6 months later, CD vs. Slash

[Martin Riggs]

For me I'd give a slight edge to CD. It has some terrible stuff (Riad, Shackler, Scraped) but it also has some really good stuff (TWAT, ITW, Prostitute, Sorry). Slash is probably more consistent but also isn't as ambitious so it doesn't ever reach the heights of CD's best stuff. All in all neither is great but both are good IMHO.

CD = 7.5/10

Slash = 7/10

I'd give them both a 7, but considering the circumstances surrounding both the albums...CD is an epic failure if we're being honest and Slash's album is just a pretty cool rock record with a bunch of different singers.

[dimitrisaxl]

For me I'd give a slight edge to CD. It has some terrible stuff (Riad, Shackler, Scraped) but it also has some really good stuff (TWAT, ITW, Prostitute, Sorry). Slash is probably more consistent but also isn't as ambitious so it doesn't ever reach the heights of CD's best stuff. All in all neither is great but both are good IMHO.

CD = 7.5/10

Slash = 7/10

I'd give them both a 7, but considering the circumstances surrounding both the albums...CD is an epic failure if we're being honest and Slash's album is just a pretty cool rock record with a bunch of different singers.

So, Axl's epic failure is equal to Slash's good work...

[Guest Len B'stard]

I'm a huge Slashite but that Slash album was a load of shit, if only because there was no point of reference on it for me. I only liked the song he did with Iggy. I honestly really couldn't listen to it, he's a guitar player, an out and out guitar player and out and out guitar players can't really do solo albums that work for me cuz...they work in a band context.

You can be the bitchinest guitar player in the world (and Slash is one of em imo) but if playing guitar is all you do as in you don't sing or nothing it's not enough of a stamp on the album and if you have a mish mash of all these different people on the album it just makes it come across as a bit of a cocksuck to me, it lacks cohesion. None of the artists he collabed with are people that i like, except Iggy Pop and Cypress Hill and i like Cypress Hill doing hip hop so the whole album was kind of a meh point for me.

I like what Slash is capable of but he doesn't always make shit that's my kind of music (and why should he i guess). I loved all the Guns stuff, i liked the first Snakepit album and i liked Libertad, didn't really listen to Contraband much....or the 2nd Snakepit album.

[Mr_Oujamaflip]

Ok, I listened to the leaks, wasn't interested in the slightest. Have watched live performances, still not interested.

Slash? I heard a couple of the songs that were on his site and whatnot, not interested either. I'll stick with my Stone Temple Pilots obsession for now.

[Martin Riggs]

For me I'd give a slight edge to CD. It has some terrible stuff (Riad, Shackler, Scraped) but it also has some really good stuff (TWAT, ITW, Prostitute, Sorry). Slash is probably more consistent but also isn't as ambitious so it doesn't ever reach the heights of CD's best stuff. All in all neither is great but both are good IMHO.

CD = 7.5/10

Slash = 7/10

I'd give them both a 7, but considering the circumstances surrounding both the albums...CD is an epic failure if we're being honest and Slash's album is just a pretty cool rock record with a bunch of different singers.

So, Axl's epic failure is equal to Slash's good work...

You understand the concept of degree of difficulty, right?

There's a difference between funding an album as a guitarist with a bunch of different singers in a relatively short period of time and taking over 10 years making a band album with tens of millions of dollars....I like about the same number of songs from both albums, but it wouldn't be accurate to judge them in the exact same way.

[LightningBolt]

Chinese Democracy, hands down.

[Bumble's Bridge Pickup]

For me I'd give a slight edge to CD. It has some terrible stuff (Riad, Shackler, Scraped) but it also has some really good stuff (TWAT, ITW, Prostitute, Sorry). Slash is probably more consistent but also isn't as ambitious so it doesn't ever reach the heights of CD's best stuff. All in all neither is great but both are good IMHO.

CD = 7.5/10

Slash = 7/10

I'd give them both a 7, but considering the circumstances surrounding both the albums...CD is an epic failure if we're being honest and Slash's album is just a pretty cool rock record with a bunch of different singers.

So, Axl's epic failure is equal to Slash's good work...

You understand the concept of degree of difficulty, right?

There's a difference between funding an album as a guitarist with a bunch of different singers in a relatively short period of time and taking over 10 years making a band album with tens of millions of dollars....I like about the same number of songs from both albums, but it wouldn't be accurate to judge them in the exact same way.

What does the background of an album matter at all when reviewing music? Nothing

Also, likewise I could argue that CD was more difficult to make considering the amount of production put into it and the technicality of some of the guitar parts in there

[F*ck Fear]

Chinese Democracy is the better album in my opinion. Having said that, I am very fond of Slash too.

[bacardimayne]

CD wins in a landslide, but there aren't too many albums that wouldn't.

Let's wait for VR III.

[dimitrisaxl]

For me I'd give a slight edge to CD. It has some terrible stuff (Riad, Shackler, Scraped) but it also has some really good stuff (TWAT, ITW, Prostitute, Sorry). Slash is probably more consistent but also isn't as ambitious so it doesn't ever reach the heights of CD's best stuff. All in all neither is great but both are good IMHO.

CD = 7.5/10

Slash = 7/10

I'd give them both a 7, but considering the circumstances surrounding both the albums...CD is an epic failure if we're being honest and Slash's album is just a pretty cool rock record with a bunch of different singers.

So, Axl's epic failure is equal to Slash's good work...

You understand the concept of degree of difficulty, right?

There's a difference between funding an album as a guitarist with a bunch of different singers in a relatively short period of time and taking over 10 years making a band album with tens of millions of dollars....I like about the same number of songs from both albums, but it wouldn't be accurate to judge them in the exact same way.

I understand what you're saying but time nor money make great songs...

[Izzy_Stradlin_XX]

Lyrics? They are downright laughable more often than they are good. Its overproduced and impersonal, rock music is raw and meaningful. Better rock album, Slash. Better industrial/whatever album, CD. Fans of Guns n Roses (actual GNR) like rock music, not stuff like most of what you find on CD. But this is just such a tired argument and the wrong venue for it, its like going to Mexico and talking shit about Mexican food.

this post is everything wrong with this forum

derrr my opinion is fact derrr

derrrr real gnr derrrr

derrrrrr real gnr fans think what i think derrrrrr

derrrrrr its like going to ______ and talking shit about ______

Point is, Slash's album is better if you like cliche riff-rock ala We're All Gonna Die/Doctor Alibi, and silly guest spots with popular singers of the year, ala Beautiful Dangerous/Gotten

CD is better if you like music, ala TWAT/Better.

If you think Gotten is better than This I Love you know nothing about music.

Lol... I laugh when people like you say that Slash's album is better than CD.

I personally perfer CD better, but i also like slash's album ... For example i still listen alot to we're all gonna die.

Slash tried to addaptate to new musical tendences (Fergie, etc...), and it didn't work IMO.

When he says that he heard Fergie singing Zep's songs and she had a great rock voice it's complete BS.

He knows that she isn't a good singer. Proof? Superbowl 2011 break - Sweet Child O' Mine.

She assassinated the song. Slash's a great guitarrist for one thing: Rock N Fucking Roll. His album, for me is Rock/Pop.

I'm hoping his second album has new led zeppelin-like riffs like his prior work with the Snakepits. Those albums are way better that anything he has put out 'till the last Snakepit album. They totally rock.

Edited February 22, 2011 by Izzy_Stradlin_XX

[moreblack]

another Snakepit-ish album?

nah, been there done that.

I remember he snuck a Snakepit-type song on the Libertad sessions, and it sounded so out of place, and it didn't really work.

I am curious however, what he could come up with working with Todd, Brent and Bobby. Especially Todd who is a great rock writer.

Edited February 22, 2011 by moreblack

[bacardimayne]

Lyrics? They are downright laughable more often than they are good. Its overproduced and impersonal, rock music is raw and meaningful. Better rock album, Slash. Better industrial/whatever album, CD. Fans of Guns n Roses (actual GNR) like rock music, not stuff like most of what you find on CD. But this is just such a tired argument and the wrong venue for it, its like going to Mexico and talking shit about Mexican food.

this post is everything wrong with this forum

derrr my opinion is fact derrr

derrrr real gnr derrrr

derrrrrr real gnr fans think what i think derrrrrr

derrrrrr its like going to ______ and talking shit about ______

Point is, Slash's album is better if you like cliche riff-rock ala We're All Gonna Die/Doctor Alibi, and silly guest spots with popular singers of the year, ala Beautiful Dangerous/Gotten

CD is better if you like music, ala TWAT/Better.

If you think Gotten is better than This I Love you know nothing about music.

God I embarrass myself sometimes.

[moreblack]

pretty sure we've all done it cardi.

[bacardimayne]

This is like taking two great carpenters and saying build me a house. The guy that took 10 years to build his house will be better than the guy who took 1.5 years. It is unfair. If you want to figure in the time it took to make the albums, Slash wins. No question.

But I'd rather live in a house that took 10 years to build than one that took 1.5 years.

[Changes]

This is like taking two great carpenters and saying build me a house. The guy that took 10 years to build his house will be better than the guy who took 1.5 years. It is unfair. If you want to figure in the time it took to make the albums, Slash wins. No question.

But I'd rather live in a house that took 10 years to build than one that took 1.5 years.

Even if you had to pay for ten years of work?

[moreblack]

This is like taking two great carpenters and saying build me a house. The guy that took 10 years to build his house will be better than the guy who took 1.5 years. It is unfair. If you want to figure in the time it took to make the albums, Slash wins. No question.

But I'd rather live in a house that took 10 years to build than one that took 1.5 years.

what if the house took 2 years to build, but they just kept adding paint and plaster for another 8?

[LightningBolt]

This is like taking two great carpenters and saying build me a house. The guy that took 10 years to build his house will be better than the guy who took 1.5 years. It is unfair. If you want to figure in the time it took to make the albums, Slash wins. No question.

Apples and oranges.

[moreblack]

of course you would think so...

Edited February 24, 2011 by moreblack

[Zint]

I am curious however, what he could come up with working with Todd, Brent and Bobby. Especially Todd who is a great rock writer.

God I'd love to see this happen..

[moreblack]

of course you would think so...

yes

I know

[ITG]

I listen to Nothing to Say a lot. Never gets old.

[Bumble's Bridge Pickup]

I listen to Nothing to Say a lot. Never gets old.

Chains & Shackles FTW!

[therealdoofey]

I didn't really like the album Slash. I guess it's not bad, it's just not what I expected with the amount of people he had on there.

[Velvet-Rose]

By the sword (alone) > Chinky Demo (Anything on)

I hate the fact they are still using the name, but I still listen to ChiDem album on a semi regular basis, like at least a couple songs every month/2 months.

So this isnt some bias Slash V Axl vote on my behalf.