NITL live videos on youtube

[Lies They Tell]

2 minutes ago, allwaystired said:

No one can say where Taylor Swift will be in a few decades time, so your point is fairly irrelevant. She could well stand the test of time and be listened to forany many years. Saying 'most people will have forgotten her' is just speculation, probably based on your personal taste.

Unless she makes her biggest hit in the future, it's easy to predict that GNR will always be more relevant than her. I mean new artists ALWAYS fair better in streaming services than old artists, but still Taylor Swift doesn't have a song in the top 200 most streamed songs and GNR does. And since all artists become less relevant as time goes by, Taylor Swifts music will only become less relevant. Do you think Taylor Swift will be more culturally important than Madonna? Cause GNR easily beats Madonna in streaming numbers. Even Michael Jackson's biggest hit has less streams than GNR's biggest hit. That's the thing with pop music. It's way more popular at it's time compared to decades later. There's no reason to assume that Taylor Swifts music will stand the test of time better than any other pop artists music.

This has nothing to do with my own taste. I actually like Taylor Swifts newest album a lot. 

15 minutes ago, allwaystired said:

GNR are as culturally relevant as Billy Joel or Whitesnake to most normal people. 

That is factually incorrect. Unlike the artists you mentioned GNR has some of the most streamed songs of all times. What exactly is the reason why you're downplaying the relevance of GNR? Are you afraid that people will call you a fanboy if you stick to the facts?

[janrichmond]

@Lies They Tell is that spotify list the most recent? They update them every month, GNR made it to 198 on that list with SCOM. I can't see any other GNR tracks on there

[Lies They Tell]

8 minutes ago, James Bond said:

Then why wasn't it announced ahead of the latest cash grab? They played the first show of "the next chapter" and had nothing new to show for it.

I don't have answers for everything, but we do know that they were rehearsing Hard School, so we know that there were plans to play new music.

12 minutes ago, James Bond said:

Sure, new music will help boost something different but at the end of the day the casuals will just go for the hits one way or another.

Many casuals only care about the hits, but I'd argue that they may not be able to sell out stadiums for long, if they don't release new music. It's not 1991, but obviously the comeback album of GNR will create hype, especially in the rock scene. It would be pointless to let the hype go to waste. Besides, the next album is important also when you look at the legacy of GNR and how people will be writing about the history of GNR in the future. If they want to release their come back album in a big way, the only way they can do it right is if there's a tour going along with it. The tour will increase album sales and streams and the album will increase ticket sales. 

29 minutes ago, James Bond said:

They'll be on to the next excuse.

If they start touring again with no new music in sight, then I'll agree with you. At that point there's NO EXCUSES for no new music. They've got plenty of time to work on the album now with the pandemic. They must have new music when they start touring again. Otherwise the band is dead. 

All I'm saying is that I actually think it's a good excuse to not release your comeback album now when there's a pandemic and they can't tour. But if they continue touring without new music after all of this, then there's no excuses whatsoever.

[Lies They Tell]

12 minutes ago, janrichmond said:

@Lies They Tell is that spotify list the most recent? They update them every month, GNR made it to 198 on that list with SCOM. I can't see any other GNR tracks on there

It's the most recent I found. Welcome To The Jungle is there as well.

[Lies They Tell]

40 minutes ago, Gordon Comstock said:

It's impossible to say how people will perceive the band decades from now, but yes, obviously the classic songs have stood the test of time so far. That doesn't really have anything to do with the current band, though.

Of course it has a lot to do with the current band. The current band is still writing the story of the band called Guns n' Roses. When people in the future write about Guns N' Roses they might either concentrate only on the first years and write that the band became a nostalgia act after that, or they might write that the band ended up creating some of their best songs at the end of their career.

Axl didn't tour for over a year after CD was released and it killed all the hype around that album. Whether or not that was a good thing is debatable since there was a lot of negative hype around the album. Who knows, maybe it was a good thing for the legacy of GNR, that the negative hype around CD ended as soon as possible. Nevertheless the fact is that many people didn't even notice that CD was released cause the hype around it ended so quickly.

So yes, not touring after you've released an album is a very effective way to kill all the hype around it. We don't want the hype to die quickly when they release their comeback album and the best way to keep the hype going is to have a tour along the album. The more there's hype around the album, the more people will listen to it and the bigger impact the album will leave on people. And the bigger impact they manage to leave on people, the more positively people will write about the last days of GNR in the future. So if they do the release of their comeback album right, it affects the way people will write about the legacy of GNR in the future.

1 hour ago, Gordon Comstock said:

And honestly, for the last 4 years I've been reading comments about how they couldn't release or work on new material because of the touring. Now they can't release an album because they've stopped touring?

If there's no new music in sight when they start to tour again, they're out of excuses. But I do think that not releasing a comeback album during a pandemic when you can't tour is a fair excuse.

[Gordon Comstock]

14 minutes ago, Lies They Tell said:

Of course it has a lot to do with the current band. The current band is still writing the story of the band called Guns n' Roses. When people in the future write about Guns N' Roses they might either concentrate only on the first years and write that the band became a nostalgia act after that, or they might write that the band ended up creating some of their best songs at the end of their career.

Axl didn't tour for over a year after CD was released and it killed all the hype around that album. Whether or not that was a good thing is debatable since there was a lot of negative hype around the album. Who knows, maybe it was a good thing for the legacy of GNR, that the negative hype around CD ended as soon as possible. Nevertheless the fact is that many people didn't even notice that CD was released cause the hype around it ended so quickly.

So yes, not touring after you've released an album is a very effective way to kill all the hype around it. We don't want the hype to die quickly when they release their comeback album and the best way to keep the hype going is to have a tour along the album. The more there's hype around the album, the more people will listen to it and the bigger impact the album will leave on people. And the bigger impact they manage to leave on people, the more positively people will write about the last days of GNR in the future. So if they do the release of their comeback album right, it affects the way people will write about the legacy of GNR in the future.

If there's no new music in sight when they start to tour again, they're out of excuses. But I do think that not releasing a comeback album during a pandemic when you can't tour is a fair excuse.

 

That story will be called What Could've Been.

And who cares about what might be written in the future? The legacy of GNR has been established, even if a new album sucks they'll still be a legacy band. How many truly good albums have Kiss or Bon Jovi released in the last couple decades? Yea they get to play some new stuff live but it's still pretty much a greatest hits tour, like with all legacy bands.

I think a good comparison to this will be Motley Crue's album Saints Of Los Angeles. It was their 'comeback' record, the tour was huge, tons of press, and it was honestly a pretty good Motley record (or so I thought at the time). It gave them some hype and fans enjoyed it, but in the end it didn't effect their "story". It wasn't even mentioned at the end of The Dirt movie. Their legacy had been established decades earlier... like GNR's has.

When shows return, the hype will be around the fact that shows have returned. New music will be a nice bonus (or a piss break). It will be interesting to see if there are bumps in sales/streams when bands like AC/DC start touring again. On the one hand, it could have a "second wind" effect. But on the other hand, if Axl sounds awful live, it could turn people off from listening to new stuff. But again, at this stage of their careers... it don't really mattah. Gonna find out for yourself.

[Jakey Styley]

Worst of the Selects IMO. This bummed me out to watch.

Edited November 28, 2020 by Jakey Styley

[allwaystired]

Not sure streaming figures should be used as a barometer of anything really. I know of at least one (not very big) band who are rigging their streaming figures, so I imagine that sort of thing is absolutely rife higher up in the industry! 

It's all irrelevant anyway. We're yet to hear a note of new material, and until we do, I don't believe it exists. 

[Alejandro GNR]

3 minutes ago, Jakey Styley said:

I haven't gotten to catch up on  the discussion, is it just me or is Estranged REALLY bad?

It was AWFUL...and Slash on Wichita was awful as well

[Tom2112]

6 hours ago, Lies They Tell said:

Don't act dumb. You know darn well that albums are used to promote tours and there's no better album to promote a GNR tour than the GNR comeback album. It makes zero sense to release it now of all times and let all the hype go to waste. There's a vaccine coming and there's a good chance that things might go back to normal within a couple of years. Why on earth should GNR release their most important album at the worst possible time, just because you want the album now and because some other artists are releasing their not so important albums right now.?

BS. There are more than a few examples of pop acts who have released their albums to great success, then there's AC/DC who had a number one album and are everywhere doing interviews. 

Now is as good a time as any to release a new record. Also, now that a vaccine is around the corner now is even more of a perfect time to release a new album. GNR do not need to tour to promote a new album, just like AC/DC who have not performed one single song or livestream since Power up was released... yet, people bought/streamed the album and it was a huge success! Releasing an album like this wasn't AC/DC's original plan, but they pivoted and made it work. How GNR couldn't work out that releasing an album this year was an opportunity is beyond me! AND!!! last time they released an album they waited a full year to tour it!! SO touring obviously wasn't a huge promotional tool to them then, what has changed??

[James Bond]

2 hours ago, Lies They Tell said:

I don't have answers for everything, but we do know that they were rehearsing Hard School, so we know that there were plans to play new music.

Many casuals only care about the hits, but I'd argue that they may not be able to sell out stadiums for long, if they don't release new music. It's not 1991, but obviously the comeback album of GNR will create hype, especially in the rock scene. It would be pointless to let the hype go to waste. Besides, the next album is important also when you look at the legacy of GNR and how people will be writing about the history of GNR in the future. If they want to release their come back album in a big way, the only way they can do it right is if there's a tour going along with it. The tour will increase album sales and streams and the album will increase ticket sales. 

If they start touring again with no new music in sight, then I'll agree with you. At that point there's NO EXCUSES for no new music. They've got plenty of time to work on the album now with the pandemic. They must have new music when they start touring again. Otherwise the band is dead. 

All I'm saying is that I actually think it's a good excuse to not release your comeback album now when there's a pandemic and they can't tour. But if they continue touring without new music after all of this, then there's no excuses whatsoever.

Yeah, that's fair enough. I suppose I'm probably just a lot less optimistic about anything happening.

[Sydney Fan]

I would consider myself to be an old school fan,

Am i interested in a new album?. Yes, and will preorder when there is a release date.

Am i pining for it?. No

Will it set the rock world ablaze, radio etc when its released like 91 illusions?. No. 

Am i looking forward to illusions anniversary more than a new album?. Yes

The one album im really looking forward to hearinv is Dirty Honeys self debut being released i would imagine next year. They are my favourite new band.

I agree with @Gordon Comstock comments.

GNR are a legacy band, this isnt 91 era where the band were young, had fire, and still massive with YCBM dominating radio and music TV and had something to say.

As a much older fan, they are a legacy band like the bon jovis, but bigger than motley crue. They could have been the new stones but to use the same comments as Gordon, there relevance is what could have been. So many chances squandered to the point whete i really dont care one way or another what the band do.

When SOYL was released, here in Australia it was big with radio playlist for maybe 2 weeks and i havnt heard it on radio since.

The song was promoted on the GNR facebook and advertised on radio as a "new and unreleased song".This sort of marketing is promoting to casual fans. It was also promoting to the casuals as the band were on tour at the time.

This will be the same case with new music.

The band dont need new music to tour. To play stadiums?. Maybe. But if there is one thing that has been proven. Mgt and the band would prefer to appeal to only the casual fan. The hardcore fans are considered to much of a pain, demanding, and expect to much than what the band care to give, and would prefer we just go away.

 

 

 

Edited November 29, 2020 by Sydney Fan

[Tom2112]

47 minutes ago, Sydney Fan said:

I would consider myself to be an old school fan,

Am i interested in a new album?. Yes, and will preorder when there is a release date.

Am i pining for it?. No

Will it set the rock world ablaze, radio etc when its released like 91 illusions?. No. 

Am i looking forward to illusions anniversary more than a new album?. Yes

The one album im really looking forward to hearinv is Dirty Honeys self debut being released i would imagine next year. They are my favourite new band.

I agree with @Gordon Comstock comments.

GNR are a legacy band, this isnt 91 era where the band were young, had fire, and still massive with YCBM dominating radio and music TV and had something to say.

As a much older fan, they are a legacy band like the bon jovis, but bigger than motley crue. They could have been the new stones but to use the same comments as Gordon, there relevance is what could have been. So many chances squandered to the point whete i really dont care one way or another what the band do.

When SOYL was released, here in Australia it was big with radio playlist for maybe 2 weeks and i havnt heard it on radio since.

The song was promoted on the GNR facebook and advertised on radio as a "new and unreleased song".This sort of marketing is promoting to casual fans. It was also promoting to the casuals as the band were on tour at the time.

This will be the same case with new music.

The band dont need new music to tour. To play stadiums?. Maybe. But if there is one thing that has been proven. Mgt and the band would prefer to appeal to only the casual fan. The hardcore fans are considered to much of a pain, demanding, and expect to much than what the band care to give, and would prefer we just go away.

 

 

 

All true! 

The only way a new album would be bad for touring opportunities or sales is if it's a pure stinker and the press rip it apart! beyond that if it's good or even great, it really won't make that much difference in the long term! but it probably would create a small buzz around seeing them again! 

They have shows booked as early as June 2021! if they can't scramble together an album or even one new single before then, then it will be 100% confirmed that the chances of new anything beyond record label re-issues is out of the question. 

Like you, I'm more keen to see the UYI boxset! hoping and praying for some old studio footage or just anything we haven't seen / heard before from leaks.

[Lies They Tell]

9 hours ago, Gordon Comstock said:

I think a good comparison to this will be Motley Crue's album Saints Of Los Angeles. It was their 'comeback' record, the tour was huge, tons of press, and it was honestly a pretty good Motley record (or so I thought at the time). It gave them some hype and fans enjoyed it, but in the end it didn't effect their "story". It wasn't even mentioned at the end of The Dirt movie. Their legacy had been established decades earlier... like GNR's has.

Yes, Motley Crue failed at making a great comeback album that would have affected their story in a meaningful way. Saints Of Los Angeles was decent, but even Chinese Democracy is a lot more streamed album than Saints Of Los Angeles is. At the end of the day Motley Crue is nowhere near GNR in terms of popularity. GNR has over 18 million monthly listeners on Spotify. Motley Crue has about 5 million monthly listeners. They're not in the same league.

So if Chinese Democracy is a lot more popular album than Saints Of Los Angeles, even though SOLA was heavily toured and Axl didn't tour at all for a year after CD was released, what would happen, if GNR actually toured when they release their comeback album and if they promoted it and if there was tons of press? I'm not saying that they're gonna save rock music or shit like that, but there's a good chance that they could still add to the legacy of Guns N' Roses in a positive way and affect how people write about the band in the future. There's still a good chance that some of the most popular GNR songs of all times will be written by this current incarnation of the band, Both Axl and Slash are hugely talented. They're not Kiss or Bon Jovi for crying out loud. They can still create rock history, if they play their cards right and don't release one of their most important records during the worst possible time.

9 hours ago, Tom2112 said:

Now is as good a time as any to release a new record.

Don't act dumb. Of course it's a better time to release the record when they can actually tour along with it. The album will increase ticket sales and the concerts will increase album sales. It's not rocket science. I'm not saying that their comeback album wouldn't be popular if it was released now. But if it was released in a time when they can actually tour, the hype of the album wouldn't go to waste, but it would boost their ticket sales. Besides, the hype is just on a whole another level, if people are excited about a new GNR song and then they can tell their friend that they're gonna go see a GNR show the next month. Alternately they could release their album now and people would listen to the new album. They would ask their friend if they heard the new record. They would agree that it was great, but that's it. They would have nothing to look forward to. The hype is on a totally different level, when there's both an album and a tour that people can be excited about. Maybe a new GNR song could be added to a movie too and people would go crazy when they hear it in the cinema. It wouldn't be the same if they just heard the song on a Netflix show or something. I really shouldn't even have to explain these things to anyone. It is OBVIOUS that this is not as good of a time to release an album as a time when there is no pandemic ruining everything.

9 hours ago, Tom2112 said:

Also, now that a vaccine is around the corner now is even more of a perfect time to release a new album.

Or you know, maybe just maybe, they could first wait and see how things go with the vaccine and then, when it's clear that the vaccine is working and all experts agree that things will go relatively back to normal soon, then they could announce a new album and a new world tour. 

9 hours ago, Tom2112 said:

last time they released an album they waited a full year to tour it!! SO touring obviously wasn't a huge promotional tool to them then, what has changed??

At least one thing has changed. Slash and Duff are back in the band, so when they release their next album the medias focus isn't on the lack of Slash. Axl doesn't have to explain to everyone why he's not working things out with Slash. Axl doesn't have to change peoples opinions about whether or not it's a good idea to continue with the band without Slash. There was so much negativity towards Axl's GNR back then because Slash was missing. Now all of that is history. This time the media hype will be positive, if the album is good. This time the focus will be on the fact that it's the first new album with Axl and Slash and for many it's the first real GNR record since the nineties. It's all positive. Back then so much of the hype around Chinese Democracy was negative, that it raises the question if it was actually a good thing that the hype died pretty soon. This time the hype will most likely be all positive, so we don't want the hype to die soon. We want the positive hype to continue as long as possible and a tour along with the album will help that for sure.

10 hours ago, allwaystired said:

Not sure streaming figures should be used as a barometer of anything really. I know of at least one (not very big) band who are rigging their streaming figures, so I imagine that sort of thing is absolutely rife higher up in the industry! 

First of all everything can be rigged to a certain degree. Album sales are constantly rigged when labels and artists buy their own albums. I do think that streaming figures are a much better barometer of measuring artists popularity than album sales is, because streams actually tell you how much people listen to your music. Many people buy albums because of the hype and then they never listen to those albums again. Streaming numbers on the other hand actually tell us about how much people actually listen to those songs.

Usually when streaming figures are rigged, it's done to boost the popularity of a new album. As far as I know it's not really something that artists do to keep their old songs relevant. If GNR was rigging their streaming numbers year by year, they would have been caught already. Why is it so hard to admit that GNR is a popular band? They just had one of the most successful tours of all times. Was that rigged too?They are popular. They don't need to manipulate their streaming numbers.

10 hours ago, allwaystired said:

It's all irrelevant anyway. We're yet to hear a note of new material, and until we do, I don't believe it exists. 

We have heard Slash play Hard School, so that's something.

[DieselDaisy]

If you want to avoid making albums, or defend somebody's decision to avoid making albums, there are always excuses extent to use, and the kung flu is as good an excuse as any I suppose. Maybe now is a bad time to release something? Dylan and AC/DC however thought otherwise and I am happy they did.

[action]

they missed their opportunity to release another great album in 89, in their absolute prime. it will never come back.

what we have now is not guns n roses, and you all know it. it's rather fat elvis meets the spice girls

[Stay.Of.Execution]

21 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

 kung flu 

[TeeJay410]

I would much prefer an answer like “We don’t want to” or “We are messing around with stuff and have talked about it, but it’s not really a priority. We are taking this opportunity after three years of touring to recharge and spent time with our families,” when it comes to the album, because it’s clearly the truth. It just isn’t a priority.

[allwaystired]

1 hour ago, TeeJay410 said:

I would much prefer an answer like “We don’t want to” or “We are messing around with stuff and have talked about it, but it’s not really a priority. We are taking this opportunity after three years of touring to recharge and spent time with our families,” when it comes to the album, because it’s clearly the truth. It just isn’t a priority.

I'd much prefer the honest approach.....but I think if they were totally honest with people, it would be the end of the band. 

[Sydney Fan]

1 hour ago, allwaystired said:

I'd much prefer the honest approach.....but I think if they were totally honest with people, it would be the end of the band. 

All Slash needs to say is "we are working on new stuff" which could mean anything.

it could mean working on a new setlist, working on a new stage setup, working on rehearsing old songs  and polish as a new song.

The band really dont need to do an album. They could add some deep cuts to the setlist ( think about you, Your Crazy) rotate MM and OTGM, Yesterday,  and add a " new unreleased" song (Hardschool) like SOYL. A song from their old days and market as a "new and unreleased " song. The casuals wouldnt have a clue.

Like SOYL and Hardschool  its interesting that the bands so called new songs are just rehashed old ones. They could keep doing this (Just another Sunday, crash diet).

The band could get away and still sell tickets doing the above. No album required.

Edited November 29, 2020 by Sydney Fan

[Tom2112]

4 hours ago, Lies They Tell said:

Yes, Motley Crue failed at making a great comeback album that would have affected their story in a meaningful way. Saints Of Los Angeles was decent, but even Chinese Democracy is a lot more streamed album than Saints Of Los Angeles is. At the end of the day Motley Crue is nowhere near GNR in terms of popularity. GNR has over 18 million monthly listeners on Spotify. Motley Crue has about 5 million monthly listeners. They're not in the same league.

So if Chinese Democracy is a lot more popular album than Saints Of Los Angeles, even though SOLA was heavily toured and Axl didn't tour at all for a year after CD was released, what would happen, if GNR actually toured when they release their comeback album and if they promoted it and if there was tons of press? I'm not saying that they're gonna save rock music or shit like that, but there's a good chance that they could still add to the legacy of Guns N' Roses in a positive way and affect how people write about the band in the future. There's still a good chance that some of the most popular GNR songs of all times will be written by this current incarnation of the band, Both Axl and Slash are hugely talented. They're not Kiss or Bon Jovi for crying out loud. They can still create rock history, if they play their cards right and don't release one of their most important records during the worst possible time.

Don't act dumb. Of course it's a better time to release the record when they can actually tour along with it. The album will increase ticket sales and the concerts will increase album sales. It's not rocket science. I'm not saying that their comeback album wouldn't be popular if it was released now. But if it was released in a time when they can actually tour, the hype of the album wouldn't go to waste, but it would boost their ticket sales. Besides, the hype is just on a whole another level, if people are excited about a new GNR song and then they can tell their friend that they're gonna go see a GNR show the next month. Alternately they could release their album now and people would listen to the new album. They would ask their friend if they heard the new record. They would agree that it was great, but that's it. They would have nothing to look forward to. The hype is on a totally different level, when there's both an album and a tour that people can be excited about. Maybe a new GNR song could be added to a movie too and people would go crazy when they hear it in the cinema. It wouldn't be the same if they just heard the song on a Netflix show or something. I really shouldn't even have to explain these things to anyone. It is OBVIOUS that this is not as good of a time to release an album as a time when there is no pandemic ruining everything.

Or you know, maybe just maybe, they could first wait and see how things go with the vaccine and then, when it's clear that the vaccine is working and all experts agree that things will go relatively back to normal soon, then they could announce a new album and a new world tour. 

At least one thing has changed. Slash and Duff are back in the band, so when they release their next album the medias focus isn't on the lack of Slash. Axl doesn't have to explain to everyone why he's not working things out with Slash. Axl doesn't have to change peoples opinions about whether or not it's a good idea to continue with the band without Slash. There was so much negativity towards Axl's GNR back then because Slash was missing. Now all of that is history. This time the media hype will be positive, if the album is good. This time the focus will be on the fact that it's the first new album with Axl and Slash and for many it's the first real GNR record since the nineties. It's all positive. Back then so much of the hype around Chinese Democracy was negative, that it raises the question if it was actually a good thing that the hype died pretty soon. This time the hype will most likely be all positive, so we don't want the hype to die soon. We want the positive hype to continue as long as possible and a tour along with the album will help that for sure.

First of all everything can be rigged to a certain degree. Album sales are constantly rigged when labels and artists buy their own albums. I do think that streaming figures are a much better barometer of measuring artists popularity than album sales is, because streams actually tell you how much people listen to your music. Many people buy albums because of the hype and then they never listen to those albums again. Streaming numbers on the other hand actually tell us about how much people actually listen to those songs.

Usually when streaming figures are rigged, it's done to boost the popularity of a new album. As far as I know it's not really something that artists do to keep their old songs relevant. If GNR was rigging their streaming numbers year by year, they would have been caught already. Why is it so hard to admit that GNR is a popular band? They just had one of the most successful tours of all times. Was that rigged too?They are popular. They don't need to manipulate their streaming numbers.

We have heard Slash play Hard School, so that's something.

"The lies they tell" now I get your username. You just continually lie to yourself to make all the gnr shit feel better😉

The chances of guns releasing even one song that is viewed in the same league as of their old now classic songs is unlikely. Of course 'I' love Chinese Democracy, and 'I' might even love a new album even more! But for the most part people are not going to say "they didn't play Rocket Queen, but they did play that new song" they'll want to hear the hits.

Acting dumb is exactly what I'd call the majority of your post. You seem to be so optimistic about the possibilities of a new albums release and the reaction from the world... but you seem to forget that the band and their management can't get anything right. What makes you think they won't bungle the marketing for a new record as bad as CD? 

A  new album obviously helps when it comes to touring, give everything a bit more excitement yada, yada! But it doesn't really translate into sales. The people who intended on buying your album have probably bought it within the 1st week these days. Outside of bands giving their albums alongside concert tickets it doesn't really move the  needle anymore. 

Finally, IF they release a good/great album that excitement doesn't just disappear! As soon as dates are announced people will go "I need to see this gig"... but again, the people that really fill out the stadiums are going to go with or without a record! We're the only one's on the fence saying we won't go. Once concerts come back people will once again be excited to see gnr. If they come out and play an all new set (of their classic material no new songs) they could tour for the 2 years without a new record and people would be excited!

Edited November 29, 2020 by Tom2112

[JimiRose]

29 minutes ago, Tom2112 said:

"The lies they tell" now I get your username. You just continually lie to yourself to make all the gnr shit feel better😉

The chances of guns releasing even one song that is viewed in the same league as of their old now classic songs is unlikely. Of course 'I' love Chinese Democracy, and 'I' might even love a new album even more! But for the most part people are not going to say "they didn't play Rocket Queen, but they did play that new song" they'll want to hear the hits.

Acting dumb is exactly what I'd call the majority of your post. You seem to be so optimistic about the possibilities of a new albums release and the reaction from the world... but you seem to forget that the band and their management can't get anything right. What makes you think they won't bungle the marketing for a new record as bad as CD? 

A  new album obviously helps when it comes to touring, give everything a bit more excitement yada, yada! But it doesn't really translate into sales. The people who intended on buying your album have probably bought it within the 1st week these days. Outside of bands giving their albums alongside concert tickets it doesn't really move the  needle anymore. 

Finally, IF they release a good/great album that excitement doesn't just disappear! As soon as dates are announced people will go "I need to see this gig"... but again, the people that really fill out the stadiums are going to go with or without a record! We're the only one's on the fence saying we won't go. Once concerts come back people will once again be excited to see gnr. If they come out and play an all new set (of their classic material no new songs) they could tour for the 2 years without a new record and people would be excited!

I don't know why a band like GnR doesnt do exactly that, they love touring and want to tour to death and fill stadiums. Release the new album, like you say 90% of classic rock bands sales today come in the first 1/2 weeks, then announce the tour, but include an album with every ticket purchase. a 3 date UK stadium tour is 200k tickets sold. x that by 10 European countries, north america, south america and aus/nz and you're looking at a couple million extra album sales minimum across a world tour, and an almost guarantee that when you play the live songs, at least the crowd have heard them before.

Muse have done it every recent release. Big marketing for the first 2/3 weeks of album on sale, couple singles and vids before it's release, maybe even an interview! Then tour dates with an album included with the ticket. It's not hard. It's so easy, one could even say. 

[Tom-Ass]

Axl sounds like shit for the most part... More one and done videos.. Nothing here worth a  secong watch except WL....

Estranged.. Axl sounds like crap... Slash was fucking awesome.. 

Civil War.. Axl sounds like crap.. I would like to snap that whammy bar right off of Fortus' guitar.. Sounds so awful. He does this on other songs too.

Witchita lineman.. This is the best of the bunch.. Go figure.. Axl sounds good on this one and I like the little acoustic jam at the end... 

Nightrain was ok... Axl sounds like death during the verses... There are better over all performances out there.. 

Another honest and underwhelming representaion of this lineup...

[Gordon Comstock]

6 hours ago, Lies They Tell said:

Yes, Motley Crue failed at making a great comeback album that would have affected their story in a meaningful way. Saints Of Los Angeles was decent, but even Chinese Democracy is a lot more streamed album than Saints Of Los Angeles is. At the end of the day Motley Crue is nowhere near GNR in terms of popularity. GNR has over 18 million monthly listeners on Spotify. Motley Crue has about 5 million monthly listeners. They're not in the same league.

So if Chinese Democracy is a lot more popular album than Saints Of Los Angeles, even though SOLA was heavily toured and Axl didn't tour at all for a year after CD was released, what would happen, if GNR actually toured when they release their comeback album and if they promoted it and if there was tons of press? I'm not saying that they're gonna save rock music or shit like that, but there's a good chance that they could still add to the legacy of Guns N' Roses in a positive way and affect how people write about the band in the future. There's still a good chance that some of the most popular GNR songs of all times will be written by this current incarnation of the band, Both Axl and Slash are hugely talented. They're not Kiss or Bon Jovi for crying out loud. They can still create rock history, if they play their cards right and don't release one of their most important records during the worst possible time.

 

The numbers would be bigger for GNR, but the general sentiment is the same. It won't be as good as their early albums, it will still be successful, and it won't have any grand effect one way or the other on GNR's legacy.

An album released by 60-year-olds who are 3+ decades into their careers isn't going to be nearly as important as you'd like to believe. It's simply not going to "add to their legacy" or "create rock history" or anything dramatic like that.

[Towelie]

1 hour ago, Tom-Ass said:

 

Another honest and underwhelming representaion of this lineup...

How many bad videos are we gonna watch before we admit to ourselves that this is just what the band sounds like now?

If Axl sounds horrible, the whole band sounds horrible.