Keep on thinking "Chinese Democracy" was a flop

[AXL_N_DIZZY]

I think why people (whether they like New Guns or not) have such a hard time with Chinese Democracy is that it neither simultaneously "revolutionized" music and single-handedly "saved" the music industry as the "pro-Axl-ites" had hoped for- NOR did it embarrassingly flop (commercially or artistically) like the haters wanted either. You sell 3 million of anything these days in the music biz. and you're doing alright- and meanwhile I believe CD has a meta critic rating of 64- meaning "generally mixed to positive reviews" (plus still turns up on "most under appreciated" lists from time-to-time, etc.).

To me it was a B+/A- effort/product that offered up a few truly brilliant performances (Robin's TIL solo, Bucket's TWAT solo, Axl's vocal gymnastics on SOD, Better and TWAT generally, etc.) to those that bothered to really give the album a chance.

That said- despite really being 71 minutes of good/very good to occasionally great music- it did NOT seem to offer up the one great "comeback" track that would knock the general public on their ass and at least confer the kind of credibility and credence to New Guns that say Van Halen (i.e. "Van Hagar") was able to achieve with 5150 (e.g. "Why Can't This Be Love", "Dreams", "Love Walks In", etc.).

There was just nothing IMHO that on the basis of its "pop smarts" and catchiness alone that would have dragged the general public into the "next era of Guns N' Roses". "Better" might have had a chance had it cone out in 2006 or 2007 and Robin was still around to promote it, etc. but sadly that was not the case obviously.

Anyway- taken altogether seems to me CD is a bit like a strange purple unicorn or something that came into view for 45 seconds- and then scampered off into the woods. Interesting and beautiful to those that got a good look at it- baffling to others- and then gone (other than the 7 tracks that get performed live)... Not sure how any side of these arguments can claim "complete and total victory" in CD threads (as there's compelling evidence on both sides)- but I am sure they will continue to try.

[wasted]

The reason is it doesnt have a hit is because its art and Axl finally went full artist. Which doesnt mean he indulged himself. It just means he expressed himself as purely as he could with the palette he had. It doesnt have to be ground breaking or commercial to be art. Just well crafted.

But anyway Back in Black sold 50 mil so Black Ice was a flop.

For Guns to have a hit they need to include Appetite in the title or Destruction.

Destruction of Illusions.

[HisRoyalSweetness]

if it wasn't a flop, would you have to try so hard to convince people it wasn't?

[Dazey]

He expressed himself as purely as he could with the palette he had

I don’t believe that for a second. I don’t think CD is anything like the album that Axl wanted to release. I think he was finally forced into giving up something to the record company and this is what we got. That’s the reason I think he went missing around the time of release, because he didn’t want to promote something that didn’t reflect his original vision for the record.

[wasted]

Just trying to work out if it is or not.

In comparison to old days it was. Black Ice was a flop in this way.

In comparison to peers it kind of under sold at first but not dramatically. It needed to sell a mil at least in the US.

[HisRoyalSweetness]

even the hardest of hardcore fans on the fan board can't convince themselves that CD was more than a flop.

[wasted]

He expressed himself as purely as he could with the palette he had

I don’t believe that for a second. I don’t think CD is anything like the album that Axl wanted to release. I think he was finally forced into giving up something to the record company and this is what we got. That’s the reason I think he went missing around the time of release, because he didn’t want to promote something that didn’t reflect his original vision for the record.

Its not what he said it seemed he went missing bcos of the lack of support or azoff sabotage. We cant actually know. Not all artists reach their vision but they dont compromise. Its really the mind set behind each song.

[wasted]

even the hardest of hardcore fans on the fan board can't convince themselves that CD was more than a flop.

It was one of best selling rock records of 2008 but even if it sold 8 mil it would still be a flop.

[Dazey]

Its not what he said it seemed he went missing bcos of the lack of support or azoff sabotage. We cant actually know. Not all artists reach their vision but they dont compromise. Its really the mind set behind each song.

I'm basing my assumptions on the fact that not only was there no involvement with promotion and the issues with errors in the booklet and wotnot but also the fact that every one of the leaks turned out to be on the album. Seems to me that with all the stuff that's supposedly in the vaults it's odd that we've heard none of them leaked. Personally I think that after the leaks came out the record company basically realised they had near enough a full record already out there and used it to force a release.

Edited December 10, 2012 by Dazey

[SuperBlaine]

He expressed himself as purely as he could with the palette he had

I don't believe that for a second. I don't think CD is anything like the album that Axl wanted to release. I think he was finally forced into giving up something to the record company and this is what we got. That's the reason I think he went missing around the time of release, because he didn't want to promote something that didn't reflect his original vision for the record.

Its not what he said it seemed he went missing bcos of the lack of support or azoff sabotage. We cant actually know. Not all artists reach their vision but they dont compromise. Its really the mind set behind each song.

Axls vision of CD is just the telling of his story...no one else's at all. Heres the thing though, the music surrounding these stories isn't all made by him, he is not capable lol. Which is why CD is a band effort. CD has no compromises what so ever. It is completely what it wants to be imo. So in conclusion , Yes Axl won, he achieved and made the record he wanted to make all these years since probably 1983 or so, now if the same is said of his previous mates, then they all win, i however don't believe that. Edited December 10, 2012 by SuperBlaine

[wasted]

Its not what he said it seemed he went missing bcos of the lack of support or azoff sabotage. We cant actually know. Not all artists reach their vision but they dont compromise. Its really the mind set behind each song.

I'm basing my assumptions on the fact that not only was there no involvement with promotion and the issues with errors in the booklet and wotnot but also the fact that every one of the leaks turned out to be on the album. Seems to me that with all the stuff that's supposedly in the vaults it's odd that we've heard none of them leaked. Personally I think that after the leaks came out the record company basically realised they had near enough a full record already out there and used it to force a release.

I think they leaked because they were the tracks that were flying around or that Axl played in a strip club. Only so many songs were actually ever going to be on CD. Thats just another theory.

Which is all kind of irelevant to the artistic approach that seemed to be taken in the creation of all those songs. Each song seems to have been given special treatment. Each song is almost completely different but about the same kind of theme. Theres no autopilot, no generic short cuts. It may be too intense or too overwrought but they didnt say hey its too down lets do one about drinking and strippers to get a hit. They followed through with this crazy idea. They didnt remake a past album. Its a bit down but the lyrics seem real.

Edited December 10, 2012 by wasted

[SuperBlaine]

However if his band mates were the ones holding him back, it seems that would be the case, as they are all making simple constructed music. Only slash is making anything of interest besides Axl. CD will never be a B or A- album....No way. CD is the story of how GNR was holding Axl back in musical scope, and its quite clear now.

Edited December 10, 2012 by SuperBlaine

[wasted]

The lyrics seem to be linked to stuff that happened in the 90s. Its kind of like protest album and a break up album.

[maynard]

in other words, an emo album.

[wasted]

I think its an emotional record. Its not as bad ass as Dr Feelgood anyway.

[maynard]

hopefully, by the time they release the next record (2030), axl will have grown some balls and stops singing about stephanie seymour or slash...

[wasted]

I do wonder if Axl will ever write about drinking and drug addiction overtly again. Maybe private jets and models could inspire something.

[SoulMonster]

if it wasn't a flop, would you have to try so hard to convince people it wasn't?

Of course, just like I have to try very hard to make people understand such simple concepts as "the band is actually Guns N' Roses", "it is actually a band", "Slash was not part of the original lineup". People are simple and gets easily confused.

[Roush]

This band is GN'R in the same way Del James is a writer.

While it isn't a total dictatorship, it certainly isn't a band either.

You're right. Until Slash came aboard, the GN'R name was worth about the equivalent of a can of refried beans (not brand name.)

[SoulMonster]

This band is GN'R in the same way Del James is a writer.

While it isn't a total dictatorship, it certainly isn't a band either.

You're right. Until Slash came aboard, the GN'R name was worth about the equivalent of a can of refried beans (not brand name.)

This band is GN'R in the same way Del James is a writer.

GN'R released a new record only 4 years ago, which is not uncommon to bands. When did Del last publish anything he has written?

While it isn't a total dictatorship, it certainly isn't a band either.

Err, there are plenty of bands where one or two band members have the final say in decisions. It doesn't make them less of a band. A band is a band when it consists of a bunch of musicians who play together.

You're right.

Of course I am.

[Bobbo]

Fuck it, I'll throw my viewpoint in. Again. I'm bored anyways.

It really depends how you look at it.

For your everyday, run in the mill album, 3+ million is not too shabby. But CD, was not your everyday, run in the mill album. Over a decade in the making, and had a budget no other act had ever seen before. It really should had sold more given the circumstances to be considered a success. I mean, I think everybody knew the album was going to sell a significant amount of copies no matter what based on the history and mystique surrounding it, at least initially. But not too long after, it fell of the face of the Earth, and nobody cared. And if Axl ever does have the balls to release another Axl N' Friends album...well...lighting never strikes the same place twice. Let's just put it that way.

Overall, it was a failure, and I think failure is the best way to describe it. It didn't connect to an audience, as most fan reception (as in the majority of the population) to the actual music was pretty poor. Axl could never play another CD song again live, and really nobody (again, as in the vast majority of people) would care. It left no demand for another "GNR" album without Slash and co, and overall, in terms of the actual nu material, Axl totally failed at making "GNR" Van Hagar. It is what it is.

And call me a skeptic, but honestly, if it was a big success like some people here are trying to pass it off as, Axl probably wouldn't be pussyfooting around with another release.

[HisRoyalSweetness]

Fuck it, I'll throw my viewpoint in. Again. I'm bored anyways.

It really depends how you look at it.

For your everyday, run in the mill album, 3+ million is not too shabby. But CD, was not your everyday, run in the mill album. Over a decade in the making, and had a budget no other act had ever seen before. It really should had sold more given the circumstances to be considered a success. I mean, I think everybody knew the album was going to sell a significant amount of copies no matter what based on the history and mystique surrounding it, at least initially. But not too long after, it fell of the face of the Earth, and nobody cared. And if Axl ever does have the balls to release another Axl N' Friends album...well...lighting never strikes the same place twice. Let's just put it that way.

Overall, it was a failure, and I think failure is the best way to describe it. It didn't connect to an audience, as most fan reception (as in the majority of the population) to the actual music was pretty poor. Axl could never play another CD song again live, and really nobody (again, as in the vast majority of people) would care. It left no demand for another "GNR" album without Slash and co, and overall, in terms of the actual nu material, Axl totally failed at making "GNR" Van Hagar. It is what it is.

And call me a skeptic, but honestly, if it was a big success like some people here are trying to pass it off as, Axl probably wouldn't be pussyfooting around with another release.

great post. if chinese democracy was a success, then the record label would be doing everything in its power to get the sequels released. instead, they're totally indifferent. record labels are in business to make money. now more than ever. the fact that chinese democracy II isn't even a dot on the horizon says it all.

[SoulMonster]

great post. if chinese democracy was a success, then the record label would be doing everything in its power to get the sequels released. instead, they're totally indifferent. record labels are in business to make money. now more than ever. the fact that chinese democracy II isn't even a dot on the horizon says it all.

I don't think anyone is claiming that CD was a success sales-wise. But "success" and "flop" are at the two ends of a scale.

[HisRoyalSweetness]

like it or not, 'success' was where the bar was set. mediocre counts as a flop. the fact that you, the most ardently dedicated super fans, are trying so hard to split hairs between 'flop' and 'mediocrity' really says it all.

Edited December 10, 2012 by HisRoyalSweetness

[Kill Devil Hill]

Now that you guys are pointing that out I wonder if rock music will be dead in 30 years. The fact that shitty artists sell 30 million albums is just... atrocious to say the least.

Honestly, some of the pop acts are more "rock n' roll" (in terms of attitude) than the rock bands that are played on the radio, so I don't blame people.

In terms of albums, the only genre selling well is country. And the females in that genre are pretty much tanking except Carrie Underwood (Miranda Lambert is second place, I'd say; Taylor Swift's album is pop, so I'll not count it).

This brings up a new question: are mainstream albums getting worse or are audiences simply not supporting their respective formats anymore?

And with "rock n' roll attitude" you mean...? 'Cause I don't see anything remotely close to Rn'R in Bieber, Gaga or Adele. But yeah, I agree with the rest of your post. Really sad.

Definitely not Bieber or Adele. But Gaga and Ke$ha. Especially Ke$ha. They're more rebellious than any of today's rock bands. though Gaga's calmed down quite a bit.

So really its only Adele that isnt a flop.

Kings of Leon outsold Lady Gaga.

Well, first of all, Lady Gaga's album came out in 2010 and Bieber's album came out in 2012, and there's no reason to believe they'll suddenly stop selling; however, I did say that pop is a flopping genre in terms of album sales. Most pop artists are singles artist.

Fuck it, I'll throw my viewpoint in. Again. I'm bored anyways.

It really depends how you look at it.

For your everyday, run in the mill album, 3+ million is not too shabby. But CD, was not your everyday, run in the mill album. Over a decade in the making, and had a budget no other act had ever seen before. It really should had sold more given the circumstances to be considered a success. I mean, I think everybody knew the album was going to sell a significant amount of copies no matter what based on the history and mystique surrounding it, at least initially. But not too long after, it fell of the face of the Earth, and nobody cared. And if Axl ever does have the balls to release another Axl N' Friends album...well...lighting never strikes the same place twice. Let's just put it that way.

Overall, it was a failure, and I think failure is the best way to describe it. It didn't connect to an audience, as most fan reception (as in the majority of the population) to the actual music was pretty poor. Axl could never play another CD song again live, and really nobody (again, as in the vast majority of people) would care. It left no demand for another "GNR" album without Slash and co, and overall, in terms of the actual nu material, Axl totally failed at making "GNR" Van Hagar. It is what it is.

And call me a skeptic, but honestly, if it was a big success like some people here are trying to pass it off as, Axl probably wouldn't be pussyfooting around with another release.

And now I'm gonna sound like I'm flipflopping. I still say it's all about perspective. For instance, you can look at my next few sentences and either go, "Well, I guess CD did well for the environment it was in," or you could say, "These are reasons why CD flopped."

The general public was not here for rock. You saw the albums I posted. It doesn't matter how much "mystique" was around CD. If there was a lot of "mystique" behind the new Justin Bieber album, would you pick it up?