The Glow Inc. Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 People bitch about the setlist because they take it as an indicator that New GNR won't be doing anything new or interesting for a long time. This.No new songs in the setlist = the same Greatest Hits tour can go on forever with no album in sight.And frankly, that's disappointing, to be diplomatic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pingouino Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 Stop being cupcakes and find another section to bash Guns in. Like the Original lineup section.How can you dare?In Axl's letter, he talks about his project with newGNR, a lot here are very supportive of the band but as stated previously on this forum, we want new music, we want to know what can achieve this band in terms of songwriting.So you can understand that some here are sad/disappointed to not hear new material since 4 years (do not tell me about Blood in the water). You said "go to Original section" but we actually want some changes, new songs! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stumbleine Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 Axl could have had it all.what a waste! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freddie Mercury's Ghost Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 You wonder why we should support the band? Because it is a great band with fantastic musicians that delivered a good record in 2008 and that plays great live shows all around the world, and that will probably release more music in the future, especially if they perceive they have fans interested in their music. "probably release more music in the future"There shouldn't be a question here. The rest of the band wants to record new material and Axl keeps preventing that from happening for reasons only he knows. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulMonster Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 So now you are trying to twist it into being a complaint about lack of productivity and not a complaint about the band catering to the fans by playing 2-3 hours long sets filled with classic songs, new songs, solos and jams?They're not "new songs" any more though. Solos and jams are pretty much for Axl to rest his voice.New is relative. To the Russian audience new songs were played tonight. Again, they played for the Russian fans, not us nerds. I personally don't enjoy solos because I'd rather hear more songs, but it doesn't take away from the fact that it extends and thus adds value to the show. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
droezle Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 There is a lot to complain because it's still the same core setlist as 10 years ago. Axl proved again how he has moved forward. NOTThis is just so unbelievably stupid it's hard to comprehend. We are talking about Guns N' Roses here. A band with a fantastic back catalogue. That core setlist will always be the band's core setlist. Not because the band doesn't "move forward", but because the audiences demand to hear the loved classics. If Axl and the band were to stop playing the old classic and just play new stuff, they might as well just change the bad name altogether. They are Guns N' Roses. They will always play the classic on live shows. It is what the audience wants. You can't criticise them for giving the audience what the audience wants. Well, you can, but then you are a moron.1 album, that's all they have. Realy fantastic back catalogue.So now you are trying to twist it into being a complaint about lack of productivity and not a complaint about the band catering to the fans by playing 2-3 hours long sets filled with classic songs, new songs, solos and jams?Just read what you have written and than tell me what Ron, DJ, Frank, Richard, Tommy and Chris have to do with the classic albums and how these albums can be a part of their back catalogue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulMonster Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 People bitch about the setlist because they take it as an indicator that New GNR won't be doing anything new or interesting for a long time. This.No new songs in the setlist = the same Greatest Hits tour can go on forever with no album in sight.And frankly, that's disappointing, to be diplomatic.And THAT is something we agree on. But that does not make tonight's show bad. It was still a great setlist on its own merits (although ot as great as most shows on the UCAP tour which were just fantastic). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ppruks Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 they have 2 back to back shows, there's no way he's gonna go all out on the first night! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick85 Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 No new songs?BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ITW 2012 Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 People bitch about the setlist because they take it as an indicator that New GNR won't be doing anything new or interesting for a long time. One thing I've always been curious about is why they get less songs in the setlist everywhere outside of North America, with the exception of Japan.It has to work harder, in the States at least, for people to even want to show up.That's true. We expect more over here. I feel bad for the poor South American fans whose shows don't start till past 1 am. They are GNR's most hardcore fans and they always get less songs and later start times. I believe Axl even started one show in South America at some time past 2 am. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apollo Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 It's funny. All you people sitting here complaining about a setlist to a show you did not attend. You just bring this thread down. What's worse is you come into the General Discussion section and just spread negativity over the new band. I'm sick of it. It almost makes me not want to post here.There is a lot to complain because it's still the same core setlist as 10 years ago. Axl proved again how he has moved forward. NOTThis is just so unbelievably stupid it's hard to comprehend. We are talking about Guns N' Roses here. A band with a fantastic back catalogue. That core setlist will always be the band's core setlist. Not because the band doesn't "move forward", but because the audiences demand to hear the loved classics. If Axl and the band were to stop playing the old classic and just play new stuff, they might as well just change the bad name altogether. They are Guns N' Roses. They will always play the classic on live shows. It is what the audience wants. You can't criticise them for giving the audience what the audience wants. Well, you can, but then you are a moron.I admire your passion in defending the band.But I think you are taking it to the extreme a bit. People aren't saying that they should stop playing SCOM, Jungle and PC. If the next show, they don't play It's So Easy and Heaven's Door and replace them with TWAT, Catcher and a brand new song.........do you think people at the show are going to demand their money back?Of course we ALL want to hear the classics. I would be dissapointed to not hear Nightrain - imo, their most underrated rock song. We all have our personal favorites, as well as the classic staples that have to be played.But just throwing in 2-3 different songs is not going to send 10,000 people home angry. Heck, just hearing Estranged, Civil War and Shackler's made my 2011 concert worth it. Three songs!!! And if they would have thrown in an actual new song......wow. That would have made it an absolutely amazing show. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulMonster Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 There is a lot to complain because it's still the same core setlist as 10 years ago. Axl proved again how he has moved forward. NOTThis is just so unbelievably stupid it's hard to comprehend. We are talking about Guns N' Roses here. A band with a fantastic back catalogue. That core setlist will always be the band's core setlist. Not because the band doesn't "move forward", but because the audiences demand to hear the loved classics. If Axl and the band were to stop playing the old classic and just play new stuff, they might as well just change the bad name altogether. They are Guns N' Roses. They will always play the classic on live shows. It is what the audience wants. You can't criticise them for giving the audience what the audience wants. Well, you can, but then you are a moron.1 album, that's all they have. Realy fantastic back catalogue.So now you are trying to twist it into being a complaint about lack of productivity and not a complaint about the band catering to the fans by playing 2-3 hours long sets filled with classic songs, new songs, solos and jams?Just read what you have written and than tell me what Ron, DJ, Frank, Richard, Tommy and Chris have to do with the classic albums and how these albums can be a part of their back catalogue.Heh. The band has a back catalogue, not the individual band members. Or are you seriously going to claim that because the band has changed lineup then old songs are off-limit ad not part of the bands back catalogue anymore and should not be part of the core set? Haha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kill Devil Hill Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 No new songs is not what makes this show so disappointing.It's the lack of Patience, Civil War, You're Crazy, Shackler's, and Used to Love Her that makes this show disappointing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris 55 Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 So now you are trying to twist it into being a complaint about lack of productivity and not a complaint about the band catering to the fans by playing 2-3 hours long sets filled with classic songs, new songs, solos and jams?They're not "new songs" any more though. Solos and jams are pretty much for Axl to rest his voice.New is relative. To the Russian audience new songs were played tonight. Well yeah if the crowd was new to the band I could see the songs being "new". The thing is that most of the "new" songs have been played live for over 10 years now. It doesn't matter WHERE they were played, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmo Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 So now you are trying to twist it into being a complaint about lack of productivity and not a complaint about the band catering to the fans by playing 2-3 hours long sets filled with classic songs, new songs, solos and jams?They're not "new songs" any more though. Solos and jams are pretty much for Axl to rest his voice.New is relative. To the Russian audience new songs were played tonight. Again, they played for the Russian fans, not us nerds. I personally don't enjoy solos because I'd rather hear more songs, but it doesn't take away from the fact that it extends and thus adds value to the show.Axl's gotta do more for us nerds, tho. We got his back during the hard times. RiR, HoF, Montezuma's Revenge, etc... give us anything! Scraped, Think About You, IRS, Catcher, OMG, Silkworms, ANYTHING. Don't take the newly added songs we liked from the last tour away, at least! Don't take Shackler's away! Gosh, change the fucking warbrode for Christ's sake! Just don't make us so vulnerable against the haters! It's getting hard to be a nuGnR fan nowadays! I freakin' love this line-up... it's a shame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulMonster Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 But just throwing in 2-3 different songs is not going to send 10,000 people home angry. They DID play three new songs (compared to the last show in Moscow) tonight...And I bet the audience was very content with this improvement.But yeah, I really wish the band would change things up more. But the band will always rely on the classics as the core of the sets. That's just how it is and nothing to complai about, really. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillageGorillaHead Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 Let's be honest. 4 years since last album, over a decade prior to that - if Axl wants this band to stand for itself, new material is the only way. Be that through releasing music, or through playing new music live. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GNR123GNR456 Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 Their playing the same arena two nights in a row, I can't see them having the same show two nights in a row. Than again, I said that for the Las Vegas shows late 2011, and what do you know, they play the same show two nights in a row. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
droezle Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 There is a lot to complain because it's still the same core setlist as 10 years ago. Axl proved again how he has moved forward. NOTThis is just so unbelievably stupid it's hard to comprehend. We are talking about Guns N' Roses here. A band with a fantastic back catalogue. That core setlist will always be the band's core setlist. Not because the band doesn't "move forward", but because the audiences demand to hear the loved classics. If Axl and the band were to stop playing the old classic and just play new stuff, they might as well just change the bad name altogether. They are Guns N' Roses. They will always play the classic on live shows. It is what the audience wants. You can't criticise them for giving the audience what the audience wants. Well, you can, but then you are a moron.1 album, that's all they have. Realy fantastic back catalogue.So now you are trying to twist it into being a complaint about lack of productivity and not a complaint about the band catering to the fans by playing 2-3 hours long sets filled with classic songs, new songs, solos and jams?Just read what you have written and than tell me what Ron, DJ, Frank, Richard, Tommy and Chris have to do with the classic albums and how these albums can be a part of their back catalogue.Heh. The band has a back catalogue, not the individual band members. Or are you seriously going to claim that because the band has changed lineup then old songs are off-limit ad not part of the bands back catalogue anymore and should not be part of the core set? Haha I don't have a problem with them playing a couple of classic G N' R songs but imo it's about time they take a couple of steps forward and start to work on their own catalogue so that we finally can hear what this band is up to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulMonster Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 So now you are trying to twist it into being a complaint about lack of productivity and not a complaint about the band catering to the fans by playing 2-3 hours long sets filled with classic songs, new songs, solos and jams?They're not "new songs" any more though. Solos and jams are pretty much for Axl to rest his voice.New is relative. To the Russian audience new songs were played tonight. Well yeah if the crowd was new to the band I could see the songs being "new". The thing is that most of the "new" songs have been played live for over 10 years now. It doesn't matter WHERE they were played,I have no problems accepting that it matters to you, but I hope you will also realize that to the Russian audience it actually matters to some degree that the 2012 show was longer -- and hence included songs they had presumably never heard live before and "new" to them in a live setting -- than the 2010 show. I mean, you cannot be that selfish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Glow Inc. Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 They can play the classics as much as they want.They are great songs and I don't think anyone is really complaining about them.But throw your hardcore fans a bone seriously One new song, four minutes long...The show is two and a half hours long...Won't kill you, just one new song.What could possibly happen ? At best it will restore everybody's hope for the months to come ( including the musicians ! ), at worst it will go unnoticed : so what ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patience 4 Axl Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 It's a good set list thanks to the old line up. I think by now, especially after the HOF, most fans have resigned themselves to the fact that there will not be a reunion. So as much as people go to a Guns show to hear the classics, even though the members of that band aren't there, I think throwing a bone to the people willing to accept this version of the band with a new tune might help. These are talented musicians, I have no idea why he doesn't let them showcase that talent with a song they have actually written and recorded themselves as a band. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulMonster Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 There is a lot to complain because it's still the same core setlist as 10 years ago. Axl proved again how he has moved forward. NOTThis is just so unbelievably stupid it's hard to comprehend. We are talking about Guns N' Roses here. A band with a fantastic back catalogue. That core setlist will always be the band's core setlist. Not because the band doesn't "move forward", but because the audiences demand to hear the loved classics. If Axl and the band were to stop playing the old classic and just play new stuff, they might as well just change the bad name altogether. They are Guns N' Roses. They will always play the classic on live shows. It is what the audience wants. You can't criticise them for giving the audience what the audience wants. Well, you can, but then you are a moron.1 album, that's all they have. Realy fantastic back catalogue.So now you are trying to twist it into being a complaint about lack of productivity and not a complaint about the band catering to the fans by playing 2-3 hours long sets filled with classic songs, new songs, solos and jams?Just read what you have written and than tell me what Ron, DJ, Frank, Richard, Tommy and Chris have to do with the classic albums and how these albums can be a part of their back catalogue.Heh. The band has a back catalogue, not the individual band members. Or are you seriously going to claim that because the band has changed lineup then old songs are off-limit ad not part of the bands back catalogue anymore and should not be part of the core set? Haha I don't have a problem with them playing a couple of classic G N' R songs but imo it's about time they take a couple of steps forward and start to work on their own catalogue so that we finally can hear what this band is up to.Thank you, I knew we would find something to agree on . I also wish they'd focus on making the future, rather than tour the past. But this doesn't make tonight's show bad. It was still a (presumably) great show and we can't really complain about the show itself -- only what it may signal for the future, right? I am not too worried about that, though, there's been so many indications that the band is working on a new record that I won't let the fact that they aren't willing to debut new material on the first show of this tour let me down. I believe we will hear new music before 2015 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeez Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 Too bad they didn't play any new songs. Can't deny it was a good set list anyway! Thanks for the twitter updates! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandallFlagg Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 People are angry but compared to Rock in Rio and the hall of fame battleground it is a soothing spring breeze. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.