CD > AFD

[star]

'promise to outdo AFD'

when did he promise?

and no, CD does not out do AFD in anyway.

They still play AFD on the radio, where's as they've yet to play CD. There is a reason for this, and it don't take much working out.

Edited September 6, 2011 by star

[Guest siliconmessiah]

Axl had no intentions of outdoing anything.

He just released an album.

[moreblack]

'promise to outdo AFD'

when did he promise?

and no, CD does not out do AFD in anyway. They still play AFD on the radio, where's as they've yet to play CD. There is a reason for this, and it don't take much working out.

Like the music on the radio means anything when it comes to talent

AFD stuff has made its way to Classic Rock Radio these days, THERE IS talent on those stations, timeless talent.

Songs from AFD resting comfortably alongside Pink Floyd, U2, Zeppelin, Deep Purple, Hendrix, Van Halen, Queen etc. That's definitely not a bad feeling

Edited September 6, 2011 by moreblack

[Lines&Noses]

AFD is the classic, CD is the masterpiece.

in my opinion...AFD is the definitive GNR masterpiece, CD is the evolution and upgrade.

I feel like AFD is too derivative to be a masterpiece. the lyrics are a bit immature, not much originality going on. it's still a classic which might be better than being a masterpiece lol

even if you breakdown CD to classic rock meets nu metal. that hasn't been done before. you can argue it wasn't done well but I think it was. so I rate over AFD.

obviously GNR will always be remembered for those early songs, but CD might like the Exile on the Main Street type album. not well received but in end gained status.

Agreed AFD was derivative but so is Chi Dem?

Street of Dreans=70 Elton John

Madagascar=Korn

This I love= Queen

Are there are loads of other influences too, nothing wrong with this. Indeed its hard to think of any one record that was truely original? Everything is a reaction/evolution of that has gone before.

My own measure if how the music moves me and resonates with me of course this is competley personal but for me AFD was the better record by some way.

[Guest Len B'stard]

BIGGEST FAIL ON THIS BOARD TODAY.

CALLING AFD AND BLACK ALBUM POP-ALBUMS.

The caracteristics of pop music are:

an aim of appealing to a general audience, rather than to a particular sub-culture or ideology

an emphasis on craftsmanship rather than formal "artistic" qualities

an emphasis on recording, production, and technology, over live performance

a tendency to reflect existing trends rather than progressive developments

much pop music is intended to encourage dancing, or it uses dance-oriented beats or rhythms

See this is where having a brain of your own and not having to google the meaning of all and sundry comes in handy. Yes, the above is a definition of a certain kind of pop music but it's not the be all and end all of pop music. It's a modern reinterpretation that negates the meaning of the actual umbrella term 'pop' because if you were to go strictly by that definition then you'd have to be of the opinion that pop music only came into existence in the 1980s, which is simply not true. The Beatles, The Stones, The Who, all of these were referred to as pop groups because they were, survey says, pop music.

[wasted]

I'm trying to look beyond my own tastes.

CD is less derivative bcos the combo classic rock meets nu metal is more original.

Lyrics are more interesting less immature.

You could say AFD isn't as creative but it's really well executed. CD is more interesting idea that didn't come off that well. It's just not my opinion.

AFD is the classic, CD is the masterpiece.

in my opinion...AFD is the definitive GNR masterpiece, CD is the evolution and upgrade.

I feel like AFD is too derivative to be a masterpiece. the lyrics are a bit immature, not much originality going on. it's still a classic which might be better than being a masterpiece lol

even if you breakdown CD to classic rock meets nu metal. that hasn't been done before. you can argue it wasn't done well but I think it was. so I rate over AFD.

obviously GNR will always be remembered for those early songs, but CD might like the Exile on the Main Street type album. not well received but in end gained status.

Agreed AFD was derivative but so is Chi Dem?

Street of Dreans=70 Elton John

Madagascar=Korn

This I love= Queen

Are there are loads of other influences too, nothing wrong with this. Indeed its hard to think of any one record that was truely original? Everything is a reaction/evolution of that has gone before.

My own measure if how the music moves me and resonates with me of course this is competley personal but for me AFD was the better record by some way.

[Kill Devil Hill]

Better, to me, sounds remarkably like "I Do Not Want This" by NIN. Except, no pun intended, better.

[wasted]

but the intro sounds a bit like SCOM and verses are in the WTTJ vocal style, the strumming is a bit Sweet Child too. I thought it was a bit Hand that Feeds. Someone was also saying the breakdown is very metalcore. It's the best NIN song GNR could do.

[Lines&Noses]

OK I think I understand your viewpoint better.

CD is more eclectic drawing on many styles, whereas AFD is pretty much just strighforward blues rock from start to finish right?

There is no question that CD is more eclectic, but AFD has many influences too but drawn primarily from the same blues rock background: aerosmith, Hanoi rocks etc. However Axl et al took those influences and melded them into their own sound which to my ears was better than anything that went before (and frankly since). It was amazing that the band could do this for even one genre.

In general CD imo was not better than the material that influenced it.

There is no harm is trying new things and experimenting, I just feel that this experiment was less successful than AFD.

I'm trying to look beyond my own tastes.

CD is less derivative bcos the combo classic rock meets nu metal is more original.

Lyrics are more interesting less immature.

You could say AFD isn't as creative but it's really well executed. CD is more interesting idea that didn't come off that well. It's just not my opinion.

AFD is the classic, CD is the masterpiece.

in my opinion...AFD is the definitive GNR masterpiece, CD is the evolution and upgrade.

I feel like AFD is too derivative to be a masterpiece. the lyrics are a bit immature, not much originality going on. it's still a classic which might be better than being a masterpiece lol

even if you breakdown CD to classic rock meets nu metal. that hasn't been done before. you can argue it wasn't done well but I think it was. so I rate over AFD.

obviously GNR will always be remembered for those early songs, but CD might like the Exile on the Main Street type album. not well received but in end gained status.

Agreed AFD was derivative but so is Chi Dem?

Street of Dreans=70 Elton John

Madagascar=Korn

This I love= Queen

Are there are loads of other influences too, nothing wrong with this. Indeed its hard to think of any one record that was truely original? Everything is a reaction/evolution of that has gone before.

My own measure if how the music moves me and resonates with me of course this is competley personal but for me AFD was the better record by some way.

[sailaway]

BIGGEST FAIL ON THIS BOARD TODAY.

CALLING AFD AND BLACK ALBUM POP-ALBUMS.

The caracteristics of pop music are:

an aim of appealing to a general audience, rather than to a particular sub-culture or ideology

an emphasis on craftsmanship rather than formal "artistic" qualities

an emphasis on recording, production, and technology, over live performance

a tendency to reflect existing trends rather than progressive developments

much pop music is intended to encourage dancing, or it uses dance-oriented beats or rhythms

See this is where having a brain of your own and not having to google the meaning of all and sundry comes in handy. Yes, the above is a definition of a certain kind of pop music but it's not the be all and end all of pop music. It's a modern reinterpretation that negates the meaning of the actual umbrella term 'pop' because if you were to go strictly by that definition then you'd have to be of the opinion that pop music only came into existence in the 1980s, which is simply not true. The Beatles, The Stones, The Who, all of these were referred to as pop groups because they were, survey says, pop music.

Yes,even the Doors were labelled "pop" music in their day, the connotations of the word have changed.

[wasted]

it's more that the actual styles being thrown together on CD hasn't been done as often. appreciate the innovation. but also feel like the songs are a bit experimental, creative.

that would be my argument for AFD too, like those influence hadn't been put together before either. I think the contrast between CD influence more stark. that's how I weighed it up.

Also I feel with CD you get the Nov Rain epics which AFD doesn't have. whereas CD does have a Jungle, it's like a GH when break it done. it's just not pure classic rock style.

AFD will more popular and be played on radio way more. I could go along with that really on a different day. I think CD just hits me with the creativity and complexity and freshness. they took on all these influences and it still sounds like GNR.

Was listening to If The World today and it's just like how can anyone not like it, I must be crazy lol

OK I think I understand your viewpoint better.

CD is more eclectic drawing on many styles, whereas AFD is pretty much just strighforward blues rock from start to finish right?

There is no question that CD is more eclectic, but AFD has many influences too but drawn primarily from the same blues rock background: aerosmith, Hanoi rocks etc. However Axl et al took those influences and melded them into their own sound which to my ears was better than anything that went before (and frankly since). It was amazing that the band could do this for even one genre.

In general CD imo was not better than the material that influenced it.

There is no harm is trying new things and experimenting, I just feel that this experiment was less successful than AFD.

I'm trying to look beyond my own tastes.

CD is less derivative bcos the combo classic rock meets nu metal is more original.

Lyrics are more interesting less immature.

You could say AFD isn't as creative but it's really well executed. CD is more interesting idea that didn't come off that well. It's just not my opinion.

AFD is the classic, CD is the masterpiece.

in my opinion...AFD is the definitive GNR masterpiece, CD is the evolution and upgrade.

I feel like AFD is too derivative to be a masterpiece. the lyrics are a bit immature, not much originality going on. it's still a classic which might be better than being a masterpiece lol

even if you breakdown CD to classic rock meets nu metal. that hasn't been done before. you can argue it wasn't done well but I think it was. so I rate over AFD.

obviously GNR will always be remembered for those early songs, but CD might like the Exile on the Main Street type album. not well received but in end gained status.

Agreed AFD was derivative but so is Chi Dem?

Street of Dreans=70 Elton John

Madagascar=Korn

This I love= Queen

Are there are loads of other influences too, nothing wrong with this. Indeed its hard to think of any one record that was truely original? Everything is a reaction/evolution of that has gone before.

My own measure if how the music moves me and resonates with me of course this is competley personal but for me AFD was the better record by some way.

[sailaway]

it's more that the actual styles being thrown together on CD hasn't been done as often. appreciate the innovation. but also feel like the songs are a bit experimental, creative.

that would be my argument for AFD too, like those influence hadn't been put together before either. I think the contrast between CD influence more stark. that's how I weighed it up.

Also I feel with CD you get the Nov Rain epics which AFD doesn't have. whereas CD does have a Jungle, it's like a GH when break it done. it's just not pure classic rock style.

AFD will more popular and be played on radio way more. I could go along with that really on a different day. I think CD just hits me with the creativity and complexity and freshness. they took on all these influences and it still sounds like GNR.

Was listening to If The World today and it's just like how can anyone not like it, I must be crazy lol

OK I think I understand your viewpoint better.

CD is more eclectic drawing on many styles, whereas AFD is pretty much just strighforward blues rock from start to finish right?

There is no question that CD is more eclectic, but AFD has many influences too but drawn primarily from the same blues rock background: aerosmith, Hanoi rocks etc. However Axl et al took those influences and melded them into their own sound which to my ears was better than anything that went before (and frankly since). It was amazing that the band could do this for even one genre.

In general CD imo was not better than the material that influenced it.

There is no harm is trying new things and experimenting, I just feel that this experiment was less successful than AFD.

I'm trying to look beyond my own tastes.

CD is less derivative bcos the combo classic rock meets nu metal is more original.

Lyrics are more interesting less immature.

You could say AFD isn't as creative but it's really well executed. CD is more interesting idea that didn't come off that well. It's just not my opinion.

AFD is the classic, CD is the masterpiece.

in my opinion...AFD is the definitive GNR masterpiece, CD is the evolution and upgrade.

I feel like AFD is too derivative to be a masterpiece. the lyrics are a bit immature, not much originality going on. it's still a classic which might be better than being a masterpiece lol

even if you breakdown CD to classic rock meets nu metal. that hasn't been done before. you can argue it wasn't done well but I think it was. so I rate over AFD.

obviously GNR will always be remembered for those early songs, but CD might like the Exile on the Main Street type album. not well received but in end gained status.

Agreed AFD was derivative but so is Chi Dem?

Street of Dreans=70 Elton John

Madagascar=Korn

This I love= Queen

Are there are loads of other influences too, nothing wrong with this. Indeed its hard to think of any one record that was truely original? Everything is a reaction/evolution of that has gone before.

My own measure if how the music moves me and resonates with me of course this is competley personal but for me AFD was the better record by some way.

No worries,a few of us are infected with the same kind of crazy,impressive post!

[Lines&Noses]

He he there is no shame in liking a song, ITW is strong lyrically but I just can't get into it overall.

it's more that the actual styles being thrown together on CD hasn't been done as often. appreciate the innovation. but also feel like the songs are a bit experimental, creative.

that would be my argument for AFD too, like those influence hadn't been put together before either. I think the contrast between CD influence more stark. that's how I weighed it up.

Also I feel with CD you get the Nov Rain epics which AFD doesn't have. whereas CD does have a Jungle, it's like a GH when break it done. it's just not pure classic rock style.

AFD will more popular and be played on radio way more. I could go along with that really on a different day. I think CD just hits me with the creativity and complexity and freshness. they took on all these influences and it still sounds like GNR.

Was listening to If The World today and it's just like how can anyone not like it, I must be crazy lol

OK I think I understand your viewpoint better.

CD is more eclectic drawing on many styles, whereas AFD is pretty much just strighforward blues rock from start to finish right?

There is no question that CD is more eclectic, but AFD has many influences too but drawn primarily from the same blues rock background: aerosmith, Hanoi rocks etc. However Axl et al took those influences and melded them into their own sound which to my ears was better than anything that went before (and frankly since). It was amazing that the band could do this for even one genre.

In general CD imo was not better than the material that influenced it.

There is no harm is trying new things and experimenting, I just feel that this experiment was less successful than AFD.

I'm trying to look beyond my own tastes.

CD is less derivative bcos the combo classic rock meets nu metal is more original.

Lyrics are more interesting less immature.

You could say AFD isn't as creative but it's really well executed. CD is more interesting idea that didn't come off that well. It's just not my opinion.

AFD is the classic, CD is the masterpiece.

in my opinion...AFD is the definitive GNR masterpiece, CD is the evolution and upgrade.

I feel like AFD is too derivative to be a masterpiece. the lyrics are a bit immature, not much originality going on. it's still a classic which might be better than being a masterpiece lol

even if you breakdown CD to classic rock meets nu metal. that hasn't been done before. you can argue it wasn't done well but I think it was. so I rate over AFD.

obviously GNR will always be remembered for those early songs, but CD might like the Exile on the Main Street type album. not well received but in end gained status.

Agreed AFD was derivative but so is Chi Dem?

Street of Dreans=70 Elton John

Madagascar=Korn

This I love= Queen

Are there are loads of other influences too, nothing wrong with this. Indeed its hard to think of any one record that was truely original? Everything is a reaction/evolution of that has gone before.

My own measure if how the music moves me and resonates with me of course this is competley personal but for me AFD was the better record by some way.

No worries,a few of us are infected with the same kind of crazy,impressive post!

[John Doe]

Technically better does not always mean musically better. To me AFD is THE Guns N' Roses album. The album flows perfectly from one song to the next. Appetite is a bluesy hard rockin album that is a combination of 5 guys who were fighting their way to success one step at a time and had a burning motivation to kick everyone's ass. Don't get me wrong I love Chinese Democracy, but for me Appetite is the record that has all the elements of a timeless classic. The Illusions come close, but no Guns album imo has the flow and spark of energy that Appetite had.

And speaking as a musician, even though I do appreciate the complexity that Chinese Democracy has to offer, I am more appreciative of the raw hunger and drive that is evident on AFD. The songs sound great because those 5 guys have a special chemistry that can not and have not been replicated since

[Bumble's Bridge Pickup]

Better, to me, sounds remarkably like "I Do Not Want This" by NIN. Except, no pun intended, better.

wat, I get how Better can sound a bit like NIN, but I Do Not Want This? It has nothing to do with that

[Kill Devil Hill]

Better, to me, sounds remarkably like "I Do Not Want This" by NIN. Except, no pun intended, better.

wat, I get how Better can sound a bit like NIN, but I Do Not Want This? It has nothing to do with that

Really? I heard it for the first time in a long time (haven't heard The Downward Spiral in a long time), and when I heard the, err, "chorus," it totally just reminded me of Better.

I'm pretty sure it was I Don't Want This. I just remember pausing on a song and thinking, "Wait a minute. This sounds familiar..."

[Georgy Zhukov]

I think CD is in every way as good as AFD. Both are solid albums great for their time. CD will never be as important as AFD but it has a lot of gems. It has its epic rockers and it's epic ballads, just a lot of great stuff.

[wasted]

AFD is the perfect rags to riches making it debut.

CD is the perfect prog rock break up album.

[sailaway]

Better, to me, sounds remarkably like "I Do Not Want This" by NIN. Except, no pun intended, better.

Can't see.the resemblance,totally different.

[mcalldp]

I actually agree. Having said that, you have to take into account, the raw energy of AFD and the time it came out. It's hard to outdo that as a classic. However, I do think the layers and depth of CD make for more interesting re-listining. I don't think it's BETTER but I think it's different- My opionion:

CD is better than Illusions, Spag or Lies

CD is not better or worse than AFD... but which I want to hear depends on my mood. A lot of AFD is hinged into the fact that it was the soundtrack for my life during a time and CD does not have that classic feel. CD does not have that young killer energey either. However, I don't think an artist that is growing and evolving should do the same thing. I don't think Illusions was the same as AFD but I would take CD over Illusions any day. I can't say the same for CD Vs AFD.... that just depends on mood. CD won't ever be my life's "soundtrack" but I still love it just as much, but in a different way.

I guess as I have gotten older, my evolution chimes in with the evolution of Axl's music (still).

So over time, I do think Axl has become a better musician. I do not think he still uses (and do not disctount) the raw energy and emotion of AFD.

Everyone has an opinion though.

[wasted]

Better is more of a Finck song. did he write Discipline?

Listen to Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds then Shacklers.

[Georgy Zhukov]

AFD was just pure rock and roll. It blew away all other artists that were dominating the charts back then. Bon Jovi, Prince, U2, then all of a sudden this fusion of hard rock, metal and punk blew them away. They fought hard to get on the radio and took the nation by storm.

It seems they went the other way with CD. It was an album that was certainly better than the crap that dominated the charts but they basically threw it under the bus. Almost like Axl was going for a more underground approach. Only the hardcore fans will look for it.

IMO Axl's best vocal performances are on this album. He showed range I've never heard him sing in Street of Dreams and surprised me again in Madagascar. At first I assumed his vocal tracks are from the last decade but he's been singing unbelievably well recently. Turns out he had a vocal coach to help him out.

I think the age of fans has a lot to do with it. Many dismiss the album as not having enough rockers but I think there's plenty. The title track, Shackler's, Better, Scraped, Raid and IRS are satisfying enough for me. Besides Axl knows how to write a ballad without the cheesey aspect.

[wasted]

every band has a commercial peak. and in someways the whole GNR thing is from a different age. It's like Axl would have been happier in the 70s.

I think what Billy Corgan said about CD showing what Axl does was interesting in that Axl is about influences then modeling it like an artist. Axl is a soul, an artist. he's not just riding fads it's almost purely about what he likes to hear.

I'm kind of making this as I have no quotes to back it up.

It's just funny he comes back with same mindset but diff influences and it's like no you can't do this lol

Edited September 8, 2011 by wasted

[Georgy Zhukov]

He would have been much better off in the 70's. That decade was pure creative musical freedom. So many groundbreaking records. Nothing breaks ground anymore. It's all fixed. Everyone is basically singing like robots now. They might as well build robots that can sing.

[wasted]

if you step out of line the celebrity police state comes down hard. it's just not in fashion to be creative. people prefer mediocre music because it makes them feel less worthless. Who does Axl think he is with his fancy album and tardiness? being late isn't very corporate.