yes this is a reunion thread.

[wasted]

Half those are hits to me. Then well known songs like Easy and Brownstone.

He doesn't play the folk hits I guess. But across all his albums they are hits like Nightrain is a hit or Yesterdays, Civil War. Positively 4th Street, Maggies Farm, Watchtower, Dont think twice, Desolation row, Jokerman, Baby Blue are classics. Some of the others are like Better, Sorry and Catcher. Tweedle and Beyond here lies Nothing are like CD era tracks. God Knows was featured on Tell Tale Signs. So hits, classics and some new stuff. So you go home thinking greatest hits show.

If you start focusing on real GNR hits in the show its like

Jungle

SCOM

Paradise

Patience

YCBM

DC

Nov Rain

Heaven

Live n let Die

Estranged maybe i

Then it's more classics that people love, so not sure which you'd replace.

Edited May 23, 2015 by wasted

[dalsh327]

Dylan's very much a "I'm going to do what I feel like" performer.

Sounds like it was a fun time in LA for musicians of different generations crossing paths when Dylan was working towards a comeback.

Edited May 23, 2015 by dalsh327

[wasted]

He has so many band members. Makes GNR look stable.

[DieselDaisy]

Half those are hits to me. Then well known songs like Easy and Brownstone.

He doesn't play the folk hits I guess. But across all his albums they are hits like Nightrain is a hit or Yesterdays, Civil War. Positively 4th Street, Maggies Farm, Watchtower, Dont think twice, Desolation row, Jokerman, Baby Blue are classics. Some of the others are like Better, Sorry and Catcher. Tweedle and Beyond here lies Nothing are like CD era tracks. God Knows was featured on Tell Tale Signs. So hits, classics and some new stuff. So you go home thinking greatest hits show.

If you start focusing on real GNR hits in the show its like

Jungle

SCOM

Paradise

Patience

YCBM

DC

Nov Rain

Heaven

Live n let Die

Estranged maybe i

Then it's more classics that people love, so not sure which you'd replace.

Jokerman, 'classic'. Really? There are as many non-hits present in Dylan's setlist also: Gonna Change My Way of Thinking (from Slow Train), High Water (Love and Theft), Spirit on the Water (Modern Times).

Yes but he is changing the setlist by at least 50% every single night whereas Axl has played the exact same setlist since 2011. How on earth can you compare the two? Look at the beginning, ''Jungle, CD, It's So Easy etc''. You can select a random Dylan gig and find a completely different beginning with songs that were not even played the previous night. There is no similarity whatsoever. Dylan is an artist who regularly releases albums and changes his setlists night-by-night. Axl is a Vegas performer who never releases albums and plays the same setlist night-by-night. No comparison.

[wasted]

Jokerman was a single around that time. Stuff like Maggies farm and Watchtower are classics. Dylan has way more songs.

But having less songs isn't selling out. They have popular songs like Easy, Brownstone, Rocket Queen, Nightrain. Estranged was campaigned for. Civil War is a classic.

Again it's just two different approaches. GNR do big rock songs. But is honing a Best of set from 2010 to 2015 for a stadium band isn't selling out. It's a little uninspired maybe. Dylan had his lean years too. He did some weaker albums, some 80s stuff. What was Nashville all about?

I guess there's two ways of looking at things. Your hero is down and out and experimenting with different styles. Or he's a has been who's selling out trying to jump on a band wagon.

This could just be Axl doing his Dylan. A never ending tour mailing it for the money til he comes back to find Jesus and put out his Time out of Mind/reunion record.

Edited May 23, 2015 by wasted

[DieselDaisy]

Listen, 'selling out', definition of,

- Played greatest hits/best of setlists to appeal to laymen

- playing the same setlist

- not releasing new material

- playing Vegas

- doing commercials for cash

- releasing music specifically designed to appeal to the largest denominator.

Axl is guilty of at least, five of those, the first five.

[Apollo]

I suppose he might talk about art and then play Vegas.

Thats the point though, he never espoused artistic ideals to the point of like, some kind of martyr for the idea of art, he was never anti-commerce, they were always bold and brazen about the fact that they wanted to make dumploads of cash, just The Beatles were...and fair play to em.

The guy was doing adverts for Raw magazine, actual tv spots, mass corporate sponsorship, he was never no 'it's just about the art!' type kiddie, no, he was looking to get paid and paid handsomely. He's not really of that other category.

It's true his quote about it was more that people in the position to do so should pursue art. You don't get huge and famous by accident.

But I guess going into CD he wasn't going to just put out something he wasn't happy with it. Not just put out a frisbee so you can tour. They were in a unique position that very few bands have ever been in. So he wanted to use that position a bit like U2 do in away. Maybe even abuse it.

But that's where the idea comes from that Axl wants to be an artist and make statements and get rid of the old band to do it. But then he ends up a nostalgia Vegas act.

I think he kind of wants to be an artist and make a buck. Difference between Axl and Slash say is Axl has more of something to say. He cares more about issues. On Shacklers he's still defending himself from when Brownstone was implicated in a school shooting.

So I think he's not a sell out at all. Or at least there's a time for art and time for a good time. Are The Stones sell outs because they turned into capitalist touring machine. Did Dylan sell out his idealism for a buck etc etc.

If Dylan can do stuff for money I'm sure Axl can too.

Axl has more to say than Slash?

How do you come to that conclusion?

One album and a handful if interviews in the last 20 years would disagree with you.

[magisme]

What's ridiculous, is this begins to appear as if we're somehow preoccupied with calling Axl a sellout when that's absolutely not the case. Many criticisms of Axl are thrown around this forum; sellout doesn't come up that much. The reason this shit comes up, and the reason it's an argument, is people love to casually state that Axl is unlike others and never sells out, or that he's much full so integrity, or he's too art perfectionism, or whatever - and these things are said as if everyone should passively accept them as truth. It's fucking bonkers

[EvH]

Even if Dylan was playing Greatest Hits type setlists, we wouldn't even know considering how impossible it is to actually understand anything through his mumbling.

[wasted]

I suppose he might talk about art and then play Vegas.

Thats the point though, he never espoused artistic ideals to the point of like, some kind of martyr for the idea of art, he was never anti-commerce, they were always bold and brazen about the fact that they wanted to make dumploads of cash, just The Beatles were...and fair play to em.

The guy was doing adverts for Raw magazine, actual tv spots, mass corporate sponsorship, he was never no 'it's just about the art!' type kiddie, no, he was looking to get paid and paid handsomely. He's not really of that other category.

It's true his quote about it was more that people in the position to do so should pursue art. You don't get huge and famous by accident.

But I guess going into CD he wasn't going to just put out something he wasn't happy with it. Not just put out a frisbee so you can tour. They were in a unique position that very few bands have ever been in. So he wanted to use that position a bit like U2 do in away. Maybe even abuse it.

But that's where the idea comes from that Axl wants to be an artist and make statements and get rid of the old band to do it. But then he ends up a nostalgia Vegas act.

I think he kind of wants to be an artist and make a buck. Difference between Axl and Slash say is Axl has more of something to say. He cares more about issues. On Shacklers he's still defending himself from when Brownstone was implicated in a school shooting.

So I think he's not a sell out at all. Or at least there's a time for art and time for a good time. Are The Stones sell outs because they turned into capitalist touring machine. Did Dylan sell out his idealism for a buck etc etc.

If Dylan can do stuff for money I'm sure Axl can too.

Axl has more to say than Slash?

How do you come to that conclusion?

One album and a handful if interviews in the last 20 years would disagree with you.

Axl writes lyrics and considers these important. So that slows him down a bit. Slash just wants to play.

[wasted]

Listen, 'selling out', definition of,

- Played greatest hits/best of setlists to appeal to laymen

- playing the same setlist

- not releasing new material

- playing Vegas

- doing commercials for cash

- releasing music specifically designed to appeal to the largest denominator.

Axl is guilty of at least, five of those, the first five.

I think Dylan did that first one in Asia. Compare that to his US sets recently. He's playing the same set list right now in the US tour.

I don't think any of them are really selling out. Everyone has done an ad put a song in a movie. YCBM? Videos kind of selling out if your hardcore? Have some chick dancing around in her underwear or on a bed with a snake!

Not sure about last one AFD is the heartland CD is commercial suicide, Axl was influenced by styles that sold less than AFD and wasn't even what fans want. Possibly broadening fanbase buts that an uncommon marketing ploy in rock.

Edited May 24, 2015 by wasted

[Rovim]

I suppose he might talk about art and then play Vegas.

Thats the point though, he never espoused artistic ideals to the point of like, some kind of martyr for the idea of art, he was never anti-commerce, they were always bold and brazen about the fact that they wanted to make dumploads of cash, just The Beatles were...and fair play to em.

The guy was doing adverts for Raw magazine, actual tv spots, mass corporate sponsorship, he was never no 'it's just about the art!' type kiddie, no, he was looking to get paid and paid handsomely. He's not really of that other category.

It's true his quote about it was more that people in the position to do so should pursue art. You don't get huge and famous by accident.

But I guess going into CD he wasn't going to just put out something he wasn't happy with it. Not just put out a frisbee so you can tour. They were in a unique position that very few bands have ever been in. So he wanted to use that position a bit like U2 do in away. Maybe even abuse it.

But that's where the idea comes from that Axl wants to be an artist and make statements and get rid of the old band to do it. But then he ends up a nostalgia Vegas act.

I think he kind of wants to be an artist and make a buck. Difference between Axl and Slash say is Axl has more of something to say. He cares more about issues. On Shacklers he's still defending himself from when Brownstone was implicated in a school shooting.

So I think he's not a sell out at all. Or at least there's a time for art and time for a good time. Are The Stones sell outs because they turned into capitalist touring machine. Did Dylan sell out his idealism for a buck etc etc.

If Dylan can do stuff for money I'm sure Axl can too.

Axl has more to say than Slash?

How do you come to that conclusion?

One album and a handful if interviews in the last 20 years would disagree with you.

Axl writes lyrics and considers these important. So that slows him down a bit. Slash just wants to play.

Maybe that's what Axl meant when he said Slash didn't want to take it to the next level.

I think it means different things to Axl. The music he releases is of great importance to him. Has to have the meaning, evolution, inspiration, and a certain level of quality he expects from himself.

Very different personalities, and after listening to Slash's Guns and post Guns work, his 7 "solo" albums I think he's not interested in changing the formula, or create something that is more out of the box that embraces new influences and approaches.

He doesn't have the attention span to wrestle with it too much. He likes the way he does it and it's good enough for him. The main goals is to write riffs and improvise solos and play his guitar live.

Axl has kept many old Guns elements and used them on Chinese. More interesting when an artist is not interested in doing the exact same thing imo. It wasn't even a major departure compared to other attempts to keep a band alive without key past members of the band.

[wasted]

Even if Dylan was playing Greatest Hits type setlists, we wouldn't even know considering how impossible it is to actually understand anything through his mumbling.

My friend went to early 90s shows with the mumbling hits. People said he was on heroin. But he claims in book he was so bored of those songs and he was in some town by a jazzbar and heard some music he like, it was some jazz scale so he started using it on the hits to make them more interesting to him. Axl hasn't done that he pretty much tries to put on a show for the audience. He has other foibles.

But recent years since the cheese ball intro he plays them straight ish. You virtually have to be huge fan to enjoy his shows though other than just wait for the one you know. Or hear it think where can I hear that again.

[wasted]

I suppose he might talk about art and then play Vegas.

Thats the point though, he never espoused artistic ideals to the point of like, some kind of martyr for the idea of art, he was never anti-commerce, they were always bold and brazen about the fact that they wanted to make dumploads of cash, just The Beatles were...and fair play to em.

The guy was doing adverts for Raw magazine, actual tv spots, mass corporate sponsorship, he was never no 'it's just about the art!' type kiddie, no, he was looking to get paid and paid handsomely. He's not really of that other category.

It's true his quote about it was more that people in the position to do so should pursue art. You don't get huge and famous by accident.

But I guess going into CD he wasn't going to just put out something he wasn't happy with it. Not just put out a frisbee so you can tour. They were in a unique position that very few bands have ever been in. So he wanted to use that position a bit like U2 do in away. Maybe even abuse it.

But that's where the idea comes from that Axl wants to be an artist and make statements and get rid of the old band to do it. But then he ends up a nostalgia Vegas act.

I think he kind of wants to be an artist and make a buck. Difference between Axl and Slash say is Axl has more of something to say. He cares more about issues. On Shacklers he's still defending himself from when Brownstone was implicated in a school shooting.

So I think he's not a sell out at all. Or at least there's a time for art and time for a good time. Are The Stones sell outs because they turned into capitalist touring machine. Did Dylan sell out his idealism for a buck etc etc.

If Dylan can do stuff for money I'm sure Axl can too.

Axl has more to say than Slash?

How do you come to that conclusion?

One album and a handful if interviews in the last 20 years would disagree with you.

Axl writes lyrics and considers these important. So that slows him down a bit. Slash just wants to play.

Maybe that's what Axl meant when he said Slash didn't want to take it to the next level.

I think it means different things to Axl. The music he releases is of great importance to him. Has to have the meaning, evolution, inspiration, and a certain level of quality he expects from himself.

Very different personalities, and after listening to Slash's Guns and post Guns work, his 7 "solo" albums I think he's not interested in changing the formula, or create something that is more out of the box that embraces new influences and approaches.

He doesn't have the attention span to wrestle with it too much. He likes the way he does it and it's good enough for him. The main goals is to write riffs and improvise solos and play his guitar live.

Axl has kept many old Guns elements and used them on Chinese. More interesting when an artist is not interested in doing the exact same thing imo. It wasn't even a major departure compared to other attempts to keep a band alive without key past members of the band.

Slash said in interview that he takes things on more organically but it has to fit his overall musical personality.

I think, not sure, but Axl tested waters with Silkworms and Oh My God and sort of got negative response. Scraped, ITW, Sorry, Shacklers seem to get the most criticism. I think he still took the risks and changed the sound enough.

Slash is ACDc

Izzy is Dylan

Axl is Bowie

Axl experimental and commercial. Reality by Bowie is kind of like an Axl record. If Bowie did hard rock it would be like CD. Some riffs, some drum and bass, some hip hop beats and pop songs. Fame, Sound and Vision.

[wasted]

What's ridiculous, is this begins to appear as if we're somehow preoccupied with calling Axl a sellout when that's absolutely not the case. Many criticisms of Axl are thrown around this forum; sellout doesn't come up that much. The reason this shit comes up, and the reason it's an argument, is people love to casually state that Axl is unlike others and never sells out, or that he's much full so integrity, or he's too art perfectionism, or whatever - and these things are said as if everyone should passively accept them as truth. It's fucking bonkers

once Axl got comfortable he said something to the effect that if you have the opportunity you should try to make art. But he started it with Nov rain and Estranged I guess. Just takes more time.

Perfectionism doesn't mean it's perfect. But Axl does a lot of takes, quite few have mentioned this. There's meant to be three versions of every CD song. Someone said that Axl takes music more seriously than anyone they'd worked with.

I suppose if you think CD sucks then you can't see the art. Either way Axl was trying to do something like blend new influences with GNR.

Azoff/Goild came out and said it was art and its hard to mix art and commence. I guess it was a sales pitch but it might have some truth to it.

But these ideas aren't made up by posters, they are repeated. I think they are part of the reason people don't get what they want from Axl.

I don't think the perfectionism is why it took so long to release, that's business issues.

But if you you'resaying he's a sell out because some posters say he's a perfectionist then it's going to be innerestin'.

Edited May 24, 2015 by wasted

[wasted]

I think as a singer he wants to be in a big band but change the sound every record and mix commercial and more left field influences.

[ChineseIRS]

Axl and Dylan both did commercials this year. Fuckin sell outs.

[wasted]

Scorsese does Johnny Walker. Keep Walking.

[magisme]

What's ridiculous, is this begins to appear as if we're somehow preoccupied with calling Axl a sellout when that's absolutely not the case. Many criticisms of Axl are thrown around this forum; sellout doesn't come up that much. The reason this shit comes up, and the reason it's an argument, is people love to casually state that Axl is unlike others and never sells out, or that he's much full so integrity, or he's too art perfectionism, or whatever - and these things are said as if everyone should passively accept them as truth. It's fucking bonkers

once Axl got comfortable he said something to the effect that if you have the opportunity you should try to make art. But he started it with Nov rain and Estranged I guess. Just takes more time.

Perfectionism doesn't mean it's perfect. But Axl does a lot of takes, quite few have mentioned this. There's meant to be three versions of every CD song. Someone said that Axl takes music more seriously than anyone they'd worked with.

I suppose if you think CD sucks then you can't see the art. Either way Axl was trying to do something like blend new influences with GNR.

Azoff/Goild came out and said it was art and its hard to mix art and commence. I guess it was a sales pitch but it might have some truth to it.

But these ideas aren't made up by posters, they are repeated. I think they are part of the reason people don't get what they want from Axl.

I don't think the perfectionism is why it took so long to release, that's business issues.

But if you you'resaying he's a sell out because some posters say he's a perfectionist then it's going to be innerestin'.

Like I said, fucking bonkers.

[wasted]

But I guess depends what you read about CD. Del said Axl just wasn't ready to release it until 2008. The perfectionist thing has to play into, or fear, or just being lazy, but wouldn't it be easier and less hassle just to release something on schedule? Axl fights the system, tries to get it to work. Izzy doesn't deal with it, he's in the desert recording and releasing whatever he wants.

[Apollo]

I suppose he might talk about art and then play Vegas.

Thats the point though, he never espoused artistic ideals to the point of like, some kind of martyr for the idea of art, he was never anti-commerce, they were always bold and brazen about the fact that they wanted to make dumploads of cash, just The Beatles were...and fair play to em.

The guy was doing adverts for Raw magazine, actual tv spots, mass corporate sponsorship, he was never no 'it's just about the art!' type kiddie, no, he was looking to get paid and paid handsomely. He's not really of that other category.

It's true his quote about it was more that people in the position to do so should pursue art. You don't get huge and famous by accident.

But I guess going into CD he wasn't going to just put out something he wasn't happy with it. Not just put out a frisbee so you can tour. They were in a unique position that very few bands have ever been in. So he wanted to use that position a bit like U2 do in away. Maybe even abuse it.

But that's where the idea comes from that Axl wants to be an artist and make statements and get rid of the old band to do it. But then he ends up a nostalgia Vegas act.

I think he kind of wants to be an artist and make a buck. Difference between Axl and Slash say is Axl has more of something to say. He cares more about issues. On Shacklers he's still defending himself from when Brownstone was implicated in a school shooting.

So I think he's not a sell out at all. Or at least there's a time for art and time for a good time. Are The Stones sell outs because they turned into capitalist touring machine. Did Dylan sell out his idealism for a buck etc etc.

If Dylan can do stuff for money I'm sure Axl can too.

Axl has more to say than Slash?

How do you come to that conclusion?

One album and a handful if interviews in the last 20 years would disagree with you.

Axl writes lyrics and considers these important. So that slows him down a bit. Slash just wants to play.

You are right, for the most part.

But have you listened to the lyrics for IRS? Shacklers Revenge? Rhiad? Scraped? Prostitute?

And some of the bands biggest hits or staple songs? Paradise City? You could Be Mine? Nightrain? It's so easy? Perfect crime?

Yes. Sometimes Axl and great song writers can give you a great story with their lyrics.

But you don't need a great story that takes you on a lyrical journey to make a fantastic rock song. Songs like PC, Nightrain, YCBM and rocket queen prove that.

I would rather Axl put out an album every five years that had 3-4 of his attempts at being "epic" type songs (estranged and TWAT) and 10 old fashion kick ass rock songs (YCBM and Nightrain). And repeat that cycle every five years.

As opposed to one album every 20 years as Axl tries to create the greatest album of all time.

[Słash]

But I guess depends what you read about CD. Del said Axl just wasn't ready to release it until 2008. The perfectionist thing has to play into, or fear, or just being lazy, but wouldn't it be easier and less hassle just to release something on schedule? Axl fights the system, tries to get it to work. Izzy doesn't deal with it, he's in the desert recording and releasing whatever he wants.

What do you mean he wasn't ready to release it until 2008? so he made his mind back in 2000 that he won't release it in 2008? I guess he had pressure from his management cause of the Dr. Pepper thing and the Best Buy deal thats why he had to just release it, otherwise CD also wouldn't have seen the light of the day, supposedly a lot of stuff has been recorded, he was touring in 2010, he could have easily released a new record that time, he has people who do work for him, so it just goes over my head why he keeps on delaying things.

[DR DOOM]

The frustrating thing is that songs like IRS and TWAT were basically (lyrically, at least) done back in 99, we have the demos to prove.

All that time wasn't spent writing and recording, it definitely seems like that was done in a couple of bursts and the rest was inactivity/sitting on hands.

[magisme]

The frustrating thing is that songs like IRS and TWAT were basically (lyrically, at least) done back in 99, we have the demos to prove.

All that time wasn't spent writing and recording, it definitely seems like that was done in a couple of bursts and the rest was inactivity/sitting on hands.

That's the case with almost all the songs. In 2001-2002 we heard CD, SOD, Madagascar and Riad - all pretty much the same as what we'd get on the album. Don't believe the fan fiction.

[Słash]

I guess 90% of the songs were done between 1999 to 2004, CD, SOD, Madagascar, IRS, Riad, Twat, Catcher,(without Rons Solo) were I guess from the first batch, Bucket left in 2004, he did stuff on Shacklers, Scraped, If the world, Sorry, I guess Better was the only song written by Fink after 2004, but even in that Bucket has one solo, TIL had different versions and Fink recorded the final solo in 2006 for it, I guess Prostitute was written sometime in 2001