Would you object if GnR used live shows to develop songs for a future album?

[saber_]

Would you object if GnR used live shows to develop songs for a future album? (i.e. there would be loose, jammy, experimental versions on tour, and the song could change forms significantly)

Or do you prefer consistent, polished, taut renditions that would eventually strongly resemble the official studio album cuts?

Edited May 31, 2011 by mindsaber

[Chris 55]

You mean like normal bands do?

[Matt13]

I would not object to any form of released material. What this proposes is years of experimentation. Those years of experimentation would lead to the years of studio work to actually get an album out. I'd like to have some new music before I have grandchildren. And I don't even have children yet.

[saber_]

You mean like normal bands do?

I would dispute the implicit assertion that all "normal" bands play embryonic versions of songs which will eventually be on a future album.

What I'm talking about is using the stage instead of the studio to get a feel for an unfinished song. Yeah yeah i know- what I'm saying isn't profound, and you can call me captain obvious, but nonetheless...a coupla gigs here n there, jam on the unfinished stuff, try out new ideas, get a feel for it: Would fans object to songs being played which were still in the demo stage?

[wasted]

Guns did this before I think before UYI came out. They had shows in LA with them breaking out new material. Play the whole CD II at Rio. just jam for 2 1/2 hours on Soul Monster.

[Chris 55]

You mean like normal bands do?

I would dispute the implicit assertion that all "normal" bands play embryonic versions of songs which will eventually be on a future album.

What I'm talking about is using the stage instead of the studio to get a feel for an unfinished song. Yeah yeah i know- what I'm saying isn't profound, and you can call me captain obvious, but nonetheless...a coupla gigs here n there, jam on the unfinished stuff, try out new ideas, get a feel for it: Would fans object to songs being played which were still in the demo stage?

Yeah. Like other bands do. I know Metallica does this

[phaeryen]

I think any attempt to be a "jam band" infront of thousands of people is doomed to fail.

If nu-GNR would want to "jam out" songs before a live audience, I fear they are so big that they'd have to organize completely private parties in little clubs infront of a select audience to get the circumstances right for something like that to happen.

Who knows, it might work, but I fear there is A LACK OF COMMUNICATION, and more precisely, a lack of organization and management that will prevent this plan as much as any of the other ones being thrown around by creatively savvy forum-members.

[Cosmo]

You mean like normal bands do?

I would dispute the implicit assertion that all "normal" bands play embryonic versions of songs which will eventually be on a future album.

What I'm talking about is using the stage instead of the studio to get a feel for an unfinished song. Yeah yeah i know- what I'm saying isn't profound, and you can call me captain obvious, but nonetheless...a coupla gigs here n there, jam on the unfinished stuff, try out new ideas, get a feel for it: Would fans object to songs being played which were still in the demo stage?

Yeah. Like other bands do. I know Metallica does this

Yeah, Metallica did that some times, but then again so did Guns, that wouldn't be something new to GnR..

[Guest gunns5]

or how they do 'jams' of unreleased songs ;P

[LesPaul_Player_91]

Don't know about very loose jams but for R.E.M.'s album "Accelerate" they did shows playing/developing the songs before the album came out and both the shows and the album were received very positively.

[dalsh327]

Isn't that what they did before "Chinese Democracy" came out?

"Dark Side of the Moon", "Wish You Were Here", and "Animals" were worked out on the road. That's why Roger, David, and Alan Parsons said they spent 6 weeks total time in the studio. The footage shot for "Pompeii" was mostly for the movie - the album was mostly finished by then.

Zappa used to take his live tapes and incorporate them into his studio albums.

Radiohead also did a tour where the album was still being worked on and debuted a lot of songs on their tours. And I think Tool did some theater sized venues for the same reason. It's a good way to throw songs out to the fans and see if they stay or get up to take a leak and get something to drink.

The Who had worked on "Who's Next" in front of a small audience when Townshend was doing his "Lifehouse" project. I think they just opened the theater up on a first come first served basis.

As far as jam bands go, they usually separate what they do in the studio from their live shows, and usually don't work songs out on the road.

But if you talk to a lot of bands, they're so focused on putting on a good show and getting to the next venue, that they have a hard time focusing on creating new songs. They might come up with some things and save it for the studio. Or what Led Zep did for II - hit recording studios while on tour. Their advantage on the first album was that the songs fell together fast, partly because Page had already worked out most of those songs during the Yardbirds. Something like "Communication Breakdown" and "Good Times Bad Times" were prob. the only new ones. And I think they played "Stairway" live before IV came out.

[nambis]

before In Rainbows was recorded, radiohead did a tour of theatres in north america where they played working versions of all the songs from that album. i was lucky enough to see it - twice - in a 2000 capacity theatre. row 3 one night.

[AmyL]

Wouldn't bother me at all. Lots of artists do that.

[Chewbacca]

No. Experimentation is a nice way to find a new ID for the band and make it grow stronger.

[wasted]

they could write a song on stage. Bumble could knock something out on an acoustic, get the audience to shout out lyrics. then dj could put a riff on it. then Axl could join them to do scream and name the song. then it could be on CD III.

[rockerman]

Would you object if GnR used live shows to develop songs for a future album? (i.e. there would be loose, jammy, experimental versions on tour, and the song could change forms significantly)

Or do you prefer consistent, polished, taut renditions that would eventually strongly resemble the official studio album cuts?

one of the very reasons Appetite was so strong explosive and the best was the fact that most of those songs had been played on the club circut for years in front of live audiences..

thats why so many bands first and second albums are often their finest efforts because they have played the songs for years in front of live audiences.

for me it strikes a authenticity chord...its not studio polished ...

We live in an era where studio executives can find people..throw them in the studio. and make them sound plausible...I for one hate that.

the club era bands that come up through the ranks..do their own writing..have their own schtick..always carry more weight for me So if Axl wanted to wheel out some raw uncooked music I'd find that brilliant and more than acceptable.

I go to a symphany orchastra if i am expecting note for note perfection..whats missing often in Rock and roll is the spontanious, the unpredictible.

[Guest NewGNRnOldGNR]

Would you object if GnR used live shows to develop songs for a future album? (i.e. there would be loose, jammy, experimental versions on tour, and the song could change forms significantly)

Or do you prefer consistent, polished, taut renditions that would eventually strongly resemble the official studio album cuts?

Beggars can't be choosers...

[Val22]

I've seen other bands that have played new stuff from their upcoming cds and it's cool.

I just want Axl and GNR to do a US tour. I wouldn't care if they did some new stuff. Haven't they played songs from CD for years before it was released?

I would welcome new stuff from Axl and GNR because then it would mean he's actually meaning to continue as a band and singer.

I just want a US tour. Is that so much to ask?

[Bucketslash]

*ahem*prostitutebeforeNRrio2001*ahem*

[tryinharder]

The new stuff should be close to the polished stuff. The old stuff I totally dig it when they cut loose and jam. Thats why I see them live! Its real and personal that way.

[Blunoze]

It depends what is sacrificed in order to make these songs fit in the set-list. I would estimate most concert going fans go to see the old classics played, based on the reception the songs get when they are played. For the hardcore, they would appreciate a whole 2 1/2 hours of new material, although I don't think that would suit the majority. Personally, I'd love to hear a couple of new songs thrown in, as it would then give something to look forward to in the polished album version. But in all honesty, there has to be a short time limit in the live playing and album release. Chi Dem was already known inside out before it was actually released, so this tarnished the experience for some fans.

[DocBrown]

They did this before UYI. I saw them in Los Angeles before it came out, and didn't know any of the songs. It was pretty awesome. I think they opened up with Perfect Crime.

[nambis]

man, i've seen GNR play the AFD songs like 6 or 7 times now, plus i play the hell out of recent bootlegs. i'd prefer them to stop playing AFD material altogether! honestly, i've heard WTTJ like 32984798327498327498327498 times in my life, it really doesn't excite me anymore like it did in 1989 or so... BRING ON THE NEW MATERIAL!

[Guest NewGNRnOldGNR]

I would love Axl to build "Chinese Democracy" at small venues (granted like Slash is doing with his new material) as opposed to agreeing to the ego venues and thus accepting the necessity to play a largely old Guns leaning set. The development in little new material to a majority seeking the classics is dwarfed by the productivity in a gig of attendees there with a genuine interest in the new band. The prolongment of the album and touring of big venues means Guns N' Roses only ever reaches destinations that could have been years prior (I acknowledge there are probably certain catalysts other than Axl selling the potential of the band short but his own poor decisioning, acceptance of misadvice and general irrationality has played a detrimental part).

[saber_]

man, i've seen GNR play the AFD songs like 6 or 7 times now, plus i play the hell out of recent bootlegs. i'd prefer them to stop playing AFD material altogether! honestly, i've heard WTTJ like 32984798327498327498327498 times in my life, it really doesn't excite me anymore like it did in 1989 or so... BRING ON THE NEW MATERIAL!

I would not mind if they cut Jungle from the setlist. Even MBS and SCOM

Part of the concept I'm suggesting here is also the re-imagining of the old songs. I empathize with some of the sentiments about having heard a particular song a million times. So what keeps a song fresh but still the same? Altering the tempo, messing with the time signatures, inserting new pieces, and just well, playing it a bit differently.

Here are two examples of kind of what I'm talking about:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrgiXjC_Htg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjP7Uz4pSmQ

The same, but yet different.

Wouldn't it be cool to hear Welcome to the Jungle played a bit faster, with a backbeat (or whatever it's called), and some of the parts played a different way?