Jump to content

What do you expect from a REUNION record?


Recommended Posts

With the classic line up rekindling the musical chemistry coming up what kind of record will they produce or what do you hope for?

I think somewhere between AFD and Lies acoustic soundwise with each member getting 2 songs each, with one really big rocker from Axl, Izzy, Duff and Slash. Izzy acoustic track, maybe something like Rocket Queen meets Coma to end the album. Couple of covers like Boys are Back in Town and Born to be Wild to punch it through to the mainstream.

What's your opinion?

born to be wild? are you nuts? GNR and specially axl would NEVER record and release a cover of a song like that

well i expect the best record of the last 25 years, nothing less, and i am sure they will deliver

LOL and then they'll cover More Than a Feeling and Don't Stop Believing, to "punch it through to the mainstream."

Then, MTV will play their videos all day every day, completely taking the place of 16 Pregnant and Catfishting.

Then, Kim Kardashian and Kanye will totally be forgotten, because the entire country will be singing along to GNR's cover of Born To Be Wild.

Good lord, the delusion on this board...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't say CD fits in one genre or is very run of the mill. It's hard rock and alt rock. I would say the production isn't to many people's like becsuse Guns fans are looking for something more organic sounding, that breathes like AFD or has that hard rock metal production of UYI. But on CD the hard rock elements have kind of vacuum compressed production which is defeats the idea of hard rock. Each song is too much of a mish mash to be comforting to anyone. You need a broad palette. It can be frustrating, but generic not at all. I think people would like it more if it didn't try so hard to break out of the ghetto of hard rock production. Those songs recorded simply with Clink would be like UYI III. But those songs don't have much rock n roll swagger. It's not bar room blues rock. It's a studio album for a studio album's sake.

But for a reunion record, with Clink and no real reason not to just go with what Slash, Izzy and Duff lay down, it will just sound like UYI without the filler probably. they have various solo albums to prove they do what they do.

Edited by wasted
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It'll be at least 10x better than Chinese Democracy, that much is certain

Yeah sure how so ?

Slash's albums are good but generic as it gets hard rock, if CD sucks for you how you can expect that Duff or Slash would change thing ?

What could Slash contribute to Axl's songs (welcome CD) solos ? There were amazing solos on CD (and in fact Slash hans't written better solos since GN'R days). We all know that it's unlikely that they all will be in the same room writing tunes together.

It won't be a collsaboration if they are able to make a record it will be "

- Axl singing on Slash's and Duff generic hard rock/punk rock

- Slash and Duff playing on CD alike tunes written by Axl

- maybe maybe Axl&Izzy can create something really good.

Keith Richards and Mick Jagger produced shitty albums in their solo careers but together they made magic again after they reunited.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It'll be at least 10x better than Chinese Democracy, that much is certain

Yeah sure how so ?

Slash's albums are good but generic as it gets hard rock, if CD sucks for you how you can expect that Duff or Slash would change thing ?

What could Slash contribute to Axl's songs (welcome CD) solos ? There were amazing solos on CD (and in fact Slash hans't written better solos since GN'R days). We all know that it's unlikely that they all will be in the same room writing tunes together.

It won't be a collsaboration if they are able to make a record it will be "

- Axl singing on Slash's and Duff generic hard rock/punk rock

- Slash and Duff playing on CD alike tunes written by Axl

- maybe maybe Axl&Izzy can create something really good.

Keith Richards and Mick Jagger produced shitty albums in their solo careers but together they made magic again after they reunited.

Yes but the Jagger/Richards feud was never that long, just c.1983 - 1988, and The Stones were never folded; indeed they even managed to scratch together a dreary album (Dirty Work). It is also debatable, the quality of the Stones' discography post 1978's Some Girls (I personally like Voodoo Lounge and Bridges to Babylon).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Strictly speaking Appetite is generic, if you're going by the proper definition of the word, it fits pretty squarely into genre definitions. Thats not an insult either, just a fact. Generic as a derisory comment in terms of music criticism is meant to mean run-of-the-mill as a consequence of being firmly within genre conventions...thats Appetite to a T as well as any number of great rock n roll albums.

Generic as in the insult, flat, uninspired, THATS the definition of Chi Dem.

Yes but this just confirms my point. Axl's greatest contribution to recorded music consisted of an album of 'generic' rock (Appetite). Axl spent the best part of twenty years trying to redefine himself as Elton John and Trent Reznor's bastard offspring and the result (CD) is poor in comparison to a 'generic rock album'. Maybe he should embrace his rock n' roll muse - be Bon Scott - rather than horsing around imitating those people? Besides, it is debatable how 'progressive' CD is - this was my original point. Throwing a bunch of bleeps on Korn b-sides and ballads does not make you progressive. If you want to see progressive in an 'electronica' sense, there are areas you can visit (The guys on Warp records, Bjork) but Axl Rose is not one of those areas. People who enjoy progressive music would laugh at the notion that CD is progressive.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jagger and Keith write tunes together Axl and Slash don't or haven't since AFD. Axl and Izzy maybe. But with Slash it would be Slash playing some riffs ( and maybe only solos) on Axls soongs and Axl singing over Slash's Songs. I doubt they will be in one room writing tunes together. But I doubt any album will happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jagger and Keith write tunes together Axl and Slash don't or haven't since AFD. Axl and Izzy maybe. But with Slash it would be Slash playing some riffs ( and maybe only solos) on Axls soongs and Axl singing over Slash's Songs. I doubt they will be in one room writing tunes together. But I doubt any album will happen.

Well, that's pretty much how Estranged, November Rain, Coma and Locomotive came up. My favourites UYI tunes.

My point is, they don't need to get in a room an write to make great music. That's how great they are together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Strictly speaking Appetite is generic, if you're going by the proper definition of the word, it fits pretty squarely into genre definitions. Thats not an insult either, just a fact. Generic as a derisory comment in terms of music criticism is meant to mean run-of-the-mill as a consequence of being firmly within genre conventions...thats Appetite to a T as well as any number of great rock n roll albums.

Generic as in the insult, flat, uninspired, THATS the definition of Chi Dem.

Yes but this just confirms my point. Axl's greatest contribution to recorded music consisted of an album of 'generic' rock (Appetite). Axl spent the best part of twenty years trying to redefine himself as Elton John and Trent Reznor's bastard offspring and the result (CD) is poor in comparison to a 'generic rock album'. Maybe he should embrace his rock n' roll muse - be Bon Scott - rather than horsing around imitating those people? Besides, it is debatable how 'progressive' CD is - this was my original point. Throwing a bunch of bleeps on Korn b-sides and ballads does not make you progressive. If you want to see progressive in an 'electronica' sense, there are areas you can visit (The guys on Warp records, Bjork) but Axl Rose is not one of those areas. People who enjoy progressive music would laugh at the notion that CD is progressive.

So youre only allowed to be generic in one style? Not sure it's even meant to be progressive, just music with different guitarists/musicians. Axl is more about expressing himself, if he's into the music and gets lyrics and vocals to fit and it works then he did it. But he was still aware that maybe Silkworms was a bit outside of what GNR do.

Axl showed that he can sing on different kinds of material on CD. Why churning out worse versions of AFD and UYI is so great I don't know.

To me you can just take SOD, TWAT, Catcher, Madagascar, TIL and Prostitute and say those would be Axl's contributions to the subsequent GNR albums. He only really had Nov Rain, Breakdown and Estranged on UYI. Maybe they would be with more rawk vocals in more hard rock setting with old Guns.

So with a reunion record I'd expect Slash and Izzy solo albums with some crossover energy with 1 or 2 songs where Axl forces them to do his songs.

Edited by wasted
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something rock and roll. Something coherent. Something Izzy with Slash solo's and Axl vocals and lyrics with a pinch of Duff punk and Adler groove.

Have an epic. Maybe two. Have a ballad, maybe two and then a lot of rock. Don't make the album any longer than 60 minutes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Strictly speaking Appetite is generic, if you're going by the proper definition of the word, it fits pretty squarely into genre definitions. Thats not an insult either, just a fact. Generic as a derisory comment in terms of music criticism is meant to mean run-of-the-mill as a consequence of being firmly within genre conventions...thats Appetite to a T as well as any number of great rock n roll albums.

Generic as in the insult, flat, uninspired, THATS the definition of Chi Dem.

Yes but this just confirms my point. Axl's greatest contribution to recorded music consisted of an album of 'generic' rock (Appetite). Axl spent the best part of twenty years trying to redefine himself as Elton John and Trent Reznor's bastard offspring and the result (CD) is poor in comparison to a 'generic rock album'. Maybe he should embrace his rock n' roll muse - be Bon Scott - rather than horsing around imitating those people? Besides, it is debatable how 'progressive' CD is - this was my original point. Throwing a bunch of bleeps on Korn b-sides and ballads does not make you progressive. If you want to see progressive in an 'electronica' sense, there are areas you can visit (The guys on Warp records, Bjork) but Axl Rose is not one of those areas. People who enjoy progressive music would laugh at the notion that CD is progressive.

So youre only allowed to be generic in one style? Not sure it's even meant to be progressive, just music with different guitarists/musicians. Axl is more about expressing himself, if he's into the music and gets lyrics and vocals to fit and it works then he did it. But he was still aware that maybe Silkworms was a bit outside of what GNR do.

Axl showed that he can sing on different kinds of material on CD. Why churning out worse versions of AFD and UYI is so great I don't know.

To me you can just take SOD, TWAT, Catcher, Madagascar, TIL and Prostitute and say those would be Axl's contributions to the subsequent GNR albums. He only really had Nov Rain, Breakdown and Estranged on UYI. Maybe they would be with more rawk vocals in more hard rock setting with old Guns.

So with a reunion record I'd expect Slash and Izzy solo albums with some crossover energy with 1 or 2 songs where Axl forces them to do his songs.

If Axl had continued to do rock n' roll, why the assumption that it would be inferior to his previous rock n' roll? Was Back in Black inferior to Highway to Hell; Sticky Fingers inferior to Let it Bleed; Little Richard inferior to Here's Little Richard?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think they had at least one more great rock n' roll record in them. I have to believe they were a better band than that. Slash was churning out some terrific riffs in the 1990s, and Stradlin had some great ballads. To sacrifice rock n' roll on the altar of Trent Reznor - all inm the name of 'progress' - seems terribly premature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

maybe one or two would be alright if they did a full chain of albums. but it was like they were running out of ideas on UYI. All the songs are like fuck it style?

Running out of ideas? They released 30 songs at once. Songs from hard rock toķblues rock, epic ballads, epic "progressive" songs, classic rock songs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't duff say in his book that him, slash and izzy got together at one point in an attempt to create the next GnR album and they came up with 10-12 songs? But then the band ended up breaking up before Axl worked on them?

Those would be interesting to hear. Songs created back when GnR was still in their basic heyday and they guys weren't all 50 year old millionaires.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think they had at least one more great rock n' roll record in them. I have to believe they were a better band than that. Slash was churning out some terrific riffs in the 1990s, and Stradlin had some great ballads. To sacrifice rock n' roll on the altar of Trent Reznor - all inm the name of 'progress' - seems terribly premature.

It somehow felt that it wasnt enough in the 90s. Spag Inc has great songs in a GNR style but nothing much. For a band with so much light on them, so huge the pressure is to keep exploding. Getting over that would have taken a few ok albums get used to that idea, you're just a band. So yes I think put out Snakepit with TIL attached, take the hit. Then get Izzy back for a Sticky Fingers type thing. Really think without Izzy snd Slash not wanting to get involved with Axl's songs it just went nowhere.

I think it would be good if Izzy was on board and Slash worked on Axl's songs and let him do a few hip hop anthems.

I dont really see the merits of Slashs solo career stuff with no input from Izzy or Axl. Just churning out riffs with Axl faking singing about sex and drugs. Thats just me though. But honestly if they could do it and fans like it. I just feel they were something more. Better than AcDC and Kiss in my mind. More Stones, Zepp, Doors, something special. A bit snobby i know.

But they also covered just about everything in their first 5 cds. Just on UYI it covers so much ground it's like what else can they do?

One thing could be because they had so many hits and classics it would be hard to really force Snakepit or Ju ju Hounds songs in live. But generally they arent as stadium as GNR songs. Izzy is basically an artist in his self so to have Axl use his songs and epic them every time. Slash also is enough to drive a band. Finding the middle ground seems like the problem. Izzy brings a song in he thinks is done. Slash plays the riff bigger and Axl sings the lyrics different, and the vibe of the song is lost. But that is GNR. Not doing Axl's material isnt GNR either after UYI.

Give guys a million dollars each and watch them not give a fuck.

I guess GNR were the biggest stadium band ever not a sleazy rock n roll band. UYI really took them away from being that. Pretending that that is what they were is what distorts things. If they ducked UYI and done a In Utero style album. AFD 2 but rougher they could have toured with AIC forever.

On a reunion record you could let Izzy and Duff sing half the songs with Axl singing on a big rocker with Slash and his songs, a ballad.

Edited by wasted
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And Axl wanted Don't Cry on Appetite, the song that got them signed.

Axl wasn't going to do hard rock songs about sex and drugs forever anyway. Slash didn't like SCOM's riff when he came up with it he said. Gn'R's only number 1 hit.

There was always that tension between them. Duff didn't like Snakepit as Gn'R.

It turns into a real Guns song when everybody rapes it like Duff said. That's because the middle ground is achieved when there's basically not too much of one member's influence in a Guns song, the others must put their mark on it in a band like old Guns because each member fights for his tendencies and influences until they listen to themselves and agree it's a good Guns song.

The ideas were running out in the sense that everybody still did their thing, Slash a riff machine, Izzy capable of coming up with a song in 5 minutes, etc.

It's just that for a band like Gn'R after UYI, either you repeat yourself or you say something new which is what Axl always wanted to do with every Guns album imo.

Now, you have Slash with his 7 solo albums saying how Axl's vocals on Chinese are great, but the music not so much.

Axl said he liked Contraband, but that it could have been better. (pretty sure he said that no source)

And Axl wanted Slash to play on Chinese in 2001.

Now, Axl probably has a lot of unreleased material. The direction is there, and Slash and Duff can work on those. With a few songs from Slash and Izzy, how can it not sound like Guns?

Edited by Rovim
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I honestly think if they do an album it will be the old band reworking a lot of the supposed CD2 as well as a bunch of older material from Slash, Duff, Izzy. I think if they do an album it will be a double album combining both Axls' work and the other's

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mo source, mo on board.

Axl started that with UYI, he doesnt want to live through AFD his whole career. That's an artist. And didnt want to stay expressing UYI over and over. But problems occur if you cant find something new to say and your bamd wont change or isnt.

But that is a strength, in that AFD is convincing, on UYI Axl is singing about what they were going through as well as a few older songs.

Starting the next one again Axl was grow or die. Slash wanted to do AeroGuns. Maybe Axl couldve worked with that but he seemed to want change things again. And it didnt work out.

Maybe there are ideas lying around from that era and some songs Axl has been working on that they could pull together.

I prefer Axl's ambitious style. But its true if you hammer out hard rock records theres bound to be good ones.

In someways we got the best of Axl, Slash and Izzy musically. Like purer visions of what they want to do. Its a healthy thing for them to do to find out who they are.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mo source, mo on board.

Axl started that with UYI, he doesnt want to live through AFD his whole career. That's an artist. And didnt want to stay expressing UYI over and over. But problems occur if you cant find something new to say and your bamd wont change or isnt.

But that is a strength, in that AFD is convincing, on UYI Axl is singing about what they were going through as well as a few older songs.

Starting the next one again Axl was grow or die. Slash wanted to do AeroGuns. Maybe Axl couldve worked with that but he seemed to want change things again. And it didnt work out.

Maybe there are ideas lying around from that era and some songs Axl has been working on that they could pull together.

I prefer Axl's ambitious style. But its true if you hammer out hard rock records theres bound to be good ones.

In someways we got the best of Axl, Slash and Izzy musically. Like purer visions of what they want to do. Its a healthy thing for them to do to find out who they are.

It's a win win for me anyway. I believe he'll release CD ll in the next 5 years. If a reunion somehow happens, I won't be upset as well, cause I think Axl wants to release CD ll anyway. If he wants Slash and Duff to be a part of it, that's cool.

They don't even have to be a big part of it to make it sound more Gn'R.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...