next album.....flowing or a mishmash

[Apollo]

I love CD and the diversity in the songs. But it really doesn't flow that well and seems like it was just random songs thrown together to fill out an album.

Shacklers doesn't sound like it would normally be on the same album as a prostitute or street of dreams.

Do u all think CD songs were specifically picked for the album? Or do u think Axl really has 30-70 songs and some songs were forced to CD (like if a song leaked, it was put on CD).

Do u think the next album will be a flowing one....orvwill it be an extreme mixture of different sounds?

Or maybe Axl does the double album again? One filled with songs like shacklers, oh my god, silkworms. And then one with the old school illusions type songs like catcher and Twat?

[WhazUp]

I hope it has a great flow to it. CD to me just needed better studio takes and songs that went well together. Individually the songs are good but as an album IMO it was missing the flow that the truly great albums have. A lot of it has to do with the copy and paste nature of the album mixed with old studio takes that should have been kept in the 90's. So I hope this new album is truly "new" and not just a releasing of the vault (I would love for the past stuff to be released but not as a new album, maybe as a box set or something).

[wasted]

it just get progressively more epic on each side. but I do like 4 or 5 rockers in a row to really get things going. then an epic ballad.

[sailaway]

it just get progressively more epic on each side. but I do like 4 or 5 rockers in a row to really get things going. then an epic ballad.

I like the diversity,personally.And I like the layers of music,not fond of the "cut and paste" term. Music and the way it is made,mixed and produced is simply different now.I don't see the advantages of going back to analog four-track recording that was used in the 60's.

[KBear]

It'll be a mishmash because of the way Axl writes and puts together an album. Even within certain songs themselves it's a mishmash.

[wasted]

I think it works perfectly on CD cos of all the layering and each song is great so you're not just relying on pace to create excitement. it's the intracies that hold my attention on CD. to me that's why it's a great record. but in general Pump by Aerosmith works pretty well. with CD though it might not. it would be

CD

Shacklers

Scraped

Riad

TWAT

as side 1?

side 2

Better

ITW

IRS

Prostitute

Catcher

Axl has an elliptical style.

[wasted]

oh boy.

I thunk a great format for a GNR record, not that Axl needs my advice, would be like Ritual de lo Habitual. like five insane rockers on one side, then side two is epic experimental ballads.

[sailaway]

it just get progressively more epic on each side. but I do like 4 or 5 rockers in a row to really get things going. then an epic ballad.

I like the diversity,personally.And I like the layers of music,not fond of the "cut and paste" term. Music and the way it is made,mixed and produced is simply different now.I don't see the advantages of going back to analog four-track recording that was used in the 60's.

It doesn't have to be black and white. A lot of fans were drawn away by the overproduction and all the layers, (and I understand you might not care, but I'm just looking at the bigger picture). It doesn't have to be analog four track recordings, but it doesn't need to be produced to within an inch of it's life either.

I mean look at Foo Fighters latest record. Everything to tape, recorded within a three month window, in Dave's garage. And it's a great sounding record. Sometimes less is more.

Not a Foo Fan,and as I stated I like the layers of sound. I don't see it as overproduced,it sounds glorious in my system and I'm still catching nuances in the Album.

[WhazUp]

it just get progressively more epic on each side. but I do like 4 or 5 rockers in a row to really get things going. then an epic ballad.

I like the diversity,personally.And I like the layers of music,not fond of the "cut and paste" term. Music and the way it is made,mixed and produced is simply different now.I don't see the advantages of going back to analog four-track recording that was used in the 60's.

Don't get me wrong I think when used properly stuff like protools and other digital recording methods are fantastic ways to record

But you can HEAR the spliced up vocal tracks and the instruments being punched in on the album, and that is the problem. Great songs - horribly executed IMO

Listen to the end of CD, the final chorus in Riad, and the final vocal parts on Sod - it is soo obvious that pieces of the vocals are punched into the original track.

I love complex layered music but this goes beyond that in a negative way

Edited September 19, 2011 by WhazUp

[sailaway]

oh boy.

I thunk a great format for a GNR record, not that Axl needs my advice, would be like Ritual de lo Habitual. like five insane rockers on one side, then side two is epic experimental ballads.

Ha! Had no idea you were into Jane's Addiction! I think you nailed it when you described the sound as elliptical.

[wasted]

less layering is more commercial but it's not what they were going for on CD. I don't think anyway

I just find how the intros of the songs and outros are similar. songs like IRS and Sorry, ITW seem to be abbreviated. then if you look at the sides 1 & 2 they have similar flow, the tracks kind of match up. So side two feels like your reliving side 1 but through a different filter.

oh boy.

I thunk a great format for a GNR record, not that Axl needs my advice, would be like Ritual de lo Habitual. like five insane rockers on one side, then side two is epic experimental ballads.

Ha! Had no idea you were into Jane's Addiction! I think you nailed it when you described the sound as elliptical.

[sailaway]

it just get progressively more epic on each side. but I do like 4 or 5 rockers in a row to really get things going. then an epic ballad.

I like the diversity,personally.And I like the layers of music,not fond of the "cut and paste" term. Music and the way it is made,mixed and produced is simply different now.I don't see the advantages of going back to analog four-track recording that was used in the 60's.

It doesn't have to be black and white. A lot of fans were drawn away by the overproduction and all the layers, (and I understand you might not care, but I'm just looking at the bigger picture). It doesn't have to be analog four track recordings, but it doesn't need to be produced to within an inch of it's life either.

I mean look at Foo Fighters latest record. Everything to tape, recorded within a three month window, in Dave's garage. And it's a great sounding record. Sometimes less is more.

Not a Foo Fan,and as I stated I like the layers of sound. I don't see it as overproduced,it sounds glorious in my system and I'm still catching nuances in the Album.

Not the biggest Foo fan either, just giving an example of how sometimes less is more, as you can't deny the commercial and critical success of that record. And the record flows pretty nicely.

My main point is, if Axl stripped down the sound just a tad, it might've helped the album flow a little better, along with keeping the songs a little more consistent with each other.

I don't rely on commercial success or what some critic thinks to decide what I like. I like the flow and the complexity,really would like to inquire about the people complaining about pro tools,if they are familiar with the program.It is an asset not a drawback to the recording process.

I shudder to think of how my ears would be tortured and my soul compromised If I listened to what is considered critically acclaimed and Successful in the US music scene at present.

[WhazUp]

it just get progressively more epic on each side. but I do like 4 or 5 rockers in a row to really get things going. then an epic ballad.

I like the diversity,personally.And I like the layers of music,not fond of the "cut and paste" term. Music and the way it is made,mixed and produced is simply different now.I don't see the advantages of going back to analog four-track recording that was used in the 60's.

It doesn't have to be black and white. A lot of fans were drawn away by the overproduction and all the layers, (and I understand you might not care, but I'm just looking at the bigger picture). It doesn't have to be analog four track recordings, but it doesn't need to be produced to within an inch of it's life either.

I mean look at Foo Fighters latest record. Everything to tape, recorded within a three month window, in Dave's garage. And it's a great sounding record. Sometimes less is more.

Not a Foo Fan,and as I stated I like the layers of sound. I don't see it as overproduced,it sounds glorious in my system and I'm still catching nuances in the Album.

Not the biggest Foo fan either, just giving an example of how sometimes less is more, as you can't deny the commercial and critical success of that record. And the record flows pretty nicely.

My main point is, if Axl stripped down the sound just a tad, it might've helped the album flow a little better, along with keeping the songs a little more consistent with each other.

I don't rely on commercial success or what some critic thinks to decide what I like. I like the flow and the complexity,really would like to inquire about the people complaining about pro tools,if they are familiar with the program.It is an asset not a drawback to the recording process.

I shudder to think of how my ears would be tortured and my soul compromised If I listened to what is considered critically acclaimed and Successful in the US music scene at present.

Like I said in my previous post, IMO protools itself is not the problem. I love layered music and musically complex song ideas, but that does not excuse the sloppy copy/pasting that is blatantly audible throughout the album. Protools, when used right, can be very useful and is very much a great program. But when you use vocal cuts from 1999 and guitar tracks from 2007 along with sloppy inserts it just doesn't mesh well (see my other post for examples)

Edited September 19, 2011 by WhazUp

[wasted]

I just don't see it as cluttered. only two are Catcher and IRS. I think the first has this psychedelic vibe going on. The thing with IRS is that it has this Zeppelin feel to it but then this really heavy ranting element. If it was a ballad then the layering seems right but as a rocker the mellotron or whatever is pretty lost. what I noticed is how seamlessly it moves from Zepp to ranting.

To me Sorry and ITW are pretty clean. Wouldn't change any of the others or Catcher really.

It's like with You're Crazy on AFD, I think they felt did get right. The tried something different with CD, like an UNKLE album meets DJ Shadow cut and paste, all this intricate little bits.

Obviously they surely know how to just strip the songs down as they did at those secret shows. Or just do them in more 80s or 90s style.

could take it for what is was intended more than wish it was UYI or AFD, maybe live we do get more raw versions.

maybe Dj will produce the next one and get a more consistent sound?

[noonoo]

I hope they'll go for a more classic sound, getting rid of all the extra orchestration, octavers, choirs and wall of guitars when it doesn't really add much to the song.

Hire Mike Clink, Butch Vig or Rick Rubin.

To me Shacklers is the best example for messing up a mix. If you listen to the seperate layers from Rock Band you know what I mean "HuhHuhHuhHuhHuhHuhHuhHuh"

And don't let DJ Ashba in front of the mixing desk, the last Sixx A.M. record sounds like shit, way too much compression and unimpressing guitar sounds....

[wasted]

on speakers it sounds awesome. sometimes on my crappy mp3 player I can't get it loud enough but other albums are like that too. sounds great on my iPod.

[sailaway]

I just don't see it as cluttered. only two are Catcher and IRS. I think the first has this psychedelic vibe going on. The thing with IRS is that it has this Zeppelin feel to it but then this really heavy ranting element. If it was a ballad then the layering seems right but as a rocker the mellotron or whatever is pretty lost. what I noticed is how seamlessly it moves from Zepp to ranting.

To me Sorry and ITW are pretty clean. Wouldn't change any of the others or Catcher really.

It's like with You're Crazy on AFD, I think they felt did get right. The tried something different with CD, like an UNKLE album meets DJ Shadow cut and paste, all this intricate little bits.

Obviously they surely know how to just strip the songs down as they did at those secret shows. Or just do them in more 80s or 90s style.

could take it for what is was intended more than wish it was UYI or AFD, maybe live we do get more raw versions.

maybe Dj will produce the next one and get a more consistent sound?

I like your views,you are obviously knowledgable and discerning with music.

[Chris 55]

I love CD and the diversity in the songs. But it really doesn't flow that well and seems like it was just random songs thrown together to fill out an album.

Yeah, it seemed like they just threw on the songs that leaked and a few that didn't. I do wonder if the songs hadn't leaked, what combination of songs would we have gotten?

[Chewbacca]

I love CD and the diversity in the songs. But it really doesn't flow that well and seems like it was just random songs thrown together to fill out an album.

Shacklers doesn't sound like it would normally be on the same album as a prostitute or street of dreams.

Do u all think CD songs were specifically picked for the album? Or do u think Axl really has 30-70 songs and some songs were forced to CD (like if a song leaked, it was put on CD).

Do u think the next album will be a flowing one....orvwill it be an extreme mixture of different sounds?

Or maybe Axl does the double album again? One filled with songs like shacklers, oh my god, silkworms. And then one with the old school illusions type songs like catcher and Twat?

I kinda like this way. AiC and Jerry Cantrell always did their albums like this, look BGWTB for example, that album got rockers, ballads and chunky downtuned songs.

Edited September 19, 2011 by Chewbacca

[sailaway]

I love CD and the diversity in the songs. But it really doesn't flow that well and seems like it was just random songs thrown together to fill out an album.

Yeah, it seemed like they just threw on the songs that leaked and a few that didn't. I do wonder if the songs hadn't leaked, what combination of songs would we have gotten?

This is a viable question,but no way of knowing thanks to the leeches that are involved in theft of intellectual property. I wish the approved booklet and artwork had been used,as well as the alternate covers.

[WhazUp]

What the fuck are you all talking about? I don't hear no cut and paste crap or a sloppy mixing job.....Chinese Democracy sounds fuckin' awesome (wether you like the songs or not) in my car sound system and in my home sound system

The actual sounds that are in the album are clear, dynamic, and sound great. I wish more modern albums would sound like that instead of being loud and compressed. But I can hear in songs where certain vocals are being punched in (and it is a fact that it happened, the demos and early leaks are clear evidence). And regardless of that, it boggles my mind how in CITR they take piano and vocal takes from 1999, guitar tracks from 2007, and who knows when the other tracks were recorded, and put them all together. The songwriting isn't the problem in this instance, it is the execution of the ideas that IMO could have gone better

[sailaway]

What the fuck are you all talking about? I don't hear no cut and paste crap or a sloppy mixing job.....Chinese Democracy sounds fuckin' awesome (wether you like the songs or not) in my car sound system and in my home sound system

The actual sounds that are in the album are clear, dynamic, and sound great. I wish more modern albums would sound like that instead of being loud and compressed. But I can hear in songs where certain vocals are being punched in (and it is a fact that it happened, the demos and early leaks are clear evidence). And regardless of that, it boggles my mind how in CITR they take piano and vocal takes from 1999, guitar tracks from 2007, and who knows when the other tracks were recorded, and put them all together. The songwriting isn't the problem in this instance, it is the execution of the ideas that IMO could have gone better

I think we can find common ground in that we both like these songs and this album better than 99% of the crap that somehow passes for rock these days. On other issues,we can agree to disagree.Can appreciate you do have knowledge of what protools are capable of,and can see the vast progress from the recording of the analog 60's to the digital massive multitracks available today.

[star]

..less layers

[sailaway]

I love CD and the diversity in the songs. But it really doesn't flow that well and seems like it was just random songs thrown together to fill out an album.

Shacklers doesn't sound like it would normally be on the same album as a prostitute or street of dreams.

Do u all think CD songs were specifically picked for the album? Or do u think Axl really has 30-70 songs and some songs were forced to CD (like if a song leaked, it was put on CD).

Do u think the next album will be a flowing one....orvwill it be an extreme mixture of different sounds?

Or maybe Axl does the double album again? One filled with songs like shacklers, oh my god, silkworms. And then one with the old school illusions type songs like catcher and Twat?

I kinda like this way. AiC and Jerry Cantrell always did their albums like this, look BGWTB for example, that album got rockers, ballads and chunky downtuned songs.

I am a huge Cantrell fan,his lyrics are fkn inspiring,always loved the harmonies of AIC.Sounded beautiful and hit straight home at the same time.

[CheapJon]

heavy n hard dark shit with lotsa hate if it was up to me. it's not.