username Posted August 19, 2013 Share Posted August 19, 2013 Having Brian May anywhere near a song is an ultimate disrespect in my opinion.Utter garbage.Even Axl thought so, hence he chopped up his solo and made a new one.I doubt many people would agree. And if Axl thought of his work as garbage (which we all know he didn't) he wouldn't have played at the Freddie Tribute, he wouldn't have Brian play with GnR live a couple of times and he CERTAINLY wouldn't have invited him to the studio. Your personal dislike for Brian May is a matter of opinion, but if you doubt the quality of his work and the respect he gets in the business you're an idiot. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luciusfunk Posted August 19, 2013 Share Posted August 19, 2013 Having Brian May anywhere near a song is an ultimate disrespect in my opinion.Utter garbage.Even Axl thought so, hence he chopped up his solo and made a new one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dickdasterdly10000 Posted August 19, 2013 Share Posted August 19, 2013 Yep - personal opinion is that he is tosh.Don't care if Axl loves him to bits or not.Would rather hear Bucket or Bumble all day long on a track.Much in the same way that I love "Goodbye Yellow Brick Road" but because Axl loves Elton, I didn't go out and buy the Disney back catalogue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasted Posted August 19, 2013 Share Posted August 19, 2013 there's some story about the May solo, like the solo they were going to use wasn't the one May himself liked. So in the end, the one that fit May didn't like, so in the end they thought Ron's worked better. So it's never black and white.I think it would have been great to have a name brand on the product and CD may have got more sales bcos of May's endorsement.In the same way if Down by the Ocean an Izzy songs makes the next album, even if it's just a throwaway it will get more media attention than a Ron penned song. Axl could call in all his celerity rock pals to make his album, but you lose some autonomy with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luciusfunk Posted August 19, 2013 Share Posted August 19, 2013 Yep - personal opinion is that he is tosh.Don't care if Axl loves him to bits or not.Would rather hear Bucket or Bumble all day long on a track.Much in the same way that I love "Goodbye Yellow Brick Road" but because Axl loves Elton, I didn't go out and buy the Disney back catalogue.Disney? WTF are you talking about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randy Jesus Posted August 19, 2013 Share Posted August 19, 2013 I think that Axl wanted Atlas on CD but the leaks screwed everything up, The Label forced them to use the leaked songs with only one unleaked song. I believe there is more better and finished material out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pe_teko Posted August 19, 2013 Share Posted August 19, 2013 child abuse song dedicated to lennon is obviously catcher in the rye Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liers Posted August 19, 2013 Share Posted August 19, 2013 I think "Daddy can the Devil do Mommy and Me" is the song about child abuse.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmo Posted August 19, 2013 Share Posted August 19, 2013 They'd have to take out two weaker songs to put Atlas in CD. Axl must've thought it wasn't worth it. It certainly does not mean Atlas is likely to be inferior to the stuff in CD. Hell, anyone who's still into that theory needs a brain check. Oh My God and Going Down have destroyed it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liers Posted August 19, 2013 Share Posted August 19, 2013 (edited) Axl said in 2002 the songs we heard were the songs that they weren't considering the "big guns". He said there would be (I think 17 or 18) additional songs and then these (The Blues, Maddy, Riad, OMG, Silkworms, CD) which wouldn't be released as singles or promoted as much.Someone can probably find the exact quote.In another quote he also said the better songs would be released on later albums, and in 2006? he said that the songs that leaked were the ones that the label forced him to release. Edited August 19, 2013 by liers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dickdasterdly10000 Posted August 19, 2013 Share Posted August 19, 2013 Along with Tim Rice, Elton John wrote the songs for the 1994 Disney animated film The Lion King, which became the 2nd highest-grossing animated feature of all timeThere you go stupid. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luciusfunk Posted August 19, 2013 Share Posted August 19, 2013 Along with Tim Rice, Elton John wrote the songs for the 1994 Disney animated film The Lion King, which became the 2nd highest-grossing animated feature of all timeThere you go stupid.That hardly constitutes "the entire Disney back catalog". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
batman007 Posted August 19, 2013 Share Posted August 19, 2013 They should of taken out ITW, and put in Atlas I instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apollo Posted August 19, 2013 Share Posted August 19, 2013 They'd have to take out two weaker songs to put Atlas in CD. Axl must've thought it wasn't worth it. It certainly does not mean Atlas is likely to be inferior to the stuff in CD. Hell, anyone who's still into that theory needs a brain check. Oh My God and Going Down have destroyed it. A brain check because they have a different opinion about a couple songs than you do?I think it would really severely damage the album's reputation to put those two songs on the follow up CD. One album in 20 years..........and we finally get a second album and two slots are taken up by a remake of an already released song and a song without Axl on lead vocals.That worked on illusions because the band put out 3.5 albums in a five year period, including two albums at once. But when you are putting out an album every decade - it's ludicrious to spend 15% of those albums on remixes/remakes and vocals by other band members. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
axlsalinger Posted August 19, 2013 Author Share Posted August 19, 2013 I can't believe people keep saying things like Oh My God will be on the next album. There's no chance. With Going Down, at least there's a chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmo Posted August 19, 2013 Share Posted August 19, 2013 They'd have to take out two weaker songs to put Atlas in CD. Axl must've thought it wasn't worth it. It certainly does not mean Atlas is likely to be inferior to the stuff in CD. Hell, anyone who's still into that theory needs a brain check. Oh My God and Going Down have destroyed it. A brain check because they have a different opinion about a couple songs than you do?I think it would really severely damage the album's reputation to put those two songs on the follow up CD. One album in 20 years..........and we finally get a second album and two slots are taken up by a remake of an already released song and a song without Axl on lead vocals.That worked on illusions because the band put out 3.5 albums in a five year period, including two albums at once. But when you are putting out an album every decade - it's ludicrious to spend 15% of those albums on remixes/remakes and vocals by other band members.I don't think any of them will/would be on the nect record. It just goes to show they could have been in Chinese Democracy, and are, according to the majority of the people here, better than at least a few of the songs in Chinese Democracy, and were still left out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts