Jump to content

What do you think of Axl Rose as a songwriter?


Recommended Posts

But just because Axl released 1 album in 24 years doesn't mean that's all he managed to write all those years.

On the contrary, he said there is another album that is done. Who knows how much material there is in his vault.

I have written twenty albums that are better than Sgt Pepper, Dark Side, Blonde on Blonde, Exile, combined. I am surely the greatest songwriter ever. You have never heard them - they are buried in my vault, unreleased? Well you will just have to take my word for it then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But just because Axl released 1 album in 24 years doesn't mean that's all he managed to write all those years.

On the contrary, he said there is another album that is done. Who knows how much material there is in his vault.

I have written twenty albums that are better than Sgt Pepper, Dark Side, Blonde on Blonde, Exile, combined. I am surely the greatest songwriter ever. You have never heard them - they are buried in my vault, unreleased? Well you will just have to take my word for it then.

Doesn't change the fact we have no idea how many songs Axl managed to write and record in the last 24 years and hoard.

Seems like he doesn't want to release a bad album of original material under the Guns name. He'd rather delay it and get it right than release something that will not stand the test of time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just asking, but what if he is not releasing CD2 because he doesnt agree with those lyrics anymore?

It may sound silly, but who knows

I think it's not silly. It's possible. Like how do Madagascar or Sorry play at a reunion show?

I still think some elements are universal and Axl has kept it kind of vague.

Take Atlas Shrugged about how Axl's shoulders werent wide enough to carry the weight of GNR or whatever. If there's a reunion he wouldn't be doing that?

But I think Axl has often been past the songs he's touring. He's a great actor. I think he finds new ways to motivate himself. Like DTJ on UYI wasn't about Warren Beatty specifically but a quick intro rant and he's got a reason to sing it.

Axl could feel sorry for another group of dissenters?

There's always another righteous mountain climb at the gym to complete to Madagascar.

Some of songs on CD are universal and forever. There will always be dictators to fight?

Silkworms is obvious. It's a song about how we should listen to this song. But we might have heard it?

I wonder if Axl still feels the same way about many of the songs. It's just his job to deliver them live and maybe present the songs in a narrative that makes sense to the fans.

The idea that the feud is over definitely makes Crucify the Dead make less sense.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always thought he was a damn good songwriter. Maybe not Dylan or Lennon level, but he's good. Even once you get past the obvious choices like Nov Rain and Estranged, his lyrics have bite. Songs like You Could Be Mine or Locomotive or One in a Million, that's not run of the mill stuff. Even songs like Right Next Door to Hell or Bad Apples, there's something there. He doesn't write too much bullshit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But just because Axl released 1 album in 24 years doesn't mean that's all he managed to write all those years.

On the contrary, he said there is another album that is done. Who knows how much material there is in his vault.

I have written twenty albums that are better than Sgt Pepper, Dark Side, Blonde on Blonde, Exile, combined. I am surely the greatest songwriter ever. You have never heard them - they are buried in my vault, unreleased? Well you will just have to take my word for it then.

Doesn't change the fact we have no idea how many songs Axl managed to write and record in the last 24 years and hoard.

Seems like he doesn't want to release a bad album of original material under the Guns name. He'd rather delay it and get it right than release something that will not stand the test of time.

We can only assess his songwriting gifts on what he gives us, not speculative material.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We can only assess his songwriting gifts on what he gives us, not speculative material.

It's not purely speculative when so many people have said there is a lot of material in Axl's vault. And Axl has no reason to lie about CD ll being done.

He had more than what we got in 2006.

Edited by Rovim
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure he has stuff in the vault but we - as the listening public and not 'insiders' - cannot very well use those recordings as a basis to assess Axl Rose's songwriting gifts since we have not heard them! Prince also has stuff in a vault but we still have 34 studio albums with which to assess Prince's songwriting gifts. With Axl we still only have the original four original studio albums and Chinese Democracy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure he has stuff in the vault but we - as the listening public and not 'insiders' - cannot very well use those recordings as a basis to assess Axl Rose's songwriting gifts since we have not heard them! Prince also has stuff in a vault but we still have 34 studio albums with which to assess Prince's songwriting gifts. With Axl we still only have the original four original studio albums and Chinese Democracy.

5 albums are enough to assess. Never released a bad album of original material, says there is a finished album, no reason to lie about that imo.

You're saying he's not a great songwriter cause he didn't release enough albums? and he released 5 with Guns and new Guns.

I'll give him the benefit of the doubt cause what he did manage to release is great imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure he has stuff in the vault but we - as the listening public and not 'insiders' - cannot very well use those recordings as a basis to assess Axl Rose's songwriting gifts since we have not heard them! Prince also has stuff in a vault but we still have 34 studio albums with which to assess Prince's songwriting gifts. With Axl we still only have the original four original studio albums and Chinese Democracy.

5 albums are enough to assess. Never released a bad album of original material, says there is a finished album, no reason to lie about that imo.

You're saying he's not a great songwriter cause he didn't release enough albums? and he released 5 with Guns and new Guns.

I'll give him the benefit of the doubt cause what he did manage to release is great imo.

The fact of the matter is, Axl has released only fifteen songs in twenty-four years. If we were to assess Axl's songwriting ability from say, ages thirty to fifty three, we have only fifteen songs with which to do it. As I've said, whole bands have had their career during the interim.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact of the matter is, Axl has released only fifteen songs in twenty-four years. If we were to assess Axl's songwriting ability from say, ages thirty to fifty three, we have only fifteen songs with which to do it. As I've said, whole bands have had their career during the interim.

But we're talking about great songwriting? about the quality of what he released in his entire career, not quantity. I don't know why we'll only determine his songwriting ability from age 30 to 40. Cause it's different bands? doesn't matter cause we're talking about Axl's abilities.

The point is that the quality remained consistent imo. The fact he released 1 album in 24 years doesn't really say anything about his abilities as a songwriter when you consider his problem of letting go as an artist from his work.

You've agreed there is probably some unreleased material in the vault, and he talked a year and a half ago about a finished album.

Every album that he released has that magic only he can bring imo.

If CD ll is released, we'll probably have about 30 songs to judge including what we've got, but so far, he's a great songwriter imo, cause like you said we can only assess what we already have. Not just from one time period, his least active one.

Edited by Rovim
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My dream scenario:

A NuGNR album releases that gives us the other half of ChiDem (as Axl has described ChiDem 2) and puts out some stuff Ashba and other NuGNR artists provided Axl

With that completely out of Axl's system, we then get a Classic/UYI lineup *Guns N' Roses reunion album

*Some of this stuff might be unfinished NuGNR-era music that Axl needs Slash, Izzy, Duff, and Steven, etc to help him get the songs to reach their full potential.

Edited by Caught_in_a_Coma
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact of the matter is, Axl has released only fifteen songs in twenty-four years. If we were to assess Axl's songwriting ability from say, ages thirty to fifty three, we have only fifteen songs with which to do it. As I've said, whole bands have had their career during the interim.

But we're talking about great songwriting? about the quality of what he released in his entire career, not quantity. I don't know why we'll only determine his songwriting ability from age 30 to 40. Cause it's different bands? doesn't matter cause we're talking about Axl's abilities.

The point is that the quality remained consistent imo. The fact he released 1 album in 24 years doesn't really say anything about his abilities as a songwriter when you consider his problem of letting go as an artist from his work.

You've agreed there is probably some unreleased material in the vault, and he talked a year and a half ago about a finished album.

Every album that he released has that magic only he can bring imo.

If CD ll is released, we'll probably have about 30 songs to judge including what we've got, but so far, he's a great songwriter imo, cause like you said we can only assess what we already have. Not just from one time period, his least active one.

Quantity does matter however. Case in point, If 'songwriter A' writes one great song, should he be judged on the same level as 'songwriter B' with ten great albums to his name? The names being dropped in this thread, Dylan, Lennon-McCartney etc., had all built up extensive canons by the time they had reached Axl's age or earlier (as in Lennon's case). We do not judge Lennon on five albums, or even five 'great' albums. We judge him on twenty-two albums, a great many of them considered 'great' by any objective analyse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is not a 'great' songwriter with a discography as paltry and minuscule as W. Axl Rose - that is just a pure fact. All of the 'great songwriters' of popular music - Dylan, Wilson, Lennon-McCartney, Jagger-Richards, Chuck Berry, etc. - had an extensive oeuvre by Axl's age. Axl is now 53 years old and has a grand total of five original studio albums and one covers album to his credit. At a similar age Neil Young had twenty-five and Dylan twenty-nine studio albums! Heck, Lennon only lived up until 40 years of age and produced twenty-two albums during his life time; in other words, despite the intervention of Mark Chapman, John Lennon had produced around four times more albums than Axl has, thirteen years earlier in Axl's life span!

If you analyse all of the 'greats' it is a similar story.

And what may his defenders reply to this, ''artists of Axl's era release albums at a slower rate'', ''the compact disc holds more music than the vinyl long player''? Well these arguments can easily be defeated by merely analysing Axl's contemporaries. Chris Cornell is now on his tenth record. Hetfield/Ulrich, often accused of being notorious plodders themselves, have still produced nine albums for Metallica - nearly twice more than Axl. Bon Jovi are on their thirteen, Pearl Jam their tenth, Megadeth their fifteenth studio albums - it is a similar tale when you look at every act.

There are songwriters and acts which have had their entire career, birth and dissolution, within W. Axl Rose/Guns N' Roses's period of activity, and have still produced many more albums than Axl. Oasis produced seven original compact discs, two more than Axl, between 1994 and 2008 - a shortened time span within Axl's period of so called 'activity' (and that is robbing Oasis of their extensive b-sides, some of which appear on The Masterplan); focusing on their chief songwriter, Noel Gallagher, specifically, that era extends up until the present day and increases by two more albums! Noel Gallagher, despite lacking circa eight years of activity that Axl has possessed (I am arriving at this date by analysing the release of their respective debut long players) has produced nine original studio albums, nearly twice as many as Axl!

And what of Axl's former band mates? Including their Guns' (and Velvet Revolver when applicable) albums, Slash has produced eleven, Stradlin fifteen, McKagan sixteen, Gilby twelve, original album appearances - granted McKagan was not always the songwriter on some of those.

It really is sad that Axl, for whatever reason, has chosen to conduct his career in that fashion. A musician who doesn't like to share his music.

His fans, and rock music in general, are the real losers.

*******^

Rovin - quantity does matter.

Look at sports. If a guy wins the MVP and had a couple great years and retires, we have to judge his career on what he actually did / and not on his potential, what he might have left in the tank, or what would/could have happened.

And a five year great career doesn't match up with a guy who had a 15 year great career.

Axl potentially could have been considered one of the elite rock songwriters of all time. But his lack of production keeps him from the upper echelon.

You could win a fist fight tonight. That doesn't mean you are a badass. But win ten street fights in a row? Then people will fear you.

IMO Axl needs 2-3 more great albums before we started talking about him as being an all time great.

Edited by Apollo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quantity does matter however. Case in point, If 'songwriter A' writes one great song, should he be judged on the same level as 'songwriter B' with ten great albums to his name? The names being dropped in this thread, Dylan, Lennon-McCartney etc., had all built up extensive canons by the time they had reached Axl's age or earlier (as in Lennon's case). We do not judge Lennon on five albums, or even five 'great' albums. We judge him on twenty-two albums, a great many of them considered 'great' by any objective analyse.

But many great songwriters have 5 albums or less. If Izzy only had Appetite, Lies, Illusions, and Juju Hounds, I'd still consider him to be a great songwriter.

And Axl has written way more than 1 great song.

I don't compare him to Lennon or anyone else. Music is a language, and in every album he said something great musically imo.

So it's like people that don't say much, but when they do, it's always interesting, or funny, or deep for example.

Edited by Rovim
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Axl has written some great lyrics, but most –if not all– of them are lacking the poetry that makes the listener find different meanings and interpretations (I don't know, think of lyricists like Perry Farrell or Courtney Love, who use a lot of imagery, and from those pieces you can analize the content and find endless meanings to their words). On that regard, Axl's lyrics have a more defined role: delivering a specific concrete message, and he does a great job at it.

I think he can be great but he needs help from the right people. He's not "Great" on his own. I can fully amit the ideas are there on Chinese Democracy but the execution is horrible. If Axl had surrounded himself with complimentary musicians and not just "all stars" CD could've beena great album. Instead Axl wantd full control and it had a negative impact on the album. I mean can anyone seriously sit there and say that CD would not have been infinitely better had Axl brought these ideas to Slash and co and allowed them to work on them and mold them? Axl has great ideas but he needs the proper help bringing them to fruition.

It's so hard to tell if Slash would have improved those songs. I don't doubt his skills, but I have never heard something new or refreshing coming from Slash.

I like his style, he has his own sound and tone, but there are songs (if the world, shackler's, scraped, riad) that seem like a departure or a bit too far from what Slash has delivered through his career. And of course there are songs like Madagascar, twat, catcher, street of dreams where slash's style would fit really well.

Have you heard November Rain, Estranged, Locomotive, Coma, etc etc etc etc etc? It's not hard to tell. Slash WOULD HAVE MOST DEFINITELY IMPROVED THOSE SONGS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quantity does matter however. Case in point, If 'songwriter A' writes one great song, should he be judged on the same level as 'songwriter B' with ten great albums to his name? The names being dropped in this thread, Dylan, Lennon-McCartney etc., had all built up extensive canons by the time they had reached Axl's age or earlier (as in Lennon's case). We do not judge Lennon on five albums, or even five 'great' albums. We judge him on twenty-two albums, a great many of them considered 'great' by any objective analyse.

But many great songwriters have 5 albums or less. If Izzy only had Appetite, Lies, Illusions, and Juju Hounds, I'd still consider him to be a great songwriter.

And Axl has written way more than 1 great song.

I don't compare him to Lennon or anyone else. Music is a language, and in every album he said something great musically imo.

So it's like people that don't say much, but when they do, it's always interesting, or funny, or deep for example.

I was obviously providing a simplified hypothetical scenario to illuminate a rhetorical point with the 'songwriter A' thing.

He is being compared with Lennon, Dylan, Jagger, etc. Then Axl has to exist on a higher plain for you to dismiss the paltry quantity so flippantly. Say for instance, every 'great' Axl song has to be twice, three times, as great as every great Lennon song in order to counteract against the effects of a disproportion between their respective discographies. Case in point, songwriter A has one great song, songwriter B has two. That one great song from songwriter A has to be twice as great as each individual song from B, i.e. A's song has to equate B's two songs combined in quality, in order to balance everything out.

Axl's songs have a hell of a task on their shoulders! They have to in effect work twice - three times, four times - harder than Lennon's and Dylan's great songs have to, in order to elevate their songwriter's credentials!

Edited by DieselDaisy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not much of a Zeppelin fan but Mercury had a phenomenal canon of LPs to his name, fifteen Queen albums and two solo. Now many of those Queen albums are masterpieces. I would rate Queen II, Sheer Heart Attack, A Night At The Opera, A Day At The Races, News Of The World and Innuendo as fullly blown masterpieces, and Queen and The Game as near masterpieces. Even the weaker albums, all except Hot Space (some would say Jazz also), are good solid albums. (I'm trying to be objective here by the way as I actually rate Jazz higher than most).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not much of a Zeppelin fan but Mercury had a phenomenal canon of LPs to his name, fifteen Queen albums and two solo. Now many of those Queen albums are masterpieces. I would rate Queen II, Sheer Heart Attack, A Night At The Opera, A Day At The Races, News Of The World and Innuendo as fullly blown masterpieces, and Queen and The Game as near masterpieces. Even the weaker albums, all except Hot Space (some would say Jazz also), are good solid albums. (I'm trying to be objective here by the way as I actually rate Jazz higher than most).

The problem with Axl is we're missing his prime years. A songwriters peak I've read is from around age 28 to early 30s. UYIs offered a glimpse at what might have been had Axl continued on a steady basis throughout his 30s. I mean we have to remember, between 1992 and 1998, Axl didn't even write any new lyrics (by his own admission). Maybe songwriting is something that, if you take too long of a break from it, you lose the momentum. I mean, Estranged and Coma were written lyrically in 1990. It's a good indication of where his talent was at that time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was obviously providing a simplified hypothetical scenario to illuminate a rhetorical point with the 'songwriter A' thing.

He is being compared with Lennon, Dylan, Jagger, etc. Then Axl has to exist on a higher plain for you to dismiss the paltry quantity so flippantly. Say for instance, every 'great' Axl song has to be twice, three times, as great as every great Lennon song in order to counteract against the effects of a disproportion between their respective discographies. Case in point, songwriter A has one great song, songwriter B has two. That one great song from songwriter A has to be twice as great as each individual song from B, i.e. A's song has to equate B's two songs combined in quality, in order to balance everything out.

Axl's songs have a hell of a task on their shoulders! They have to in effect work twice - three times, four times - harder than Lennon's and Dylan's great songs have to, in order to elevate their songwriter's credentials!

Not really. I don't need to compare Axl to Lennon to think November Rain is a great song for example.

You don't have to be the greatest to be great. The artists you've mentioned are considered to be some of the greatest that ever lived. Does it make Axl's work on Illusions not great?

I just judge his music on it's own merits. Doesn't mean I think he's the greatest songwriter that ever lived.

Edited by Rovim
Link to comment
Share on other sites

CD isn't a departure from the sound. It's just a clusterfuck of everything thrown in but the kitchen sink. You can take a dump everywhere but the toilet and call it complex if you want to but you're still just shitting up your house. CD is like shitting up your house.

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...