. But there's much less to enjoy sonically. Which is part of the fun of CD. CD is just rammed with stuff to wank over. But there's still great songs underneath it all. 

I think the demos, especially Catcher and IRS, had that organic sound that people really like. Maybe this is an avenue Axl still wants to explore? Going Down kind of fit that mold too with the "Earthy" vibe. But I guess it's a little too late with CD material unless the thought is an Anthology release where you get the kitchen sink and then some.

I usually weave in and out of what I'm listening to. The core artists are always the same for the most part, but I might binge on AC/DC for a couple weeks, then on to Christmas music, then back to STP or Lennon. But CD is the only constant for me. I can find something new with headphones on with each listen. It really is a masterpiece and the fact it's so hated or rejected almost adds to the mystique. 

I worry with the return of Slash and Duff and the willingness to play CD material, more and more are starting to accept it. I hope it keeps that mystique for me though throughout. It's almost like once cannabis is legalized federally it's going to lose it's luster to a degree because you lose the "doing something you aren't supposed to be doing" aura. 

CD is like a fine wine though. It's getting better with age.

16 minutes ago, Apollo said:

The hyperbole from some of you is funny. 

I love how much you guys care what I think. 

Its cool that a GnR video has received so many YouTube plays.  But it's also a format that Katy Perry as a couple in the top ten of all time. 

Lol. Apparently to be a "true" fan we must worship everything Axl does. Smh. 

No joke do you have a crush on Axl that you are having a hard time dealing with? You seem to think this forum is a gushingly flamboyant Axl nut-sucking site. I think there are some like that but from my perspective the vast majority of the complaints on here are directed at Axl, fairly or unfairly.

I notice you like to come in to just about any topic, and post something that essentially is akin to a back handed compliment. Meaning you play victim in that people respond to whatever negative comment you say about how Axl isn't impressive or what he needs to do, or in this case reminding everyone that "artists like Katy Perry are in the top 100 too", but then always respond to peoples responses along the lines of "Don't get so worked up over my opinion." And when you are really feeling frisky you say shit like "Too bad Axl doesn't get this worked up over his band." Like it's always got to have that little one liner there right? 

I think it's awesome a 25 year old video can compete with the monstrosity today's pop music is. Add in YouTube is used primarily by younger people, who generally are attracted to newer, pop music. It's an impressive feat for sure for GNR. And Katy Perry is one of the biggest stars today, like it or not, so for GNR to compete in today's marketplace with her is cool. You realize it's not a slight right? Because November Rain is obviously a masterpiece musically, lyrically and the video. So if anything you should be saying "Isn't it great that in our bloated pop entertainment world, a song with the integrity of November Rain can garner just as much popularity as a Katy Perry?" 

I can balance both truths of yes, YouTube views don't mean everything, and popularity for that matter sometimes has little to do with quality which I think is the point you are scratching at, but I also understand the role and importance of technology and sites like YouTube, and like it or not, it's exposed a lot of people to that video and GNR. No other artist pre 2000 has a video with that many views. That is saying something.

Furthermore, YouTube is the 2nd most visited website on the globe, second only to google. For a band with little self flaunting, who has been seen by many to be basically non existent up until this year since 1993, to have a video in the top 100 viewed videos, on the 2nd most visited website in the world, is extremely impressive. Threads get made when Axl is trending on Yahoo search engine. It's cool for fans to see "their" band getting accolades. It's really as simple as that.

With your constant need to play devils advocate or be the one who critiques Axl, in what you feel is a forum that does not do that, I can't help but think if say, this were a Nirvana vs. GNR "popularity" thread, and switching the roles to say Smells like Teen Spirit was the video from 91 with 600 million views, and November Rain had half that, you would be telling us this is the reason Nirvana is more popular, or using it to make that point.

We all see things how we want to see them. But you're playing victim or you attempt to be the "voice of reason" but honestly your posts are more and more coming across of the ramblings of a crazed, closeted man with an odd attraction/aversion to W. Axl Rose. I don't mean any grief to you personally and the closeted comment is really good natured ribbing, but  dude. Come on. 

Run on sentences were probably littered all over this but it makes it harder to read and understand which gets you thinking of a better response. I still think you are a good poster and I enjoy reading your posts, let's just ease up on the constant negativity and you could be one of the better ones up there with @Rovim and @wasted. Go read the last few pages of the social media thread. It's essentially a shit on Axl fest, as usual.

1 hour ago, wasted said:

DC just have a more feelgood rocking set. I watched a few vids. Civil War with Slash recently and it was good. Nightrain with Bucket was pure danger. Then Highway to Hell was just so awesome it's hard to reslly describe it. Guns just don't have as many straight ass kicking songs. Jungle, YCBM, Chi dem. mostly they have a bunch of ballads. They could probably put together a ACDC style setlist but all these songs like Nov rain, Don't cry, Patience, Civil War, Estranged, This I Love just aren't as badass as Hell's Bells, Shoot to thrill, Highway to Hell. 

For me there is a time and place for ACDC's style of music. I love it, but after awhile the repetition really gets to me and I have to turn it off. But like a bad cold my listening to them lingers on for weeks. And that's also why I love GNR because they're a 6 course meal, there is usually something for everyone and for me their music isn't as tiring. 

I don't want to or expect Guns to have a set like that. I don't even know if that's possible with their catalog. ACDC perfected hard rock pop. Simple song structures for the most part, light hearted lyrics usually. A lot of Guns songs are just too nitty gritty to be compared with ACDC and that's not a knock against ACDC whatsoever. You need the tongue-in-cheek writing style for ACDC. Used to Love her would work with a few tweaks. Out to get me could have made it on Back in Black sans the swearing. But the ACDC influence is pretty clear when looking at GNR as a whole.

6 hours ago, wasted said:

also Axl has said he sees a record as or should have the spirit of the band that made it. With that in mind, with Ron and Frank coming in maybe he wanted them on the record. And maybe there were bits he wasn't happy with. I think Ron improved Chi dem and his Shackler's solo was iconic. Ron played rythmn on every track on CD. He made CD more rock n roll, as hard as that is to believe. The final version is the best version. 

For all the criticism the album gets for over production or too much tinkering, Ron's parts in the song CD put it over the edge. It's perfect. When I listen to the demos or live versions from 00-07 I feel empty.

9 minutes ago, Lies They Tell said:

Axl seemed way more confident here, compared to those That metal show and Jimmy Kimmel interviews. And it's no wonder. When Slash and Duff are in GNR most people accept it as GNR and Axl doesn't have to defend himself like before. And surely the positive reactions to Axl/DC has helped too. Great to see him this way.

Probably feels like it's less "me against them" type situation now. When you have Slash and Duff back with you, you have GNR from a publicity standpoint. Everyone knows Axl and Slash but a lot are starting to know Duff too in ways outside of music. Considering Duff has become this era's rock musician turned intellectual and has had success in doing that and putting his name and thoughts out there, he brings credibility. For a better or worse, he brings more credibility than the guy who left the band in 91 that only hardcore's really know, or Steven or Matt. 

You still have to deal with the crazy fans who insist this is nothing without Steven and Izzy though. I feel their pain in a way because I'm as big of fan as they are. But really they have become the internet's version of groupies. They are after using the band to promote themselves if you think about it. Only instead of wanting to be famous or sleep with the band, they are wanting to get off using nostalgia from them so they can bask in the memories they have. The memories that remind them of a simpler time in their life perhaps. Or some people really need the symbol of the original band in the same way I use the clock to tell the time.

"How can you call it GNR without Izzy and Steven!?!?" is just like "How am I to know what time it is without the clock!?!?" Because the sun shines bright and the music is always there regardless that's why.

So I think Axl can handle that critique easier than the burden of a large percentage of people not thinking it's GNR without Slash, and now Duff, who I think has earned 1C to Axl and Slash's 1A/1B.  

18 minutes ago, scooby845 said:

so that's why you got a tree in your profile pic right?

Must be! I didn't even realize that until after I posted that haha. 

Everyone has a bad picture or at least wouldn't want a bad picture available for others to see. So I understand it from that level. I also understand what others are saying which is sometimes it's ok to let sleeping dogs lie. Being a celebrity really magnifies scrutiny I think because you are so out there for others. The internet is in the process of unifying us but along the way you are going to run into some bad people who want to remain in judgement of "them" or "the others". 

If you could pluck yourself momentarily from who you think you are, which i presume to be GNR fan, someone who works, someone who likes music, someone who goes to school, someone who eats pizza; If you could for a second only witness that. Go "out of body" and just witness yourself being as opposed to identifying with the "actor" who loves pizza or music, or is a student, etc. 

From that perspective everything becomes clear and undisguised. You are no longer zoomed in on the "storm cloud" picture of your life, but have zoomed out to see that storm cloud is surrounded by a bright blue sky.

In doing this it puts things like bullying, name calling, and general shittiness humans sometimes exhibit in perspective. At what level is a meme using a poorly angled photo of Axl, coupled with a fat joke ok from an inclusion level of not wanting to hurt others? If I am in a grocery store and see a fat person shopping for pie would it be appropriate for me to make fun of that? I think reasonably you could say no because ultimately you are sending negative emotions into the universe. 

A little off topic, but it gets at the greater point. Take Forensic files as another example. Why I can sit and watch that show with intrigue I'll never understand, because if I heard the screams of murder coming from next door that changes everything. So it's like this separation we have from each other through technology is creating negative feelings or making us act in ways we normally wouldn't if we didn't have this separation on TV or the internet. But I still see the whole spectrum of the blue sky that this technology is ringing in.

But the illusion of separation is but an illusion. In reality we are all connected in some way, like trees. Try to look at people like a tree. When you look at trees in a forest you don't notice how that one didn't get enough sun which is why it's tilted, or that one is half dead with dry leaves, you just see trees. Without judgement. So practice turning people into trees and you'll see that's much more exhilarating than a bad picture of a celebrity with an oatmeal joke meme.

1 hour ago, paranoyd androyd said:

100% accurate statement and i was a much bigger GNR fan than Metallica. there's no doubt Axl felt a ton of jealousy and anger during/after the Metallica tour. also, Slash was a huge Metallica fan back then so who knows if that might've bothered Axl as well.

Every comic book story has a bad guy.

2 minutes ago, Un42nutzly said:

Hahaha I really like that analogy! But that's exactly what it is, and it doesn't make any friggin' sense!

And they'll say "Well, we are allowed to have an opinion too yadda yadda yadda" 

Of course you do - but if you didn't like this, and you didn't like that, and you absolutely hated this, then why are you wasting your time on this forum? 

I just think you learn to adjust and accept it. Even the negative ones make me think about my own view so I appreciate that. 

Just now, DieselDaisy said:

Has it ever entered your head that some people find GN'R a comedy? It is not negative - quite the reverse: it is absolute comedy gold.

There's the charm!

Just now, MillionsOfSpiders said:

 

I don't doubt Metallica out did GNR on that particular tour. 

 

 

I don't know if outdid is the word. They got a little more fired up on that tour you could say.

5 minutes ago, tsinindy said:

 

speaking of subjective, I'm going to imagine based on what you said the Met songs that you like are the ones that most hardcore Met fans think suck.

Ha. Probably. I actually am going rogue and think their 2 best songs were the covers of Whiskey in the Jar and Tuesday's Gone. 

11 minutes ago, Un42nutzly said:

I am speaking of those that CONSISTENTLY spew negativity. I mean go find something you enjoy and be positive. Now being critical of certain aspects, that is totally different. We all have something that we are critical about. 

It's funny because you have one part of the forum thinking Axl ruined everything, and the other half that doesn't see it that way. The ones who aren't explicitly negative towards Axl are called "axl nutswingers" by the others (some in this thread!) because I don't think the tired old argument of "Axl's massive ego" is the only thing that happened and Slash and Co. were innocent bystanders. That's revisionist history and it doesn't sit well because it seems overwhelmingly one sided. 

I think people just like to complain. Death, taxes and wishing it was a different way than it is, are the only things certain in life. It does seem odd to me that so many have so many posts but seem to despise essentially everything Axl Rose has done and there is no doubt it's his band. It's a little like the mentality that goes into cuckold porn. It's almost like denying self pleasure which ironically is what's getting them off.

From one of the last great rock and roll bands.....

STP- Tiny Music. 

19 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

You had one great performance and fifteen years of Nugnr shite.

Dude I wish you were there with me in 2011, 12 and 14. Got loaded and jammed to some great music. 

3 hours ago, tsinindy said:

Of course you're wrong, mainly bc you weren't there.  Metallica consistently destroyed GnR on that specific tour.  What James said is totally on point, other than Metallica having a "lean" set list.  They played the same basic set they had been playing since they started touring in support of the black album.  

The audience at these shows was 1/4 hardcore Met fans, 1/4 hardcore GnR fans and 50% casual metal fans and chics, etc that had no real allegiance to either band.

Met came out night in and night out and won a lot of the 50% over with no bullshit, GnR did not.

I was there in 1992 at the Hoosier Dome in Indianapolis and trust me GnR was not nearly as awe-inspiring as they were just one year prior.  Metallica was every bit as good  as every other time I had seen them to that point which was 5-6.

if you think Metallica wasn't in GnR's league you need to reconsider that, bc that tour specifically and GnR's immediate demise was the second biggest factor in Metallica becoming the biggest band on the planet once GnR completely vacated the scene a year later.

 

It's all subjective. Because if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck... but Bob still thinks it's a goose.

Full disclosure: I don't like Metallica. I've tried for years. I think it's Hetfield's growl mostly that bothers me. I like a few of the radio hits. But I generally have never been able to get into them.

I'm speaking mass scale here not of specific concerts dates and the overall perception of the 2 at those concerts. How you went around to 20K people asking them their opinion, and remembering it 25 years later, I'll never know.

What I do know is it's silly to imply either band was that much "bigger" than the other. Both were phenomenally successful. The black album, Nevermind and UYI's were the biggest rock albums of 91 and still today are huge. I also know Guns N Roses won the Billboard music award for most albums sold in 1992. So there is that little nugget to deal with too when implying Guns weren't in Metallica's league.

As I said I think it's all subjective. I could have been there with you and while I might have dug Enter Sandman, I mostly would have been waiting for Guns. I don't think Metallica has ever had the fan base guns does in terms of being a large spectrum of people of all walks of life. There is something there for everyone with Guns. You've got to like a certain genre to really get into Metallica. They are almost more cult like to me. Not as sadistic as the Manson cult but not as impactful either.

9 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

Alright, alright - let's assume that McKagan is less important than others.

Tier 1 members: Axl, Slash, Izzy

Tier 2 Member: Duff

Tier 3 member: Adler

Let's allocate, say, 25% to each Tier 1 member, 15% to Duff and 10% to Adler. Seem about fair?

You still end up with 50% for the Hall of Fame band, and 25% for Nugnr. The percentage in Nugnr's favour are only marginally improved under this system!

(Heck, you could ever dump Sorum, Dizzy and Gilby in a Tier 4 - but I will leave that aside for purposes of clarity.)

And you still end up with Nu Guns as a viable band that toured and the other groupings being not Guns N Roses. 

Let's say everyone here cops to your point. Ok. What then? 

So a couple bands/groupings of musicians, who at one time played a show with more original GNR members than actual current GNR. Ok great. But who had the name?

It's like you argue just to argue.

I think it worked for what the goal was in that era in a similar way to hairspray being vital to the 80's. 2002 was a long time ago now. 20% of the average person's lifespan is how much has gone by since then. Of course it looks silly in retrospect, but in 2002 certain styles were in and the band was going for that odd man out look it felt like. Is it really any different than other peers in their respective eras having a certain look? We just didn't see many of GNR's peers in hard rock make it on a big scale post 2000 so they really stand alone to criticism in a way because they were pioneers, and not living off nostalgia.

I wouldn't go for the style myself but looking at it in the context of what the goal was, which was a makeover of Guns N Roses musically and aesthetically, I think it was a great move on Axl's part. Enough to warrant parodies by the most famous actors/musical acts on famous late night or awards shows. You don't pick on poor people if you know what I mean. 

And from what level are we talking the impact of his look in that era? Here we are talking about it 14 years later. How does the old line go? No press is bad press because it gets them talking? From that level it was great because it still gets talked about or you'll still find daily mail type articles from 2015 about the "top 10 worst plastic surgeries ever!" and they still use those old pictures from the VMA's, which were really just bad angles that people ran with to make themselves comforted in knowing their distaste for Axl is grounded in some sort of reality that comforts their view.

What about from the level of being a celebrity/musician and image being a, for better or worse, huge part of your appeal? I don't know why it is that way but it is. As I said no press is bad press from that level. Alice Cooper gets a pass and he's probably the weirdest one.

All that chaos, all those fuck ups, all the "axl is terrible" articles, all the controversy... it laid the ground for 31 year old band to be selling out stadiums this summer. Who else is doing that this year? Honest question. 

4 minutes ago, Rovim said:

I don't actually think Duff is as important as Izzy or Axl and Slash. Not trying to take anything away from him, he's very important it's just that to me the others are more important.

Which is why I also think new Guns was more Guns than Slash and The Conspirators even when they played many Guns tunes live and it's 1 classic member in each band.

Face it, there are Axl, Izzy, and Slash

Then Duff

Then Steven

From the most important to the least for the viability of the band.

Interesting. I get the logic, I'm just timid to cop to it. I don't know if the inner workings of a band really play out like how we can analyze it. Like Steven was not as important, I can get it. Even Duff. But what is Appetite left with without that groove they perfected? Does the rest of the album organically come together like it did without them? Or Duff's obvious punk influence which was just as vital to Appetite as Izzy's Stones-ness. So to even rate the importance of the 5 seems a little unassuming when you think of the sum total of what they created.

Because I think what made it so great is it all came together perfectly. They all complimented each other and made each other what they were in a way. The sum was greater than the parts type thing, as great as the parts were. I think it's this aspect of the band that people like Tomass and Daisy miss and why all of their nugnr posts are just complaints. The band works a lot different today for sure. Different life stage. Different era. Etc. And I have doubts that it is realistic to think that they will ever return to that Appetite magic, so why hold on to the anger or longing for it? People love to complain or think about how it should or could be. Next to death and taxes it's all we've got.

But at the same time, I get the ranking system. Because to me there is no Guns N Roses without Axl, love him or hate him. He turned this into his band initially which I think was an intelligent move on his end considering the substance abuse and mega success that swirled around them in the early days. He clearly had more of a business sense than the other 4 at the time. He's also the part people know the most. Well him and Slash. So I get ranking them on that level, but I think that is all just fun mind games to play. What happened is what happened and we are left with what's left. We can debate who did more or what version of a grouping had higher percentages, but at the end of the day all that matters is the music that was created.

If that article doesn't make it clear curfews are for a few board members to make some money, I don't know what will short of a board member saying it directly. The guy is actually trying to imply 25 minutes is the difference between civility on a work night and all out chaos on the streets with those kids and their damned rock n roll music. Seriously I'd love to see how many hundreds of thousands that board makes with a "late" show. 

Or how about an NFL game lasts 3.5-4 hours?

Quote

Sunday, Oct. 5 vs. Cincinnati, 8:30 p.m. (NBC)

Thursday, Oct. 16 vs. New York Jets, 8:25 p.m. (CBS, NFL Network)

 

That's 2 home games from last years patriots schedule. Both games went to Midnight I'd assume? It's all about the money.