Rustycage Posted July 18, 2012 Share Posted July 18, 2012 Isn't it unusual for a record company to release material without the producer and musicians consent? And isn't it more usual for the producer needing to get musician consent before allowing the music to be "exploited" by the record label? I don't see Axl signing away the music before he wanted to. Even in '99. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shotgunblues1978 Posted July 18, 2012 Share Posted July 18, 2012 The story is that GnR agreed to contribute a song to the End of Days soundtrack and were contractually obligated to do so (they were probably paid in advance for the right to use the song). That is why it was released.I don't think it was a demo but there's definitely an anecdote somewhere that Axl and Jimmy Iovine were up all night working on the mix prior to the deadline for it to make it on the album. Whether or not it was a "demo" is semantics but I think that, based upon how long it took the album to come out, and comparing the production on OMG to the production on the album, Axl would've liked more time to work on itOh here's the link to where Axl said it was a demo FWIW:Quote from: Dexter @ CD.comQuote from: yorch on Today at 12:07:05I love Oh my God, but it really sounds like a demo, why? I'm sure we all would love a new version.Because that's all it was, only at the time having just got it together only Jimmy Iovine knew that who wanted it to sell their soundtrack. I saw segments of the movie which were good. As a whole later not so much but it wasn't ready yet then. I did write an experimental piece inspired by the bits I'd seen called "Daddy Can the Devil do Mommy and me?" Grin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts