The "New Album" Thread . The maybe, possibly, at some point, soon, whenever, wtf Axl thread🤞

[smokingarthur]

It’s likely Axl spent the better part of the 1990’s and a portion of the early millennium recording himself singing nearly every word in the English language so that they can be digitally pasted together at different points in time. We have plenty of anecdotes and heresy attesting to the cut-and-paste nature of CD. 

[gavgnr]

1 hour ago, ToonGuns said:

I think it's two different things though. Yes I agree their legacy will always be Appetite (greatest debut ever etc etc) and deservedly so. However the risk is it becomes tarnished. A good comparison is the Sex Pistols, fantastic legacy, equally infamous debut album, without their legacy being tarnished with tat. Tat is okay if you have the artistry behind that to back it up. Tat and only tat is... tat. Had the Sex Pistols continued indefinitely touring their debut ad infinitum and selling Sex Pistols towels and tonka trucks they would fall into the same camp as GnR but they haven't.

There's three ways (generally) this can go - 1) great debut then nothing more so the legacy is the debut, untarnished,  2) great debut then constant new music (good, bad, indifferent doesn't really matter to be honest - not everything Van Gogh painted ended up in a gallery) a la Deep Purple, Skynrd, Stones, Beatles, etc etc), or 3) becoming a brand and milking every penny out of that debut while losing all artistic integrity. Guns are very much pushing for the latter, which is the worst of the 3 options.

Great post. I would imagine this sums up many fans thoughts on the situation@Fernando

[ZoSoRose]

1 hour ago, ToonGuns said:

I think it's two different things though. Yes I agree their legacy will always be Appetite (greatest debut ever etc etc) and deservedly so. However the risk is it becomes tarnished. A good comparison is the Sex Pistols, fantastic legacy, equally infamous debut album, without their legacy being tarnished with tat. Tat is okay if you have the artistry behind that to back it up. Tat and only tat is... tat. Had the Sex Pistols continued indefinitely touring their debut ad infinitum and selling Sex Pistols towels and tonka trucks they would fall into the same camp as GnR but they haven't.

There's three ways (generally) this can go - 1) great debut then nothing more so the legacy is the debut, untarnished,  2) great debut then constant new music (good, bad, indifferent doesn't really matter to be honest - not everything Van Gogh painted ended up in a gallery) a la Deep Purple, Skynrd, Stones, Beatles, etc etc), or 3) becoming a brand and milking every penny out of that debut while losing all artistic integrity. Guns are very much pushing for the latter, which is the worst of the 3 options.

Subsequent releases don't take away from past ones. Nobody is going to question "Exile on Main St." because of "Dirty Work"

[ToonGuns]

3 minutes ago, ZoSoRose said:

Subsequent releases don't take away from past ones. Nobody is going to question "Exile on Main St." because of "Dirty Work"

Yep. I think you're agreeing with me? I just don't want Guns legacy to be years of touring the same stuff and releasing tat, when they could spend years touring different stuff and releasing music (doesn't always need to be "new", but a blend of new, unreleased, demos, live etc).

[MaskingApathy]

8 hours ago, ToonGuns said:

Honestly.... so so so so many missed opportunities with this band.

The fan base is lining up gagging for releases.

GnR should acknowledge that they have a very local passionate fan base, and reward them as such.

We compared GnR to Deep Purple a few weeks back on another topic, but to use the same band as a comparison - look at their discography. Or The Beatles. Or even bands like Lynyrd Skynyrd. Huge bands with loyal followings but who constantly release live albums, box sets, new albums, etc. New albums aside GnR could trawl through the archive and do the same - live releases for each line up / each era, vinyl box sets, remasters, deluxe editions. Not $1000, but multiple releases focussing on the music (not the box the music comes in). It wouldn't take a great amount of work and would better cement the legacy, whilst the average fans wouldn't even notice so wouldn't hurt the concert revenue. Most of us are completists and would buy all these types of releases, rewarding the band for their "art". Not just constantly pushing t-shirts or branded tat (and tattoos!).

That kind of approach is what separates artists from brands.

GnR are floating through a cesspit of drivel towards the latter, and it's almost beyond the point of no return. Almost.

 

4 hours ago, allwaystired said:

That 'legacy band' label seems to basically mean 'were good in the past, now they're not'. There's no reason whatsoever for GNR to be a legacy band....but they seem to want to be that, for some inexplicable reason. I'm not really alright with them being labelled that as I think they have much more to offer, but as they don't want to offer it or be anything else, it is what it is. 

As you say, if it is what they want to be - OK, then release some stuff to cement that role. Instead we get a permanently touring band constantly dangling a carrot of imminent new material as some sort of bait and switch. It's difficult to see how they expect this modus operandi to attract anything other than hostility. 

We've been led, from the day CD was released, to believe new material is very close, to the point of insanity. 

 

4 hours ago, Sydney Fan said:

Unfortunately GNR are now the thing that between 87 and 93 they swore they would never be.

I know people that are interested in hard rock who think that SOYL when they first heard it on the radio was a brand new song. To the band and MGT, This is the majority of the fanbase.

Im more eager for the illusion anniversary stuff that they will do then what iam for new music. Part of that is the current  lineup that i dont like, and whatever songs are on an album we will be wondering and asking whethet it was a nuguns song, which member was on the original rather than the band doing a new album from scratch where those sorts of questions will not be applicable and not comparing to the nuguns lineup.

I agree with all of this. Definitely a lot of missed opportunities (especially since the reunion started) and I'm looking forward to UYI anniversary stuff much more than any new album that they may or may not be working on.

[Voodoochild]

4 hours ago, allwaystired said:

That 'legacy band' label seems to basically mean 'were good in the past, now they're not'. There's no reason whatsoever for GNR to be a legacy band....but they seem to want to be that, for some inexplicable reason. I'm not really alright with them being labelled that as I think they have much more to offer, but as they don't want to offer it or be anything else, it is what it is. 

As you say, if it is what they want to be - OK, then release some stuff to cement that role. Instead we get a permanently touring band constantly dangling a carrot of imminent new material as some sort of bait and switch. It's difficult to see how they expect this modus operandi to attract anything other than hostility. 

We've been led, from the day CD was released, to believe new material is very close, to the point of insanity. 

I think the band (Axl, in particular) thinks they are not legacy and still relevant. But they act the other way, of course.

 

4 hours ago, Tom2112 said:

I agree, most people I knew who were gnr fans never bought or listened to the album, but they had the strongest opinions... cut to 2017, GNR are playing CD songs live with Slash and suddenly they are posting the title track on their timeline... people are dumb. And! you are also right that even though the music we presume will be released is written by Robin, Tommy etc. most people will not look that close into it and love it... right up until pitchfork writes a story about how the old CD band actually wrote the glorious GNR reunion album... I feel like Nostradamus😄

I strongly believe CD will get a cult following over the years, if that's not the case already. I mean, outside the fanbase. 

IMO, it's incredible how overlooked it is between people who likes not only other GNR stuff, but the musicians involved like Buckethead. 

[Free Bird]

5 hours ago, Dean said:

Outside of the forums, the interest the casual listener (at least a sizable portion) has in Chinese Democracy is minimal, and that is down to either laziness for not listening to the record because Slash isn't on it, because Slash doesn't feature, and I would bet a fraction of that is because they genuinely don't like it. Who knows.

Everyone outside of this forum will be unaware how old the music is on a potential new album anyway if we are to assume it will feature predominantly music created during the Chinese sessions. Watch them lap it up though if that is the case. They'll love seeing a new release from the big 3 and Stinson, Finck, Tobias etc etc will be loving another payday (they deserve it)

Lol there are thousands of successful records out there without featuring Slash. If a record is good it's good. 

CD is as successful and as popular as it deserves. That's all.

[Tom2112]

3 hours ago, ToonGuns said:

I think it's two different things though. Yes I agree their legacy will always be Appetite (greatest debut ever etc etc) and deservedly so. However the risk is it becomes tarnished. A good comparison is the Sex Pistols, fantastic legacy, equally infamous debut album, without their legacy being tarnished with tat. Tat is okay if you have the artistry behind that to back it up. Tat and only tat is... tat. Had the Sex Pistols continued indefinitely touring their debut ad infinitum and selling Sex Pistols towels and tonka trucks they would fall into the same camp as GnR but they haven't.

There's three ways (generally) this can go - 1) great debut then nothing more so the legacy is the debut, untarnished,  2) great debut then constant new music (good, bad, indifferent doesn't really matter to be honest - not everything Van Gogh painted ended up in a gallery) a la Deep Purple, Skynrd, Stones, Beatles, etc etc), or 3) becoming a brand and milking every penny out of that debut while losing all artistic integrity. Guns are very much pushing for the latter, which is the worst of the 3 options.

I think it's option 3. 

If gnr were going to do something creative they'd be in the studio now... instead all the members are spread out, Slash is recording with his other projects... it's 1995 all over again, but I think they are old enough now with less ambition so they won't break up over creative differences.

[ToonGuns]

1 hour ago, Free Bird said:

Lol there are thousands of successful records out there without featuring Slash. If a record is good it's good. 

CD is as successful and as popular as it deserves. That's all.

"Good" and "popular" are not the same thing though. I can think of plenty of good records that nobody has ever heard of, and plenty of popular record that are appalling. Regardless of anyones views of CD, it's success (or not) has little to do with how good it is (or isn't).

Edit: not intentionally looking to disagree of course. I just read into your comment that CD wasn't more popular because it wasnt good enough. 

Edited September 21, 2020 by ToonGuns
.

[allwaystired]

1 hour ago, Tom2112 said:

I think it's option 3. 

If gnr were going to do something creative they'd be in the studio now... instead all the members are spread out, Slash is recording with his other projects... it's 1995 all over again, but I think they are old enough now with less ambition so they won't break up over creative differences.

It is very similar to 1995, but with people who are sober and adult, and recognize that keeping a touring show on the road is good for their bank balances. 

[axlvai]

Please no... 1995 again noooooooooooo.

[Tom2112]

2 hours ago, Free Bird said:

Lol there are thousands of successful records out there without featuring Slash. If a record is good it's good. 

CD is as successful and as popular as it deserves. That's all.

The point isn't that people only buy because Slash is on something, it's that they were choosing sides at the time. They decided not to buy or engage with the music because Slash was the good guy, and Axl was the bad guy in the break up.

10+ years of reading the books and interviews kinda cemented most peoples opinion on the record before it ever leaked never mind the release in 2008. Those people have not given the record a fair shake. End of the day (all things considered) I don't care, but it used to annoy the hole off me when I was younger🤣 now if someone really pushes my buttons I might be forced to duel, but I like to think I'm retired.

I don't disagree that there are lots of people who listened to the record and didn't enjoy it though, no reasonable fan of that record would argue otherwise. 

[allwaystired]

41 minutes ago, Tom2112 said:

The point isn't that people only buy because Slash is on something, it's that they were choosing sides at the time. They decided not to buy or engage with the music because Slash was the good guy, and Axl was the bad guy in the break up.

10+ years of reading the books and interviews kinda cemented most peoples opinion on the record before it ever leaked never mind the release in 2008. Those people have not given the record a fair shake. End of the day (all things considered) I don't care, but it used to annoy the hole off me when I was younger🤣 now if someone really pushes my buttons I might be forced to duel, but I like to think I'm retired.

I don't disagree that there are lots of people who listened to the record and didn't enjoy it though, no reasonable fan of that record would argue otherwise. 

I think if you listen to something, give it a go, and really don't like it - fair enough. I'll happily hear why you didn't like it and why you don't think it's any good. 

With CD though it seemed people never even bothered listening to it before deciding they didn't like it. I once got sat on a table at a wedding with come guy, and the conversation got onto music. I told him GNR was my favourite, he started saying how shit CD was, and it soon became apparent he'd never heard one fucking note of it. Not a thing. I'd had a few drinks and just told him he was a prick who had wasted ten minutes of my life! 

 

 

 

[DTJ80]

21 minutes ago, allwaystired said:

I think if you listen to something, give it a go, and really don't like it - fair enough. I'll happily hear why you didn't like it and why you don't think it's any good. 

With CD though it seemed people never even bothered listening to it before deciding they didn't like it. I once got sat on a table at a wedding with come guy, and the conversation got onto music. I told him GNR was my favourite, he started saying how shit CD was, and it soon became apparent he'd never heard one fucking note of it. Not a thing. I'd had a few drinks and just told him he was a prick who had wasted ten minutes of my life! 

 

 

 

😂

[Gordon Comstock]

8 hours ago, Sweersa said:

Some did, like If The World, and of course many Bucket instrumentals. If we had a massive leak of material a year or two after from the era the village leaks came from, I'm sure it would be way more Buckethead heavy. Bucket was in late '99/2000 - 2004 and most of the village leaks were 2000 and some 2001. Ideally, pre Bumblefoot CD sessions would be absolutely killer.

I think Bucket's on the ending of Hardschool too, and Madagascar? They're all from November 2000 so it's pretty likely.

[ToonGuns]

35 minutes ago, allwaystired said:

I think if you listen to something, give it a go, and really don't like it - fair enough. I'll happily hear why you didn't like it and why you don't think it's any good. 

With CD though it seemed people never even bothered listening to it before deciding they didn't like it. I once got sat on a table at a wedding with come guy, and the conversation got onto music. I told him GNR was my favourite, he started saying how shit CD was, and it soon became apparent he'd never heard one fucking note of it. Not a thing. I'd had a few drinks and just told him he was a prick who had wasted ten minutes of my life! 

 

 

 

I love a good old "pissed at a wedding argue with a random" story. That's what weddings are for 🙂

I'd personally be well chuffed if a random started to talk to me about CD at a wedding. Beats the usual drivel and polite tosh you normally have to spew out, at least until the older generation have called it a night!

[allwaystired]

57 minutes ago, ToonGuns said:

I love a good old "pissed at a wedding argue with a random" story. That's what weddings are for 🙂

I'd personally be well chuffed if a random started to talk to me about CD at a wedding. Beats the usual drivel and polite tosh you normally have to spew out, at least until the older generation have called it a night!

That's true! Although I expect everyone else at the tables eyes were glazed over in boredom listening to it! 

[Sweersa]

2 hours ago, Gordon Comstock said:

I think Bucket's on the ending of Hardschool too, and Madagascar? They're all from November 2000 so it's pretty likely.

I believe that is him. The "old Josh drums" versions of The Blues and Riad also sound like Bucket plays, but I could be wrong. For years I always thought Bucket played the Riad leak solo, but maybe it's Robin.

[Free Bird]

8 hours ago, Tom2112 said:

The point isn't that people only buy because Slash is on something, it's that they were choosing sides at the time. They decided not to buy or engage with the music because Slash was the good guy, and Axl was the bad guy in the break up. 

Most people I know (on forums etc.) bought that record. I remember how I met a guy from another forum at the store before it opened just to be the first in town who buys that record on the day of its release. We were excited as hell and we both knew there wasn't Slash on it.

The disappointment was BIG though.

To me the point of preoccupation because of Slash regarding CD seemed always as an attempted explanation or as an excuse by people who were dissapointed of the low success of CD.

There might were a few guys out there who were biased to the point of not buying that record or not giving it a fair listen. But that surely was a minority which didn't effect the success of CD.

I think the biggest reason for that was the change of sound. It wasn't just a different band, the music was entirely different. 

9 hours ago, ToonGuns said:

"Good" and "popular" are not the same thing though. I can think of plenty of good records that nobody has ever heard of, and plenty of popular record that are appalling. Regardless of anyones views of CD, it's success (or not) has little to do with how good it is (or isn't).

Edit: not intentionally looking to disagree of course. I just read into your comment that CD wasn't more popular because it wasnt good enough. 

Of course there's a difference between good and popular. Many unknown bands have good but unsuccessful albums. But if an album has GNR printed on it's cover, then that alone should help sell a lot of records. Of course there's a lot more that flows in but a few years back something similar sold pretty well (Contraband).

[DTJ80]

1 hour ago, Free Bird said:

Most people I know (on forums etc.) bought that record. I remember how I met a guy from another forum at the store before it opened just to be the first in town who buys that record on the day of its release. We were excited as hell and we both knew there wasn't Slash on it.

The disappointment was BIG though.

To me the point of preoccupation because of Slash regarding CD seemed always as an attempted explanation or as an excuse by people who were dissapointed of the low success of CD.

There might were a few guys out there who were biased to the point of not buying that record or not giving it a fair listen. But that surely was a minority which didn't effect the success of CD.

I think the biggest reason for that was the change of sound. It wasn't just a different band, the music was entirely different. 

Of course there's a difference between good and popular. Many unknown bands have good but unsuccessful albums. But if an album has GNR printed on it's cover, then that alone should help sell a lot of records. Of course there's a lot more that flows in but a few years back something similar sold pretty well (Contraband). 

I’ve always found my his an interesting opinion - personally I don’t think it’s THAT different to much of UYI. The stylistic changes from AFD to UYI to me are just us much as UYI to CD....you can see a progression change throughout.

If he had gone full industrial then yeah I could totally agree but I dont think it’s a total seismic shift as it is.....IMO anyway. 👍

[Free Bird]

55 minutes ago, DTJ80 said:

I’ve always found my his an interesting opinion - personally I don’t think it’s THAT different to much of UYI. The stylistic changes from AFD to UYI to me are just us much as UYI to CD....you can see a progression change throughout.

If he had gone full industrial then yeah I could totally agree but I dont think it’s a total seismic shift as it is.....IMO anyway. 👍

Really? 

In my opinion there's a progression between Appetite and the Illusions. But it's the same band. Remember, they choosed to make AFD as they did. They could have used Illusion songs for it as well, like Don't Cry but that was a stylistic question.

CD on the other hand... of course there is recognition regarding GNR because of Axl but at the same time the music, the guitars, the style and sound are so totally different to me that I can't agree it's just progression.

But that's just how I feel about it 

[DTJ80]

32 minutes ago, Free Bird said:

Really? 

In my opinion there's a progression between Appetite and the Illusions. But it's the same band. Remember, they choosed to make AFD as they did. They could have used Illusion songs for it as well, like Don't Cry but that was a stylistic question.

CD on the other hand... of course there is recognition regarding GNR because of Axl but at the same time the music, the guitars, the style and sound are so totally different to me that I can't agree it's just progression.

But that's just how I feel about it 

It’s cool - nowt wrong having a different opinion. 👍

Good point re UYI stuff being technically eligible for AFD. But there was a move/change - something like Bad Apples or Breakdown are essentially the same band (more or less) but very different to what was on AFD.

There clearly was a change in CD - I’m not convinced it’s that far removed from where we would have ended up with Slash and Duff still in the band....maybe more straightforward rockers might have been on there? Madagascar/Street Of Dreams easily would be on there. Shacklers and Scraped wouldn’t have made it (TBF - they were pushing the boundaries for sure.....Scraped was a step too far...😂).

Better is an interesting one as if it was released as a proper single I’m convinced it would have been a big hit - that was a massive mistake.

[jackparker123]

1 hour ago, DTJ80 said:

It’s cool - nowt wrong having a different opinion. 👍

Good point re UYI stuff being technically eligible for AFD. But there was a move/change - something like Bad Apples or Breakdown are essentially the same band (more or less) but very different to what was on AFD.

There clearly was a change in CD - I’m not convinced it’s that far removed from where we would have ended up with Slash and Duff still in the band....maybe more straightforward rockers might have been on there? Madagascar/Street Of Dreams easily would be on there. Shacklers and Scraped wouldn’t have made it (TBF - they were pushing the boundaries for sure.....Scraped was a step too far...😂).

Better is an interesting one as if it was released as a proper single I’m convinced it would have been a big hit - that was a massive mistake.

It's insane to me how the most anticipated and most expensive album ever made didn't have proper singles to promote it. 

• Chinese Democracy
• Better
• Street Of Dreams
• There Was A Time
• Catcher In The Rye
• Sorry
• I.R.S.
• Madagascar
• Prostitute

All of the above could have been strong singles in my opinion, we should have got 3 or 4 singles minimum, and we should have got accompanying high budget music videos.

On another point I also think that a few of the weaker songs should have been relegated to b-sides.

I'm going slightly mad here but hey ho:

August 2008:

Better (Single)

1. Better
2. Shacklers Revenge

October 2008:

Chinese Democracy (Single)

1. Chinese Democracy
2. Riad N' The Bedouins

November 2008:

Chinese Democracy (Album)

1. Chinese Democracy
2. Better
3. Street Of Dreams
4. If The World
5. There Was A Time
6. Catcher In The Rye
7. Sorry
8. I.R.S.
9. Madagascar
10. This I Love
11. Prostitute

February 2009:

Street Of Dreams (Single)

1. Street Of Dreams
2. Scraped

 

[Dean]

17 hours ago, Free Bird said:

Lol there are thousands of successful records out there without featuring Slash. If a record is good it's good. 

CD is as successful and as popular as it deserves. That's all.

Different strokes for different folks my good sir. I listen to Guns N' Roses for great riffs, phenomenal vocals and Pitman. Chinese offers it in buckets and some of the finest vocals that ginger bastard ever recorded. 

Half arsed promotion from the label and the length of time it took to finally get released hindered the strides it could have made across the world. I'm not saying it flopped or anything, but it should have had a greater impact than what it did and there was definitely a majority of casual fans of GN'R that never gave the record a chance due to the line up changes, some of my friends are an example of that. I was confronted with the look of utter disgust when I met one of them at university years ago when I answered Chinese Democracy after being asked what my favourite Guns record was. I asked if he had even listened to the record and he said "bits of it". He never did give it a chance, but loved Slash playing the Chinese stuff in Gothenburg in 2018. He was buzzing that he finally got to see Izzy Stradlin live - 4tus, the same guitarist he seen back in '06 in Stockholm  I totally derailed that there, but a moment I reflect fondly on.

[yourcrazy]

The lack of success of cd was basically all axl’s fault.  No record could live up to the hype of 14 years of hype and speculation.   At this point, the record was famous for all the wrong reasons and became something like Greek mythology.     Once it was released, reality set in that this was just a good record.  It didn’t live up to the myth (nothing would of).  If this record came out in 98 or 99 it would of been huge.  All that and then account for the change in the music industry and it was set for failure.