Chinese Democracy may become the most underrated album in history.

[wasted]

That's kind of the fate of all man.

[Flayer]

Thoughts from the other thread

Quality of the songs is subjective and up for debate. To say they are shit is disingenuous; each one was obviously a labor of love, they weren't throwaway songs, and they're not just generic rock that sounds like everything else out there. Calling them dislikable, not catchy, overproduced is perfectly legitimate; calling them garbage or shit is idiotic and incorrect.

I stopped reading after this. If i think the songs are shit they are shit. End of story. No amount of pretentious defence will change that. I'm not going to sit there and think "wow these songs really are a labour of love and given they don't sound like everything else out there means these songs truly must be good on some level." No. Fuck that shit. If a song sucks it sucks. Only on a GnR forum would I have to read some weird, pretentious, overly thought out reasoning as to why the song isn't shit and how wrong i am if I tought the song was shit or garbage. I mean for fuck sakes if a Nickelback fan gave this same type of reasoning you'd laugh in their face. But because it's Axl and the songs were a "labour of love" thinking they suck is idiotic? Fanboysim at it's finest.

Suggest you give it a full read through as the rest goes on to cover what the public (including us as fans) wanted vs. what we actually got. I left plenty of room for legitimate criticisms of the album and for you or anyone else to hate it on an individual level. If you think it sucks, then to you it sucks. This not a fanboyist defense of the album. But "it sucks" on its own is an idiotic argument when you're trying to explain how anyone other than yourself reacted to it.

The question here wasn't about the opinion of you or any one person but rather a general statement, one that sums up the views of the fanbase and the public at large. Your personal opinion means shit to anyone else. The album didn't catch on with many people and it's not because you, Bono, think it sucks. It's an interesting question as to why it didn't.

Say what you will about them, but the songs on Chinese Democracy are not generic Nickleback garbage or half-assed joke experiments like My World. As I said, you are free to like them, hate them, love them, not give a shit either way, or feel however you want about them. And that's valid for you. But it does not explain the album's poor reception with fans and the public.

How do we explain the public's reaction? Let's assume your case that it was a shitty, retarded-ass album that sucks. This doesn't explain the failure of the album because the public loves a lot of shitty, retarded-ass music that sucks. So you need to actually think a little deeper than that. You don't like it because it failed to meet your expectations. I'm gonna guess that the general public doesn't like it because it doesn't meet their expectations.

What are (or were) the public's expectations? I took a guess at it myself: they wanted some old-school, badass 80s rock, or they wanted something mind-blowingly epic and out-of-the-park crazy. Chinese Democracy meets neither of these expectations. If it was an album full of YCBM or Appetite style rockers, it would have met the first set of expectations. If it was an album full of Comas, it would have met the expectation for being some crazy experimental epic.

It was neither of these things, hence it met neither of the most common expectations, hence it fared poorly with listeners. Hence I posited that Axl lost touch with what the public expected because it's clear he wasn't even trying to meet either of those expectations. Thus, he was probably making the music for himself. That could be admirable from a creative standpoint if you respect artists who do things their own way and don't care what the rest of the world wants out of them (no reason you have to, of course). It is, of course, bad from a business standpoint. Axl was out of touch with his market and fanbase and it is reflected by the reception of the album. I think the label likely was more in tune with what the public expected. I suspect that was one of the fundamental reasons for all the conflict between Axl and the label. They knew (better, at least) what the public was looking for and they knew that Axl wasn't making it.

That right there is a broad explanation for Chinese Democracy's lack of success that goes above one's individual opinions and leaves room for you to like it, hate it, or feel any goddamned way you want to about it. It's a damn sight better than the argument everyone always has that boils down to a glorified version of:

"I think it sucks!"

"No it doesn't!"

"Yes it does"

"It does not!"

"It does!"

"Does not!"

"Axl-worshipper"

"Axl-hater"

Yeah, maybe you like engaging in those dumbassed arguments over and over again, tastes being subjective and all, but I don't think I'm the only one on here who's tired of seeing them.

[wasted]

It didn't catch on because the line up matters to the fan base/general public.

The band was huge with each member being a legend. So it doesn't matter how great CD is to a lot of people. It's not about the music.

So I think the conventions of rock bands does mean that we do have a bias. In most cases it holds true. But CD is the exception to the rule.

There's a lot of politics around CD, so to say you like it is to supposedly support Axl and what you think he did. There's always going to be reservations even if you like it.

[magisme]

Not sure I've ever heard the "people are afraid to admit they like it" excuse.

Edited April 9, 2015 by magisme

[Iron MikeyJ]

I think if a reunion happens, and if a new classic line up album ever happens, than CD will then gain a cult following, but only under those circumstances. If NUgnr fades away, and so does Axl, than CD will go down as a glairing "what not to Do" type of album, because it will be viewed as the album that killed a once great band. If CD2 ever sees the light of day, it "might" help CD gain more of a following, but only under My first scenario will it ever gain a cult type of status...

[Street Of The Blues]

My initial impression was quite a positive one except for If The World, that one needed adjustment or better yet should have sounded like the live premiers 'cause it was very awkward to get through the first time. Same with I.R.S. until it gets to the middle and picks up, hits you on a high. I understand if people don't like the terms of production and cover ups. Once the hype dies down you can take the whole thing for what it's worth which is not a bad album at all. Just suffers from some over baked ideas.

[Jakey Styley]

Thoughts from the other thread

Quality of the songs is subjective and up for debate. To say they are shit is disingenuous; each one was obviously a labor of love, they weren't throwaway songs, and they're not just generic rock that sounds like everything else out there. Calling them dislikable, not catchy, overproduced is perfectly legitimate; calling them garbage or shit is idiotic and incorrect.

I stopped reading after this. If i think the songs are shit they are shit. End of story. No amount of pretentious defence will change that. I'm not going to sit there and think "wow these songs really are a labour of love and given they don't sound like everything else out there means these songs truly must be good on some level." No. Fuck that shit. If a song sucks it sucks. Only on a GnR forum would I have to read some weird, pretentious, overly thought out reasoning as to why the song isn't shit and how wrong i am if I tought the song was shit or garbage. I mean for fuck sakes if a Nickelback fan gave this same type of reasoning you'd laugh in their face. But because it's Axl and the songs were a "labour of love" thinking they suck is idiotic? Fanboysim at it's finest.

Lol no, sorry, that's not how things work, your opinions don't dictate everyone's reality. You dislike the song, just leave it at that. If I were to declare all music I disliked to be shit, with the outrageous claim that no amount of defense can change that, then that would mean for me to call the Rolling Stones, ACDC, most of Led Zeppelin's stuff, Aerosmith, and a lot of other great bands shit. Don't you realize that it's you being pretentious here?

[wasted]

Not sure I've ever heard the "people are afraid to admit they like it" excuse.

There's definitely an element of that.

If you think Axl stole the band or is disrespectful, violent, racist, wife beater then you are probably less open to the idea of CD being great.

I'm not talking about the forum dwellers who have a more balanced outlook but the general public is probably Axl is the bad guy, he stole the band and CD sucks.

Are you trying to make this a Ricco case?

I prefer the classic term: fraud.

Will, you give us a moment?

Well, what number did you have in mind?

20 million dollars or we'll see you in court.

Edited April 9, 2015 by wasted

[Strange Broue]

(This is a great thread and a great read all in all)

It's so rare here, though

[Nosaj Thing]

If you think Axl stole the band or is disrespectful, violent, racist, wife beater then you are probably less open to the idea of CD being great.

No.

There are people who would simply say that Chinese Democracy is shit because they know Slash isn't in it, but that's a minority. Others simply didn't like the album. I'm not sure why it is so hard to understand.

I firmly believe that if someone heard the album and they genuinely thought it was utter shit, they have the right to think that and not be questioned about it. I mean, same goes for those who loved it. There's no "you're afraid of admitting you liked CD" or "you didn't like CD because you thought Axl fucked Slash and Duff over" excuse -- that's nonsense.

[Free Bird]

If you think Axl stole the band or is disrespectful, violent, racist, wife beater then you are probably less open to the idea of CD being great.

No.

There are people who would simply say that Chinese Democracy is shit because they know Slash isn't in it, but that's a minority. Others simply didn't like the album. I'm not sure why it is so hard to understand.

I firmly believe that if someone heard the album and they genuinely thought it was utter shit, they have the right to think that and not be questioned about it. I mean, same goes for those who loved it. There's no "you're afraid of admitting you liked CD" or "you didn't like CD because you thought Axl fucked Slash and Duff over" excuse -- that's nonsense.

Exactly. Axl didn't change just the line up. That album is 10 years too late, has a different sound, and while there are elements of GNR it has another style, a totally different feeling to the old stuff. Some people may like it, others not.

I went to buy that album the first day of its release. I show up, before they opened the doors and I was very well aware there isn't Slash on it, or Izzy, or Duff.

Got nothing to do with it.

[Bono]

Thoughts from the other thread

Quality of the songs is subjective and up for debate. To say they are shit is disingenuous; each one was obviously a labor of love, they weren't throwaway songs, and they're not just generic rock that sounds like everything else out there. Calling them dislikable, not catchy, overproduced is perfectly legitimate; calling them garbage or shit is idiotic and incorrect.

I stopped reading after this. If i think the songs are shit they are shit. End of story. No amount of pretentious defence will change that. I'm not going to sit there and think "wow these songs really are a labour of love and given they don't sound like everything else out there means these songs truly must be good on some level." No. Fuck that shit. If a song sucks it sucks. Only on a GnR forum would I have to read some weird, pretentious, overly thought out reasoning as to why the song isn't shit and how wrong i am if I tought the song was shit or garbage. I mean for fuck sakes if a Nickelback fan gave this same type of reasoning you'd laugh in their face. But because it's Axl and the songs were a "labour of love" thinking they suck is idiotic? Fanboysim at it's finest.

Suggest you give it a full read through as the rest goes on to cover what the public (including us as fans) wanted vs. what we actually got. I left plenty of room for legitimate criticisms of the album and for you or anyone else to hate it on an individual level. If you think it sucks, then to you it sucks. This not a fanboyist defense of the album. But "it sucks" on its own is an idiotic argument when you're trying to explain how anyone other than yourself reacted to it.

The question here wasn't about the opinion of you or any one person but rather a general statement, one that sums up the views of the fanbase and the public at large. Your personal opinion means shit to anyone else. The album didn't catch on with many people and it's not because you, Bono, think it sucks. It's an interesting question as to why it didn't.

Say what you will about them, but the songs on Chinese Democracy are not generic Nickleback garbage or half-assed joke experiments like My World. As I said, you are free to like them, hate them, love them, not give a shit either way, or feel however you want about them. And that's valid for you. But it does not explain the album's poor reception with fans and the public.

How do we explain the public's reaction? Let's assume your case that it was a shitty, retarded-ass album that sucks. This doesn't explain the failure of the album because the public loves a lot of shitty, retarded-ass music that sucks. So you need to actually think a little deeper than that. You don't like it because it failed to meet your expectations. I'm gonna guess that the general public doesn't like it because it doesn't meet their expectations.

What are (or were) the public's expectations? I took a guess at it myself: they wanted some old-school, badass 80s rock, or they wanted something mind-blowingly epic and out-of-the-park crazy. Chinese Democracy meets neither of these expectations. If it was an album full of YCBM or Appetite style rockers, it would have met the first set of expectations. If it was an album full of Comas, it would have met the expectation for being some crazy experimental epic.

It was neither of these things, hence it met neither of the most common expectations, hence it fared poorly with listeners. Hence I posited that Axl lost touch with what the public expected because it's clear he wasn't even trying to meet either of those expectations. Thus, he was probably making the music for himself. That could be admirable from a creative standpoint if you respect artists who do things their own way and don't care what the rest of the world wants out of them (no reason you have to, of course). It is, of course, bad from a business standpoint. Axl was out of touch with his market and fanbase and it is reflected by the reception of the album. I think the label likely was more in tune with what the public expected. I suspect that was one of the fundamental reasons for all the conflict between Axl and the label. They knew (better, at least) what the public was looking for and they knew that Axl wasn't making it.

That right there is a broad explanation for Chinese Democracy's lack of success that goes above one's individual opinions and leaves room for you to like it, hate it, or feel any goddamned way you want to about it. It's a damn sight better than the argument everyone always has that boils down to a glorified version of:

"I think it sucks!"

"No it doesn't!"

"Yes it does"

"It does not!"

"It does!"

"Does not!"

"Axl-worshipper"

"Axl-hater"

Yeah, maybe you like engaging in those dumbassed arguments over and over again, tastes being subjective and all, but I don't think I'm the only one on here who's tired of seeing them.

This is garbage. You could say this about any fucking album ever made. it's pretentious bullshit. If a fan of a band you thought sucked started spewing this stuff you'd think they were full of shit. This is simply some psuedo intellectual way to defend the failure of CD and it's incredibly transparent.

[wasted]

No, it's not, it's human nature. It's not a blanket statement that works across the board. But some would think like that, even subconsciously. People aren't going to accept it as GNR and say it sucks because its not the same line up. Not everyone, a few maybe, a lot of 80s rock Internet radio cd spinners. To say it doesn't happen is delusional.

And yes people can be question you for not liking it or liking it. You don't have to give a reason. You may politely decline to comment.

Edited April 9, 2015 by wasted

[wasted]

If you think Axl stole the band or is disrespectful, violent, racist, wife beater then you are probably less open to the idea of CD being great.

No.

There are people who would simply say that Chinese Democracy is shit because they know Slash isn't in it, but that's a minority. Others simply didn't like the album. I'm not sure why it is so hard to understand.

I firmly believe that if someone heard the album and they genuinely thought it was utter shit, they have the right to think that and not be questioned about it. I mean, same goes for those who loved it. There's no "you're afraid of admitting you liked CD" or "you didn't like CD because you thought Axl fucked Slash and Duff over" excuse -- that's nonsense.

Exactly. Axl didn't change just the line up. That album is 10 years too late, has a different sound, and while there are elements of GNR it has another style, a totally different feeling to the old stuff. Some people may like it, others not.

I went to buy that album the first day of its release. I show up, before they opened the doors and I was very well aware there isn't Slash on it, or Izzy, or Duff.

Got nothing to do with it.

For you. Some others maybe it was a factor. I think people wrote it off because its not the classic line up. That is a factor, and it's under standable for general public to think this.

I think that way myself, you need the og line up for most part. I just think CD is great, if kind of crazy album.

[DieselDaisy]

I just think CD is great, if kind of crazy album.

We know you do, we know you do.

[Rovim]

If you think Axl stole the band or is disrespectful, violent, racist, wife beater then you are probably less open to the idea of CD being great.

No.

There are people who would simply say that Chinese Democracy is shit because they know Slash isn't in it, but that's a minority. Others simply didn't like the album. I'm not sure why it is so hard to understand.

I firmly believe that if someone heard the album and they genuinely thought it was utter shit, they have the right to think that and not be questioned about it. I mean, same goes for those who loved it. There's no "you're afraid of admitting you liked CD" or "you didn't like CD because you thought Axl fucked Slash and Duff over" excuse -- that's nonsense.

Exactly. Axl didn't change just the line up. That album is 10 years too late, has a different sound, and while there are elements of GNR it has another style, a totally different feeling to the old stuff. Some people may like it, others not.

I went to buy that album the first day of its release. I show up, before they opened the doors and I was very well aware there isn't Slash on it, or Izzy, or Duff.

Got nothing to do with it.

For you. Some others maybe it was a factor. I think people wrote it off because its not the classic line up. That is a factor, and it's under standable for general public to think this.

I think that way myself, you need the og line up for most part. I just think CD is great, if kind of crazy album.

Chinese was Axl's way to get rid of dead weight. The modern Gn'R fan gets on board. It's what on it that matters, not what isn't.

[Flayer]

This is garbage. You could say this about any fucking album ever made. it's pretentious bullshit. If a fan of a band you thought sucked started spewing this stuff you'd think they were full of shit. This is simply some psuedo intellectual way to defend the failure of CD and it's incredibly transparent.

All right, man. I think every song U2 ever wrote is a boring pile of shit. Therefore, it is. End of story. And I got no time to listen to any pretentious bullshit defense you might have to that statement. Great discussion we're having now.

[Free Bird]

If you think Axl stole the band or is disrespectful, violent, racist, wife beater then you are probably less open to the idea of CD being great.

No.

There are people who would simply say that Chinese Democracy is shit because they know Slash isn't in it, but that's a minority. Others simply didn't like the album. I'm not sure why it is so hard to understand.

I firmly believe that if someone heard the album and they genuinely thought it was utter shit, they have the right to think that and not be questioned about it. I mean, same goes for those who loved it. There's no "you're afraid of admitting you liked CD" or "you didn't like CD because you thought Axl fucked Slash and Duff over" excuse -- that's nonsense.

Exactly. Axl didn't change just the line up. That album is 10 years too late, has a different sound, and while there are elements of GNR it has another style, a totally different feeling to the old stuff. Some people may like it, others not.

I went to buy that album the first day of its release. I show up, before they opened the doors and I was very well aware there isn't Slash on it, or Izzy, or Duff.

Got nothing to do with it.

For you. Some others maybe it was a factor. I think people wrote it off because its not the classic line up. That is a factor, and it's under standable for general public to think this.

I think that way myself, you need the og line up for most part. I just think CD is great, if kind of crazy album.

Obviously that's my POV. It's an opinion not a fact. And yours is nothing more than a theory. You could be right. I can't devine what somebody's thinking but I think it's just a minority who dislikes CD just because it's not their favorite line up.

In my opinion a reason CD failed is, people aren't in rockmusic anymore. They forgot about Guns and they don't even know CD exists. That people who knows about CD are shocked because they were expecting the classic sound of the band which is not existing anymore.

Edited April 9, 2015 by Free Bird

[wasted]

I think most see what isn't there.

[wasted]

If you think Axl stole the band or is disrespectful, violent, racist, wife beater then you are probably less open to the idea of CD being great.

No.

There are people who would simply say that Chinese Democracy is shit because they know Slash isn't in it, but that's a minority. Others simply didn't like the album. I'm not sure why it is so hard to understand.

I firmly believe that if someone heard the album and they genuinely thought it was utter shit, they have the right to think that and not be questioned about it. I mean, same goes for those who loved it. There's no "you're afraid of admitting you liked CD" or "you didn't like CD because you thought Axl fucked Slash and Duff over" excuse -- that's nonsense.

Exactly. Axl didn't change just the line up. That album is 10 years too late, has a different sound, and while there are elements of GNR it has another style, a totally different feeling to the old stuff. Some people may like it, others not.

I went to buy that album the first day of its release. I show up, before they opened the doors and I was very well aware there isn't Slash on it, or Izzy, or Duff.

Got nothing to do with it.

For you. Some others maybe it was a factor. I think people wrote it off because its not the classic line up. That is a factor, and it's under standable for general public to think this.

I think that way myself, you need the og line up for most part. I just think CD is great, if kind of crazy album.

Obviously that's my POV. It's an opinion not a fact. And yours is nothing more than a theory. You could be right. I can't devine what somebody's thinking but I think it's just a minority who dislikes CD just because it's not their favorite line up

I think that's all I was saying. Although my feeling is that a lot of people wrote it off way before hearing it based on it not being the classic line ups. And sure enough it didn't deliver the same kind of hard rock as those albums.

But I think there was more negativity to CD than most records I know with line up changes. Still to this day Call Slash is common idea. People don't think this is GNR, if that doesn't taint what they think of the album, then more power to them.

Edited April 9, 2015 by wasted

[Free Bird]

If you think Axl stole the band or is disrespectful, violent, racist, wife beater then you are probably less open to the idea of CD being great.

No.

There are people who would simply say that Chinese Democracy is shit because they know Slash isn't in it, but that's a minority. Others simply didn't like the album. I'm not sure why it is so hard to understand.

I firmly believe that if someone heard the album and they genuinely thought it was utter shit, they have the right to think that and not be questioned about it. I mean, same goes for those who loved it. There's no "you're afraid of admitting you liked CD" or "you didn't like CD because you thought Axl fucked Slash and Duff over" excuse -- that's nonsense.

Exactly. Axl didn't change just the line up. That album is 10 years too late, has a different sound, and while there are elements of GNR it has another style, a totally different feeling to the old stuff. Some people may like it, others not.

I went to buy that album the first day of its release. I show up, before they opened the doors and I was very well aware there isn't Slash on it, or Izzy, or Duff.

Got nothing to do with it.

For you. Some others maybe it was a factor. I think people wrote it off because its not the classic line up. That is a factor, and it's under standable for general public to think this.

I think that way myself, you need the og line up for most part. I just think CD is great, if kind of crazy album.

Obviously that's my POV. It's an opinion not a fact. And yours is nothing more than a theory. You could be right. I can't devine what somebody's thinking but I think it's just a minority who dislikes CD just because it's not their favorite line up

I think that's all I was saying.

But I think there was more negativity to CD than most records I know with line up changes. Still to this day Call Slash is common idea. People don't think this is GNR, if that doesn't taint what they think of the album, then more power to them.

But would they think so if they'd love CD?

CD isn't GNR like they used to know and love. I think thats the case. When the public things about Guns they think about Axl and about Slash. If they hear CD it doesn't sound anything like Slash and that's what they are missing.

You and I know there is much more than just Axl and Slash to be GNR. Still there is Izzy and Duff missing but the general public doesn't know this

[wasted]

If you think Axl stole the band or is disrespectful, violent, racist, wife beater then you are probably less open to the idea of CD being great.

No.

There are people who would simply say that Chinese Democracy is shit because they know Slash isn't in it, but that's a minority. Others simply didn't like the album. I'm not sure why it is so hard to understand.

I firmly believe that if someone heard the album and they genuinely thought it was utter shit, they have the right to think that and not be questioned about it. I mean, same goes for those who loved it. There's no "you're afraid of admitting you liked CD" or "you didn't like CD because you thought Axl fucked Slash and Duff over" excuse -- that's nonsense.

Exactly. Axl didn't change just the line up. That album is 10 years too late, has a different sound, and while there are elements of GNR it has another style, a totally different feeling to the old stuff. Some people may like it, others not.

I went to buy that album the first day of its release. I show up, before they opened the doors and I was very well aware there isn't Slash on it, or Izzy, or Duff.

Got nothing to do with it.

For you. Some others maybe it was a factor. I think people wrote it off because its not the classic line up. That is a factor, and it's under standable for general public to think this.

I think that way myself, you need the og line up for most part. I just think CD is great, if kind of crazy album.

Obviously that's my POV. It's an opinion not a fact. And yours is nothing more than a theory. You could be right. I can't devine what somebody's thinking but I think it's just a minority who dislikes CD just because it's not their favorite line up

I think that's all I was saying.

But I think there was more negativity to CD than most records I know with line up changes. Still to this day Call Slash is common idea. People don't think this is GNR, if that doesn't taint what they think of the album, then more power to them.

But would they think so if they'd love CD?

CD isn't GNR like they used to know and love. I think thats the case. When the public things about Guns they think about Axl and about Slash. If they hear CD it doesn't sound anything like Slash and that's what they are missing.

You and I know there is much more than just Axl and Slash to be GNR. Still there is Izzy and Duff missing but the general public doesn't know this

To me it's part and parcel of the album. The classic line up would probably deliver something people liked.

But looking at Bucket and Finck and Axl with cornrows and they were just thinking this isn't GNR, this isn't going to be anything I like.

So people wrote it off.

I mean GNR were known for hard rock mostly, punk rock. Not Alt rock and funky synth beats.

It's almost the antithesis of GNR.

[Free Bird]

If you think Axl stole the band or is disrespectful, violent, racist, wife beater then you are probably less open to the idea of CD being great.

No.

There are people who would simply say that Chinese Democracy is shit because they know Slash isn't in it, but that's a minority. Others simply didn't like the album. I'm not sure why it is so hard to understand.

I firmly believe that if someone heard the album and they genuinely thought it was utter shit, they have the right to think that and not be questioned about it. I mean, same goes for those who loved it. There's no "you're afraid of admitting you liked CD" or "you didn't like CD because you thought Axl fucked Slash and Duff over" excuse -- that's nonsense.

Exactly. Axl didn't change just the line up. That album is 10 years too late, has a different sound, and while there are elements of GNR it has another style, a totally different feeling to the old stuff. Some people may like it, others not.

I went to buy that album the first day of its release. I show up, before they opened the doors and I was very well aware there isn't Slash on it, or Izzy, or Duff.

Got nothing to do with it.

For you. Some others maybe it was a factor. I think people wrote it off because its not the classic line up. That is a factor, and it's under standable for general public to think this.

I think that way myself, you need the og line up for most part. I just think CD is great, if kind of crazy album.

Obviously that's my POV. It's an opinion not a fact. And yours is nothing more than a theory. You could be right. I can't devine what somebody's thinking but I think it's just a minority who dislikes CD just because it's not their favorite line up

I think that's all I was saying.

But I think there was more negativity to CD than most records I know with line up changes. Still to this day Call Slash is common idea. People don't think this is GNR, if that doesn't taint what they think of the album, then more power to them.

But would they think so if they'd love CD?

CD isn't GNR like they used to know and love. I think thats the case. When the public things about Guns they think about Axl and about Slash. If they hear CD it doesn't sound anything like Slash and that's what they are missing.

You and I know there is much more than just Axl and Slash to be GNR. Still there is Izzy and Duff missing but the general public doesn't know this

To me it's part and parcel of the album. The classic line up would probably deliver something people liked.

But looking at Bucket and Finck and Axl with cornrows and they were just thinking this isn't GNR, this isn't going to be anything I like.

So people wrote it off.

I mean GNR were known for hard rock mostly, punk rock. Not Alt rock and funky synth beats.

It's almost the antithesis of GNR.

Completely agreed

[Intercourse]

This is garbage. You could say this about any fucking album ever made. it's pretentious bullshit. If a fan of a band you thought sucked started spewing this stuff you'd think they were full of shit. This is simply some psuedo intellectual way to defend the failure of CD and it's incredibly transparent.

All right, man. I think every song U2 ever wrote is a boring pile of shit. Therefore, it is. End of story. And I got no time to listen to any pretentious bullshit defense you might have to that statement. Great discussion we're having now.

See this is exactly the problem with blow-hards like you, you're not getting your way with your argument so you go childish and start lashing out at U2 to piss off Bono.

The fact of the matter is lots of people think that CD just ain't that good. You need to accept that.

Of those people, some will have listened to it deeply and really tried to like it (i.e. me) and others will have heard Chinese Democracy on the radio and left it at that.

There is nothing deeper than that, most people simply don't have the time or energy to go on like we do.

Edited April 9, 2015 by Intercourse

[SoulMonster]

This is garbage. You could say this about any fucking album ever made. it's pretentious bullshit. If a fan of a band you thought sucked started spewing this stuff you'd think they were full of shit. This is simply some psuedo intellectual way to defend the failure of CD and it's incredibly transparent.

All right, man. I think every song U2 ever wrote is a boring pile of shit. Therefore, it is. End of story. And I got no time to listen to any pretentious bullshit defense you might have to that statement. Great discussion we're having now.

See this is exactly the problem with blow-hards like you, you're not getting your way with your argument so you go childish and start lashing out at U2 to piss off Bono.

Haha, you didn't get the point Flayer was making