Wouldn't now be a great time to drop a single?

[wasted]

On 23 June 2016 at 4:32 AM, DieselDaisy said:

If I have a burger in my hand, and Axl is hovering around, there is an element of danger in the air.

Come off it. GN'R are about as dangerous as a fart in a French restaurant. Axl flying through the air on a piano - flogging shitty beer. The guy cannot even walk down the street without Fernando wiping his arse as he walks - how dangerous can he be.

It's more like on stage and the way they aren't doing much promo. The excitement is still there at the shows. Danger is a bit of a loaded word, they aren't SAS commandos. It's just not by the numbers, like around 2014 was more professiomal shows but with Slash and Duff there's some chaos back. The sound is also wilder with Frank drumming like Animal in the Muppets and Slash just riffing continuously, playing CD songs? Axl agreed to the reunion but is still saying Slash lied, has joined ACDC and Wtf is going on!? 

[paranoyd androyd]

new single? new album? LMFAO these guys look and sound like shit. no genuine camaraderie or energy.

you'd have to be on some serious drugs to think there's any future here. the band has been DEAD over 25 years now... 25 years! get over it, just embarrassing now.

 

[SoundOfAGun]

6 minutes ago, paranoyd androyd said:

new single? new album? LMFAO these guys look and sound like shit. no genuine camaraderie or energy.

you'd have to be on some serious drugs to think there's any future here. the band has been DEAD over 25 years now... 25 years! get over it, just embarrassing now.

 

That's the spirit!

[starlight]

yes they should put out a new single and an album too. Why not,time is running out. They have the ability to do that if they want to

[wasted]

3 hours ago, SoundOfAGun said:

That's the spirit!

GNRExit. 

[wasted]

On 23 June 2016 at 8:25 AM, Apollo said:

Two years ago Axl said he had two completed albums in the can. Why sit on those? Share them with the fans. 

Yes, why?

to me it's a combo of Axl thematically or artistic believing in the songs he's singing. So if you listen

to the record you kind of get what he's saying. Does he have anything left to say? 

Combined with a sort of business side which can be successful. With Slash in the band I feel like this side is easier. It will sell X amount and get good media profile. If it's hard rock it will please the fans. 

BUT what do they have, another CD? Doesn't that run against what people want from a "reunion"? 

Are we saying/hoping that CD with Slash playing riffs and solos would successful? Or would it be too compromised? No Izzy or Adler. Not seen as GNR, truly, then just becomes an anti-climax. 

This is the dilemma / delay. It's hard to find a solution. Doing the next album that captures the right spirit must be difficult. 

[pacu44]

2 hours ago, starlight said:

yes they should put out a new single and an album too. Why not,time is running out. They have the ability to do that if they want to

Write a new album? The guy who has it, is cash grabbing, remember? ROTFLMAO

 

Edited June 25, 2016 by pacu44

[starlight]

18 minutes ago, pacu44 said:

Write a new album? The guy who has it, is cash grabbing, remember? ROTFLMAO

 

Of course it was implicit that Izzy must be involved in the songwriting and watching this clip makes me want him back even more.

I don't know how someone can prefer Fortus over him

 

[Apollo]

2 hours ago, wasted said:

Yes, why?

to me it's a combo of Axl thematically or artistic believing in the songs he's singing. So if you listen

to the record you kind of get what he's saying. Does he have anything left to say? 

Combined with a sort of business side which can be successful. With Slash in the band I feel like this side is easier. It will sell X amount and get good media profile. If it's hard rock it will please the fans. 

BUT what do they have, another CD? Doesn't that run against what people want from a "reunion"? 

Are we saying/hoping that CD with Slash playing riffs and solos would successful? Or would it be too compromised? No Izzy or Adler. Not seen as GNR, truly, then just becomes an anti-climax. 

This is the dilemma / delay. It's hard to find a solution. Doing the next album that captures the right spirit must be difficult. 

I think fans just want a few new songs with Axl on vocals. 

I think you - and Axl - put way too much thought into it. 

The solution is very simple.  Share a few songs with your fans  

It's just rock and roll. It's a 4 minute song. Nobody is going to die or become homeless if Axl releases a single that flops. 

The benefits far outweigh the negative  

Some people say CD is horrible. Look at songs like My World. Anything Goes. Lots of fans hate Rhiad. Scraped is embarrassing. Yet.....through all that.....Axl and GnR will play to 40,000 people at their next show.

It is just rock and roll. The Stones have like 50 albums out and none of their fans are complaining about have long TOO much music to choose from. 

Edited June 25, 2016 by Apollo

[Rovim]

3 hours ago, Apollo said:

I think fans just want a few new songs with Axl on vocals. 

I think you - and Axl - put way too much thought into it. 

It's just rock and roll. It's a 4 minute song. Nobody is going to die or become homeless if Axl releases a single that flops. 

The benefits far outweigh the negative  

Some people say CD is horrible. Look at songs like My World. Anything Goes. Lots of fans hate Rhiad. Scraped is embarrassing. Yet.....through all that.....Axl and GnR will play to 40,000 people at their next show.

It is just rock and roll. The Stones have like 50 albums out and none of their fans are complaining about have long TOO much music to choose from. 

But maybe the question is: is it just rock n' roll for Axl? isn't it possible that his goal when it comes to releasing another Guns album is more ambitious when it comes to financial success and reception? I think it is.

At least it seems like albums of original material are a big deal for Axl, like he wants to make a statement with every album. My guess is he'd rather not release anything if he doesn't believe it's great and will have a real chance. Releasing disposable or average albums is not his chosen way of doing things.

Edited June 25, 2016 by Rovim

[Tom-Ass]

1 hour ago, starlight said:

I don't know how someone can prefer Fortus over him

Some people are born that way. They can't help it.

[wasted]

1 hour ago, Apollo said:

I think fans just want a few new songs with Axl on vocals. 

I think you - and Axl - put way too much thought into it. 

The solution is very simple.  Share a few songs with your fans  

It's just rock and roll. It's a 4 minute song. Nobody is going to die or become homeless if Axl releases a single that flops. 

The benefits far outweigh the negative  

Some people say CD is horrible. Look at songs like My World. Anything Goes. Lots of fans hate Rhiad. Scraped is embarrassing. Yet.....through all that.....Axl and GnR will play to 40,000 people at their next show.

It is just rock and roll. The Stones have like 50 albums out and none of their fans are complaining about have long TOO much music to choose from. 

GNR isn't really just rock n roll, Izzy is rock n roll. Slash is more hard rock/metal. He wants to put out solid hard rock production, not little pop rock ditties like the Stones. Also The Beatles snd Stones had huge about of freedom inthe 60s and 70s to be creative.  If Guns were out in the 70s, 80s they have more albums. As it was they were chained to the machine. 

Faith No More kind of have two more records than GNR from when Patton joined. They have the late 90s album nobody knows outside the die hards. And the recent reunion record. Strangley CD could be the late 90s record and we are waiting on the reunion record. GNR just aren't that different than a lot of bands. Soundgarden too. 

I could roll with that if GNR were as successful as The Wildhearts or The Almighty. I think the reason GNR are more successful, the reason we are here is they or Axl just put a little more thought or work into it. Whether it's Axl and Slash having the raw talent on Jungle or Paradise, or Izzy's songwriting on Patience, or Axl perfecting Nov Rain and Estranged, Slash working on Coma, Axl struggling to find a way to make CD. 

Maybe though you are right that at this point the fans need a single like Patience or Oh My God, even if it's not perfect. But I doubt that is the way forward overall. That has never been GNR ever. Even AFD has two groups of songwriting. And they put specific focus on writing SCOM so the label had a single. They had recordings that were too radio, NR was considered. It is never that easy as just record a few tracks and throw it out. 

I personally would just take CD II even a remix album. With Bucket or Ron. But somewhere along the line either the label, Axl, the fans have decided that's not going to happen. Seems like they are trying to work Slash into it. 

Axl does seem to listen to the criticism and definitely the label don't care about CD II much. 

Axl's stuff seems to take some time, that kind of stuff is a big part of GNR. So I'd wait for it albumwise. I get the impression he wants to bring Slash back into it. The door is open. 

I think we'd get more if Izzy and Slash were writing together for Guns. 

 

[DieselDaisy]

3 hours ago, Rovim said:

But maybe the question is: is it just rock n' roll for Axl? isn't it possible that his goal when it comes to releasing another Guns album is more ambitious when it comes to financial success and reception? I think it is.

At least it seems like albums of original material are a big deal for Axl, like he wants to make a statement with every album. My guess is he'd rather not release anything if he doesn't believe it's great and will have a real chance. Releasing disposable or average albums is not his chosen way of doing things.

I can think of tons of successful artists who have released multiple albums that were 'statements', that are a 'big deal' (for that particular artist), that are 'ambitious' - and I do not believe there are many acts which put out an album which they didn't think was 'great', even Slash. 

Why is Axl claimed to be unique, exceptional in all this.

[Rovim]

1 hour ago, DieselDaisy said:

I can think of tons of successful artists who have released multiple albums that were 'statements', that are a 'big deal' (for that particular artist), that are 'ambitious' - and I do not believe there are many acts which put out an album which they didn't think was 'great', even Slash. 

Why is Axl claimed to be unique, exceptional in all this.

But we know what type of artist he is. For example: would you say he is a confident artist when it comes to albums? like Neil Young? would you say he is insecure? self important?

I mean this man fuckin' said he attempted suicide or some shit but decided he had to wake up cause he only released one album at a time and Appetite wasn't enough to secure the legacy.

This is the sort of artist he is: he cannot do it on his own like Izzy for example and Tommy said Axl cares a lot about what other people think of him. I think it extends to what the fans think of his studio work.

He said the albums are the most important thing for him in music, more than the live shows. We know he obsesses over the same tunes for years, we know he didn't use certain versions of songs for Chinese cause the reception for some leaks was not good enough in his eyes.

It all paints a picture of a certain type of artist who doesn't really fit with releasing singles and albums left and right. If anything, it explains why he doesn't release music very often.

Slash doesn't give a fuck, I'm sure he's into the material he releases, but he doesn't really tinkers. He doesn't attempts every approach. My guess is Axl won't stop working on shit and won't release it until it's good enough for him. Like Brian May said: "Axl is utterly meticulous". He said he reminded him of Freddie in that sense.

Which leads me to my final point: there are many types of people and artists and Axl is not the most well adjusted human being on the planet. I get the sense he cares too much and thinks way too much if it's good enough, if it will do what it's supposed to do, what he wants his art to accomplish. Everything must be epic and monumental and must reflect him at the time of the release artistically. It's just my guess, but the music also supports this theory imo. Financial success is also a factor I believe. Like even if artistically it's there, he won't release it until the conditions and timing are just right and he feels like it's time to let go of his art. He has a problem with letting it go as well imo perhaps cause he gets attached to the tunes and releasing it means he won't get to work on it some more and tinker.

 

 

Edited June 25, 2016 by Rovim

[DieselDaisy]

16 minutes ago, Rovim said:

But we know what type of artist he is. For example: would you say he is a confident artist when it comes to albums? like Neil Young? would you say he is insecure? self important?

I mean this man fuckin' said he attempted suicide or some shit but decided he had to wake up cause he only released one album at a time and Appetite wasn't enough to secure the legacy.

This is the sort of artist he is: he cannot do it on his own like Izzy for example and Tommy said Axl cares a lot about what other people think of him. I think it extends to what the fans think of his studio work.

He said the albums are the most important thing for him in music, more than the live shows. We know he obsesses over the same tunes for years, we know he didn't use certain versions of songs for Chinese cause the reception for some leaks was not good enough in his eyes.

It all paints a picture of a certain type of artist who doesn't really fit with releasing singles and albums left and right. If anything, it explains why he doesn't release music very often.

Slash doesn't give a fuck, I'm sure he's into the material he releases, but he doesn't really tinkers. He doesn't attempts every approach. My guess is Axl doesn't stop to work on shit until it's good enough for him. Like Brian May said: "Axl is utterly meticulous". He said he reminded him of Freddie in that sense.

Which leads me to my final point: there are many types of people and artists and Axl is not the most well adjusted human being on the planet. I get the sense he cares too much and thinks way too much if it's good enough, if it will do what it's supposed to do, what he wants his art to accomplish. Everything must be epic and monumental and must reflect him at the time of the release artistically. It's just my guess, but the music also supports this theory imo. Financial success is also a factor I believe. Like even if artistically it's there, he won't release it until the conditions and timing are just right and he feels like it's time.

 

 

This is all true but then he (and his admirers) need to accept the judgement (of history) of him being an extraordinarily unprolific songwriter.

[Rovim]

^^^
Axl is brutally unprolific, I agree. Does it matter in the end if every album is what the artist has intended it to be? this is not an excuse, trust me, but his way of doing things reminds me of artists that lived long ago that like... just created their art even if it meant years, even decades of work.

I'm not talking quality or greatness, I just think he's aware there's a price for how he chose to do things, but he still prefers that over releasing something that isn't ready to him.

Besides, I don't think that these types of artists really have a say in the matter. To be unprolific could come naturally for him and not cause he's lazy, but because a slower process allows an artist to accomplish different things like trying again, working on it some more and looking at it differently as time passes.

He even mentioned something like that in the China Exchange interview how he's glad he didn't do some things then cause he can do them better now. That's very telling. It means perspective is important to him and he knows that more time will give him more of it and maybe he believes it leads to a better product and you just naturally improve technically as an artist as well.

Edited June 25, 2016 by Rovim

[DieselDaisy]

1 hour ago, Rovim said:

but his way of doing things reminds me of artists that lived long ago that like... just created their art even if it meant years, even decades of work.

Who exactly?

 

[Rovim]

2 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

Who exactly?

 

 

[DieselDaisy]

Just now, Rovim said:

 

I'm a huge Brahms fan. Brahms was a plodder when compared with Mozart and Schubert but even he looks prolific when compared with W. Axl Rose - not that a genius of Brahms' stature should be compared with Axl.

His list of compositions is far greater than Axl's paltry five albums,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_compositions_by_Johannes_Brahms_by_genre

Four symphonies, three piano sonatas, four concerti, a Requiem, eighteen + works in the chamber format - and that is leaving out incidental curiosities like the Hungarian Dances and his Variations!

[Rovim]

7 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

I'm a huge Brahms fan. Brahms was a plodder when compared with Mozart and Schubert but even he looks prolific when compared with W. Axl Rose - not that a genius of Brahms' stature should be compared with Axl.

His list of compositions is far greater than Axl's paltry five albums,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_compositions_by_Johannes_Brahms_by_genre

Four symphonies, three piano sonatas, four concerti, a Requiem, eighteen + works in the chamber format - and that is leaving out incidental curiosities like the Hungarian Dances and his Variations!

Nevertheless, it took him 20 years to finish his Symphony No. 1. It took Axl a long time to finish November Rain (again not comparing quality or talent here) but he still released Appetite and Lies in the meanwhile. It's not like he did nothing.  Maybe didn't release a lot, but what's there is enough to be remembered imo.

When you take into consideration the man in question and all his "flaws", it does make sense, and there were others that took their time. Like I've mentioned earlier: Axl can't realize his vision on his own and there was shit that had nothing to do with art (and Axl talked about this as well like lawsuits and personal problems) that delayed it even more.

Edited June 25, 2016 by Rovim

[wasted]

8 hours ago, DieselDaisy said:

I can think of tons of successful artists who have released multiple albums that were 'statements', that are a 'big deal' (for that particular artist), that are 'ambitious' - and I do not believe there are many acts which put out an album which they didn't think was 'great', even Slash. 

Why is Axl claimed to be unique, exceptional in all this.

That's a misunderstanding. It's not quite that Axl thinks it's great, it's in what way is it great. Reinventing the wheel in my opinion. Musically. Is an important element to Axl's aesethetic. Every artist is different some take 10 years like Kevin Shields or Maynard. Some it's a 2 week process. If an artist's process is 10 years saying well this guy does it in 3 days is meaningless. Don't infer anything about it, we ain't changing a tire here. There's pros and cons to anything. 

 Also GNR's MO is Event movie type releases. This is the part that people either miss or get worked up about. Axl the big prentencious artiste with Huge epic songs and video. Some people want a return to the rock n roll of AFD, I see the seeds of the perceived pomposity on AFD. The arrangements the extended solos and vocal outros. To me GNR has always been as prog as Zeppelin. So enough of the rock n roll band thing. A lot of it was just that that sells as a debut. 

Reinvent the wheel and High concept releases are the two biggest obstacles to just releasing "rock n rock songs". 

Izzy songs just suffer on high concept OTT productions. Slash wants to do much more down to earth hard rock records like Aerosmith or ACDC it seems to me. They were elements of GNR but Axl reinvented the wheel a couple of times. Not necessarily out of choice. But if Izzy and Slash fail to collab and Slash wants to write alone and Axl wants them to work on his songs, it's not simple rock n roll. It gets real complex real quick I imagine. 

Of course we can play Fantasy rock band and we say if Axl stepped aside and just let them do rock n roll. Maybe but that's not what happened on AFD. So are we deluding ourselves?

I guess I'm saying how it is not how it might be. 

Edited June 26, 2016 by wasted
Save rocknroll

[Silent Jay]

GnR discography has it all, one #1 album with a #1 single, one EP, a double album, a live album, one greatest hits and a hybrid comeback album. In that situation we could have one digital album which could possibly be free (chidem remix), a best-of or even a triple album, imagine that. That's all we got forty songs with full credits. You can't tell if it's Slash or Robin, Richard or Tobias, Buckethead or Bumblefoot, Duff or Tommy, Brain or Frank, Pitman or Melissa. Chapter two: The best rollercoaster ever. Axl said Duff and Slash liked the vault and they even show some respect, it could work well when time's right and I don't think we had the chance to fully appreciate all the previous line up. There's so many choices, can we keep Tommy on some stuff or use Dj ideas, if it sound great why not.

After TSHTF triple album I'll be ok with a Carnaval Of Souls type of situation with Izzy and Steven on board. Final goodbye, This Is It, 2030. There is one rock n roll mastermind behind the three stage plan although I'm very sure Duff and Slash would love to put their teeth in this meat, perhaps not as ambitious as the vault, I say keep it for Izzy and Steven for round III, if Slash has some throwaway riffs that he wants to put out, he could release them with Myles. Get Rubin for the nostalgia type of sound and we're done close the book. After that win a Pullitzer and be the rocknroll star Hans Zimmer.

[DieselDaisy]

5 hours ago, wasted said:

That's a misunderstanding. It's not quite that Axl thinks it's great, it's in what way is it great. Reinventing the wheel in my opinion. Musically. Is an important element to Axl's aesethetic. Every artist is different some take 10 years like Kevin Shields or Maynard. Some it's a 2 week process. If an artist's process is 10 years saying well this guy does it in 3 days is meaningless. Don't infer anything about it, we ain't changing a tire here. There's pros and cons to anything. 

 Also GNR's MO is Event movie type releases. This is the part that people either miss or get worked up about. Axl the big prentencious artiste with Huge epic songs and video. Some people want a return to the rock n roll of AFD, I see the seeds of the perceived pomposity on AFD. The arrangements the extended solos and vocal outros. To me GNR has always been as prog as Zeppelin. So enough of the rock n roll band thing. A lot of it was just that that sells as a debut. 

Reinvent the wheel and High concept releases are the two biggest obstacles to just releasing "rock n rock songs". 

Izzy songs just suffer on high concept OTT productions. Slash wants to do much more down to earth hard rock records like Aerosmith or ACDC it seems to me. They were elements of GNR but Axl reinvented the wheel a couple of times. Not necessarily out of choice. But if Izzy and Slash fail to collab and Slash wants to write alone and Axl wants them to work on his songs, it's not simple rock n roll. It gets real complex real quick I imagine. 

Of course we can play Fantasy rock band and we say if Axl stepped aside and just let them do rock n roll. Maybe but that's not what happened on AFD. So are we deluding ourselves?

I guess I'm saying how it is not how it might be. 

Izzy's songs don't suffer in the slightest.

Some people could call Queen or Floyd's discography ''event movie type releases...prentencious...Huge epic songs'' (sic) yet look at their album ratio, based upon year of release: (Floyd) 1973, 1975, 1977, 1979; (Queen) 1973, '74, '75, '76, '77, etc etc. This includes such lavish masterworks as Dark Side of the Moon, Night At the Opera and The Wall - again, why is Axl considered exceptional? You and Rovim keep making a case for Axl's exceptionalism yet there are artists every bit as ambitious and perfectionist - who 'reinvented the wheel' - who have managed to release a significant oeuvre. And again, do not merely say ''Axl is nuts'' seeing that that does not eradicate the fact that when people assess his career they will see merely five albums of original material (one of those minuscule).

Axl can only be judged (a songwriter) by the discography he leaves and as it stands that discography is pathetically small. It is not for posterity to creating numerous mitigating factors, e.g. 'level of craziness', 'loss of bandmates'.

[RONIN]

"Axl Pose Dressing Room Requirements" -- James Hetfield

 

[wasted]

5 hours ago, DieselDaisy said:

Izzy's songs don't suffer in the slightest.

Some people could call Queen or Floyd's discography ''event movie type releases...prentencious...Huge epic songs'' (sic) yet look at their album ratio, based upon year of release: (Floyd) 1973, 1975, 1977, 1979; (Queen) 1973, '74, '75, '76, '77, etc etc. This includes such lavish masterworks as Dark Side of the Moon, Night At the Opera and The Wall - again, why is Axl considered exceptional? You and Rovim keep making a case for Axl's exceptionalism yet there are artists every bit as ambitious and perfectionist - who 'reinvented the wheel' - who have managed to release a significant oeuvre. And again, do not merely say ''Axl is nuts'' seeing that that does not eradicate the fact that when people assess his career they will see merely five albums of original material (one of those minuscule).

Axl can only be judged (a songwriter) by the discography he leaves and as it stands that discography is pathetically small. It is not for posterity to creating numerous mitigating factors, e.g. 'level of craziness', 'loss of bandmates'.

Nope like I said before it's not necessarily exceptional it's just a way of working. The context of other artists means nothing to the process. Like I said there's an 80s high concept element to GNR, like MJ has a few albums. 

GNR are just more efficient they have a double Best of cd to rival anyone. I agree they do the miminum but they hit the mark. But maybe some of their material can match the greats or they are just smart business wise. So they end up on top. 

The Doors and Zepp have about the same amount of released music. So they have miniscule discography? To me it's more about impact or that is at least worth considering. Stryper has more records than the Sex pistols. What I'm saying is there's something to get from the way Axl does it. to take the time to get the right record pays off. 

By reinvent the wheel I mean reinvent GNR for each record like Bowie. The albums are clear statements, significantly different records. It takes time to get to that point. Other than that I don't know why Axl doesn't just release Izzy solo or Slash material under GNR. Maybe it's more the collab thing he puts stock in. This is what Axl sees as GNR.