Free Bird Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 29 minutes ago, SoulMonster said: Your argument is that it is some logical that transcends personal preferences and dictates that Slash should be added to these songs. My argument is that you are blatantly wrong. No, his point is that it’s logical for GNR to release music with Slash when he’s in the band. Regardless of preferences. And he’s right, of course. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post jacdaniel Posted April 12 Popular Post Share Posted April 12 Whenever I see these arguments it always makes me sad that Axl just didn’t release this music 20 years ago with whoever the band was back then and just be done with it. Axl should just do brand new music with Slash that is closer to Slash’s style. For the Chinese stuff, just release it or can it. I think everyone but Axl and Sweersa are well over it by now. 2 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulMonster Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Free Bird said: No, his point is that it’s logical for GNR to release music with Slash when he’s in the band. Regardless of preferences. And he’s right, of course. No, it is only logical IF Axl wants new music to feature Slash. There is no objective logic here. It all comes down to what the Axl wants. If he wanted the songs to feature Buckethead then it would be logical for him to release them with Buckethead. If he wanted to maximize sales revenues, then it is logical to replace Bucket with Slash. If he wanted to keep the songs with the original musicians, then it is logical to not redo them. If he wanted to please the majority of the fanbase, then it is logical to add Slash to the songs. See, the "logic" here is tied to preferences. This is not mathematics where the truth is objective. It all comes down to what Axl wants. Edited April 12 by SoulMonster Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Bird Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 12 minutes ago, SoulMonster said: No, it is only logical IF Axl wants new music to feature Slash. There is no objective logic here. It all comes down to what the Axl wants. If he wanted the songs to feature Buckethead then it would be logical for him to release them with Buckethead. If he wanted to maximize sales revenues, then it is logical to replace Bucket with Slash. If he wanted to keep the songs with the original musicians, then it is logical to not redo them. If he wanted to please the majority of the fanbase, then it is logical to add Slash to the songs. See, the "logic" here is tied to preferences. This is not mathematics where the truth is objective. It all comes down to what Axl wants. Lol no, that’s just your logic. Guns N Roses is not just Axl. It was during the New Guns Era but this is over since 2016. Good morning, sir. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulMonster Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 10 minutes ago, Free Bird said: Lol no, that’s just your logic. Guns N Roses is not just Axl. It was during the New Guns Era but this is over since 2016. Good morning, sir. I have to disagree with the idea that there is some egalitarian situation between the trio, but for the sake of the argument just replace "Axl" with "the partnership" then. My argument isn't affected by this, it still comes down to what they, together, agree on, which is dictated by their preferences. Their decision to add Slash to the songs wasn't determined by some outside logic that could have squashed their own preferences, it was 100% aligned with what they, as a trio, wanted to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Bird Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 11 minutes ago, SoulMonster said: I have to disagree with the idea that there is some egalitarian situation between the trio, but for the sake of the argument just replace "Axl" with "the partnership" then. My argument isn't affected by this, it still comes down to what they, together, agree on, which is dictated by their preferences. Their decision to add Slash to the songs wasn't determined by some outside logic that could have squashed their own preferences, it was 100% aligned with what they, as a trio, wanted to do. I really don’t know what we’re talking about here. Forget all preferences in or outside the band. As long as Slash is in the band there will be just him on lead guitar and maybe Fortus or whoever is playing alongside Slash. Call it logic, preference or whatever you want. It is what it is. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamillos Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 15 minutes ago, Free Bird said: I really don’t know what we’re talking about here. Forget all preferences in or outside the band. As long as Slash is in the band there will be just him on lead guitar and maybe Fortus or whoever is playing alongside Slash. Call it logic, preference or whatever you want. It is what it is. All resistance is futile! It’s just his typical way of attributing something to someone that they never said and just using strawman arguments all over. I wasn’t talking about Axl or decision-making, I wasn’t denying anyone their preferences or whatever, which I even explicitly stated above and then repeated several times. I was talking about the majority who attend the gig to see Axl standing next to Slash, playing SCOM. These people are gonna wanna hear Slash on the solos, not Finck or Bucket or whoever the hell, and that's only logical. SM is using textbook logical fallacy, deliberately misunderstanding and twisting shit around into nonsense as usual, that’s all. I guess he can’t help himself. I’ve just wasted another few minutes of my time, but I can live with that and hopefully learn a lesson... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulMonster Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 3 hours ago, Free Bird said: I really don’t know what we’re talking about here. Forget all preferences in or outside the band. As long as Slash is in the band there will be just him on lead guitar and maybe Fortus or whoever is playing alongside Slash. Call it logic, preference or whatever you want. It is what it is. 2 hours ago, jamillos said: All resistance is futile! It’s just his typical way of attributing something to someone that they never said and just using strawman arguments all over. I wasn’t talking about Axl or decision-making, I wasn’t denying anyone their preferences or whatever, which I even explicitly stated above and then repeated several times. I was talking about the majority who attend the gig to see Axl standing next to Slash, playing SCOM. These people are gonna wanna hear Slash on the solos, not Finck or Bucket or whoever the hell, and that's only logical. SM is using textbook logical fallacy, deliberately misunderstanding and twisting shit around into nonsense as usual, that’s all. I guess he can’t help himself. I’ve just wasted another few minutes of my time, but I can live with that and hopefully learn a lesson... What we are talking about here, @Free Bird, is me reacting to @jamillos saying the only logical thing is to include Slash on new music. My argument is that this "logic" is entirely based on what Axl (read "the band", if so you prefer) wants; if Axl wants to maximize sales, then yes it becomes logical to add Slash to the songs; if Axl wants to please the majority of the fan base, then yes it becomes logical to add Slash to the songs; but if Axl wants to have Bucket on these songs, then it is no longer logical to add Slash to them. You see? The "logic" here is based on what the objective is. Whatever leads to the objective is what is logical. It varied depending on objective. But @jamillosdidn't add this qualifier, he presented it as if there was only one logical thing to do, as if it was a case of 2+4=4, and hence, implicitly, anyone who felt otherwise would be illogical. And no, @jamillos, you didn't qualify your original statement to be only about what would be logical to do for the majority of fans, because this is what you wrote: Quote It's not about respect or Axl's whims; it's about basic logic. The fans didn't wait for Slash to return for 20 years only to subsequently hear some replacement guys (sorry) playing the guitar on the new album. Makes no sense. As you see, you said it was "basic logic" to add Slash and that it "makes no sense" to not add Slash. As if it is a universal truth. A fact. Something that goes beyond motives and goals and desires and preferences. But again, that comes from the perspective of someone who wants it that way; to everyone who doesn't want it that way it ceases to be "logical". 3 hours ago, jamillos said: SM is using textbook logical fallacy, Lovely. Please point out to me precisely where I used a logical fallacy. Oooh, I can't wait Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulMonster Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 3 hours ago, jamillos said: and twisting shit around into nonsense as usual I haven't twisted anything around. I have been responding EXACTLY to what you wrote, which was that it is "basic logic" to add Slash and that it "makes no sense" to not include him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Bird Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 (edited) 58 minutes ago, SoulMonster said: What we are talking about here, @Free Bird, is me reacting to @jamillos saying the only logical thing is to include Slash on new music. My argument is that this "logic" is entirely based on what Axl (read "the band", if so you prefer) wants; if Axl wants to maximize sales, then yes it becomes logical to add Slash to the songs; if Axl wants to please the majority of the fan base, then yes it becomes logical to add Slash to the songs; but if Axl wants to have Bucket on these songs, then it is no longer logical to add Slash to them. You see? The "logic" here is based on what the objective is. Whatever leads to the objective is what is logical. It varied depending on objective. But @jamillosdidn't add this qualifier, he presented it as if there was only one logical thing to do, as if it was a case of 2+4=4, and hence, implicitly, anyone who felt otherwise would be illogical. And no, @jamillos, you didn't qualify your original statement to be only about what would be logical to do for the majority of fans, because this is what you wrote: As you see, you said it was "basic logic" to add Slash and that it "makes no sense" to not add Slash. As if it is a universal truth. A fact. Something that goes beyond motives and goals and desires and preferences. But again, that comes from the perspective of someone who wants it that way; to everyone who doesn't want it that way it ceases to be "logical". Lovely. Please point out to me precisely where I used a logical fallacy. Oooh, I can't wait I don’t agree. Axl had decades to release the material he got in the vault. He chose to keep it. If theres something to release now, than it’s songs with Axl, Slash and Duff. Not to maximise sales, it’s the band situation that calls for it. And yes, I agree with @jamillos here. It’s the only logical thing to do if they’re gonna release music now. Everything else is wishful thinking by a minority who get wet dreams when they think of BH. And for people like you who like to argue for the sake if arguing. Edited April 12 by Free Bird 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweersa Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 8 hours ago, Rovim said: a Bucket second here, 2 Robin seconds there is not the same as a full solo though. Of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweersa Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 I'd be much more receptive to Slash being on these songs if they could do it in a way that doesn't make them sound like a mess. If they were mixed properly, it would be a start. So far, Perhaps has been the best in that regard. The weird transition from Robin's two seconds into Slash's dull solo is jarring and takes me out of the song for a moment, but back again right before the solo ends. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2020_Intensions Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 Bucket & Finck (and Huge) > Modern Slash Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulMonster Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 1 hour ago, Free Bird said: I don’t agree. Axl had decades to release the material he got in the vault. He chose to keep it. If theres something to release now, than it’s songs with Axl, Slash and Duff. Not to maximise sales, it’s the band situation that calls for it. And yes, I agree with @jamillos here. It’s the only logical thing to do if they’re gonna release music now. Everything else is wishful thinking by a minority who get wet dreams when they think of BH. And for people like you who like to argue for the sake if arguing. Again, what is logical depends on what you want to achieve. You follow this far? If you want to maximize sales, then releasing the music with Slash is logical. Did you get that? All okay to this point? But if you want to keep the music as close to how it was written, then what is logical is to not replace musicians with Slash. So what is logical here really depends on what you want to achieve. Did your brain explode now? Or did you not understand it? What is logical can only be understood in the context of what the end goal is. So when people like @jamillos argue that the only logical thing to do is release music with Slash, that suggests he either doesn't understand this or that he used rhetoric to kind of devalue those who have a different goal than him. Get it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Bird Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 1 hour ago, SoulMonster said: Again, what is logical depends on what you want to achieve. You follow this far? If you want to maximize sales, then releasing the music with Slash is logical. Did you get that? All okay to this point? But if you want to keep the music as close to how it was written, then what is logical is to not replace musicians with Slash. So what is logical here really depends on what you want to achieve. Did your brain explode now? Or did you not understand it? What is logical can only be understood in the context of what the end goal is. So when people like @jamillos argue that the only logical thing to do is release music with Slash, that suggests he either doesn't understand this or that he used rhetoric to kind of devalue those who have a different goal than him. Get it? Dear SoulMonster, you’re a smart guy but sometimes your stubbornness doesn’t do you a favour. Maybe your head is exploding because you can’t deal with reality. You can make up your own truth as long as you want but reality remains. In this case it means you have no single reunion song without Slash. Period. There’s a reason Axl didn’t release songs prior reunion and there’s a reason he releases songs post reunion. IF he wanted the songs as close as they were written he would have released them already. You can twist and wriggle yourself as much as you like but this is not an option. And as long as there isn’t Robin or Bucket on the future releases you simply can’t convince me otherwise. Get that? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZoSoRose Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 On 4/9/2024 at 9:27 PM, Sweersa said: Wouldn't it be great if after they officially release Monsters, that they later release a CD-era mix titled Soul Monster? Same with Hard Skool, vs Hardschool. Name the older mixes with Robin and Buckethead something that can differentiate them from the NITL versions. Even if it is on some bonus or digital download, it certainly would be welcomed by the hardcore fans, even if rough mixes. Minimal effort required. Jesus Christ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulMonster Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 2 minutes ago, Free Bird said: Dear SoulMonster, you’re a smart guy but sometimes your stubbornness doesn’t do you a favour. Maybe your head is exploding because you can’t deal with reality. You can make up your own truth as long as you want but reality remains. In this case it means you have no single reunion song without Slash. Period. There’s a reason Axl didn’t release songs prior reunion and there’s a reason he releases songs post reunion. IF he wanted the songs as close as they were written he would have released them already. You can twist and wriggle yourself as much as you like but this is not an option. And as long as there isn’t Robin or Bucket on the future releases you simply can’t convince me otherwise. Get that? I am not talking about any of this at all. You have lost the plot. I am talking about the argument that only one way of going about this is logical, as if it doesn't depend on what the desired outcome is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Bird Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 1 minute ago, SoulMonster said: I am not talking about any of this at all. You have lost the plot. I am talking about the argument that only one way of going about this is logical, as if it doesn't depend on what the desired outcome is. I didn’t lose anything. At this point there’s only one logical way to go. IF Axl releases now songs with BH or Finck, while Slash is in the band, than it’s not logical. It’s not logical to wait for years to reunite with Slash just to use recordings of other guitarists. Recordings you already had. That is not logical. It simply isn’t. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulMonster Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 4 minutes ago, Free Bird said: I didn’t lose anything. At this point there’s only one logical way to go. IF Axl releases now songs with BH or Finck, while Slash is in the band, than it’s not logical. It’s not logical to wait for years to reunite with Slash just to use recordings of other guitarists. Recordings you already had. That is not logical. It simply isn’t. It is, if that's what he wants to do Again. what is logical in this context is entirely dependent upon what goal you have in mind. If Axl now decided that the songs would be best if they contained the original musicians, then it would only be logical for him to release them that way. Obviously, for the four songs now released, he decided that Slash should be on them, so what he did was logical (regardless of what people might feel about that decision). But if he now decides that, "Fuck it, I'm gonna release the next singel with Paul Huge playing a solo on kazoo even if it means fans will be angry, I will be ridiculed, and it won't sell at all - but that is what I really, really want because that's how that song is supposed to be heard," then it is completely logical to do it. It won't be the best decision from a fiscal perspective, it won't be the best decision if he wants to make the fanbase happy, it won't be the best decision for his legacy, surely, but if when weighing the pros and cons he still decides that that is what he wants to do, then that action is logical per definition. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweersa Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 33 minutes ago, ZoSoRose said: Jesus Christ Amen 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Bird Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 1 hour ago, SoulMonster said: It is, if that's what he wants to do Again. what is logical in this context is entirely dependent upon what goal you have in mind. If Axl now decided that the songs would be best if they contained the original musicians, then it would only be logical for him to release them that way. Obviously, for the four songs now released, he decided that Slash should be on them, so what he did was logical (regardless of what people might feel about that decision). But if he now decides that, "Fuck it, I'm gonna release the next singel with Paul Huge playing a solo on kazoo even if it means fans will be angry, I will be ridiculed, and it won't sell at all - but that is what I really, really want because that's how that song is supposed to be heard," then it is completely logical to do it. It won't be the best decision from a fiscal perspective, it won't be the best decision if he wants to make the fanbase happy, it won't be the best decision for his legacy, surely, but if when weighing the pros and cons he still decides that that is what he wants to do, then that action is logical per definition. You won. I’m tired. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacdaniel Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 Axl can release songs without Slash on lead guitar if he wants. But would Slash stay in Guns? I’m sure they’re all more mellow these days but I don’t think Slash would have that. He’d just leave and focus on other projects. And I think Axl needs Slash a lot more than Slash needs Axl these days. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janrichmond Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 @SoulMonster For the sake of my sanity STOP, just stop! 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimiRose Posted April 14 Share Posted April 14 Has anyone managed to isolate the different vocals yet for monsters in the verses? There appears to be 4 vocal lines - the main vocal being sung, an extremely high pitch delayed version of the vocal line, the ooh oohs, and then axl seems to be saying something different in his deep devil voice under the vocal line which can't be made out. He has form for this on CD in the hidden tracks, so just wandered if anyone has been able to separate the vocal lines with your AI music tech I'm sure some of you have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.