Jump to content

The Release of Chinese Democracy


Guest Ohdistortedsmile1789

Recommended Posts

I'm not sure how successful CD will be all I know is I will buy it and support GNR

We all will buy it. It will go double or triple platinum(2,3 million copies), but unfortunately it will always be compared to the past. Thats some hard competition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 72
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

What about Richard?? i think that he is better than Izzy and he has proven how popular he is on this forum already, almost everybody i've seen post about him thinks he's great.

When Richard writes a bunch of GN'R songs that are as good as what Izzy wrote then we can talk about how he is the better of the two. Until then, he's not.

Edited by KBear
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about Richard?? i think that he is better than Izzy and he has proven how popular he is on this forum already, almost everybody i've seen post about him thinks he's great.

When Richard writes a bunch of GN'R songs that are as good as what Izzy wrote then we can talk about how he is the better of the two. Until then, he's not.

great post, izzy was guns n roses, they only did mediocre cover songs after he left

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's going to be big, it's more a question of HOW big. This is a "return of" album for a mysterious, legendary frontman and band name with incredible brand power as we all know. Given the huge amount of press and marketing that's expected to be unleashed around CD, it could almost become an Event album the way some films are considered Event movies that have to be seen. So, it's no longer just about Axl himself, it's bigger than that now.

No matter how good, though, I don't think it's going to have significant impact on the industry or music trends.

I also think the real test for this new band will be the 2nd album. This first one should be a lock for major success given all the reasons mentioned, but the novelty of the Axl's resurrection and the band's "return" will have worn off and sales will hinge directly upon how well recieved CD's actual music is by the public...

Edited by Turn_It_Up
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Sweet_Emotion

i think because everyone has been hearing about CD for so long they are going to buy it to see what Axl was up to for all those years. It's got alot of mystery surrounding it and that will be a major point for people buying it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never got into GNR just for Axl, they were a band that had great songs, and 5 different personalities. I admire Axl and he is one of my favorite rock singers, but I think the esteem he is held in on this forum is fairly overblown. I am waiting for "Chinese Democracy" like the rest of you, and atleast until the album comes out, I'm not aligning myself with any faction. But if "Chinese Democracy" comes out and is worth the wait, it will not change the world, it will not be a huge sensation, it will satisfy us (hopefully) and Axl will be redeemed. To think that CD will have videos on MTV 24/7 is just ridiculous, most see him as a drug-addled relic of the 80's (not me). Unfortunately for Axl "Where's Slash?" will haunt him for the rest of his days, and to say that he will never escape his past success is only a compliment to Guns N' Roses. In the public eye, Guns N' Roses were a great band and Axl is "That dude from the 80's, boy they had funny hair!".

I agree the esteem Axl is held in on this forum gets overblown. A lot of fans are blindly loyal to him.

But I also think you underestimate the public's view of Axl. Axl, and GN'R, are seen as more than "dudes from the 80's with funny hair." We aren't talking about Poison here. GN'R is a well-respected band, Axl a well-respected musician. Think Rolling Stone would've given the story the attention it got if it was a Bret Michaels sighting? Of course not.

Obviously none of us can predict the future and we don't know how big this album will end up being. I'm pretty confident in saying that it'll be a pretty big hit and critically acclaimed, at the very least. Do we really care if it sells more than American Idiot? I don't think that should be the focus here and I don't think that's what Axl is most concerned with. The goal was always to make good music, not generate big sales. Leave that to the Hilarys and Ashleys of the world, and all the shitty wannabe rock bands out there today.

Axl doesn't cement his place in music history with just another big selling rock album. He does it if Chinese Democracy is so good that it's considered a classic album years from now. I'm not sure we should really expect quite that much, but I have faith Chinese Democracy will at least be in the conversation.

Edited by KBear
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Ohdistortedsmile1789

I never got into GNR just for Axl, they were a band that had great songs, and 5 different personalities. I admire Axl and he is one of my favorite rock singers, but I think the esteem he is held in on this forum is fairly overblown. I am waiting for "Chinese Democracy" like the rest of you, and atleast until the album comes out, I'm not aligning myself with any faction. But if "Chinese Democracy" comes out and is worth the wait, it will not change the world, it will not be a huge sensation, it will satisfy us (hopefully) and Axl will be redeemed. To think that CD will have videos on MTV 24/7 is just ridiculous, most see him as a drug-addled relic of the 80's (not me). Unfortunately for Axl "Where's Slash?" will haunt him for the rest of his days, and to say that he will never escape his past success is only a compliment to Guns N' Roses. In the public eye, Guns N' Roses were a great band and Axl is "That dude from the 80's, boy they had funny hair!".

I agree the esteem Axl is held in on this forum gets overblown. A lot of fans are blindly loyal to him.

But I also think you underestimate the public's view of Axl. Axl, and GN'R, are seen as more than "dudes from the 80's with funny hair." We aren't talking about Poison here. GN'R is a well-respected band, Axl a well-respected musician. Think Rolling Stone would've given the story the attention it got if it was a Bret Michaels sighting? Of course not.

Obviously none of us can predict the future and we don't know how big this album will end up being. I'm pretty confident in saying that it'll be a pretty big hit and critically acclaimed, at the very least. Do we really care if it sells more than American Idiot? I don't think that should be the focus here and I don't think that's what Axl is most concerned with. The goal was always to make good music, not generate big sales. Leave that to the Hilarys and Ashleys of the world, and all the shitty wannabe rock bands out there today.

Axl doesn't cement his place in music history with just another big selling rock album. He does it if Chinese Democracy is so good that it's considered a classic album years from now. I'm not sure we should really expect quite that much, but I have faith Chinese Democracy will at least be in the conversation.

Mass popularity relies on everyone, not just Rolling Stone and musicians who respect GN'R. To most people, GN'R are the same thing as Poison. I don't care if it sells remarkably either, I'm just pointing out that it's unrealistic (in my opinion) to think that it will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about Richard?? i think that he is better than Izzy and he has proven how popular he is on this forum already, almost everybody i've seen post about him thinks he's great.

When Richard writes a bunch of GN'R songs that are as good as what Izzy wrote then we can talk about how he is the better of the two. Until then, he's not.

great post, izzy was guns n roses, they only did mediocre cover songs after he left

It's not like they did anything after he left bar touring...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Ohdistortedsmile1789
but why is it unrealistic??

did anyone honestly think AFD would seell that great! nothing is impossible

;)

It's unrealistic because many see Axl and the music that made him famous as a mockery. Also, at this point it's unlikely that CD will be in step with the times and register with masses of young consumers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Ohdistortedsmile1789
this is just your own dumbass conclusion....Chi D is one of the most highley anticipated rock albums of all time. EVERYONE will be curious to hear it, GNR fans and otherwise. It will be huge. Period.

So what if this is my own "dumbass conclusion"? It's my rightful opinion. What is "EVERYONE"'s reason for wanting to hear it? Tell me. Do you honestly think senior citizens and teenie-boppers alike will purchase Chinese Democracy? How about you substitute your irrational defense of Axl with a little reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never got into GNR just for Axl, they were a band that had great songs, and 5 different personalities. I admire Axl and he is one of my favorite rock singers, but I think the esteem he is held in on this forum is fairly overblown. I am waiting for "Chinese Democracy" like the rest of you, and atleast until the album comes out, I'm not aligning myself with any faction. But if "Chinese Democracy" comes out and is worth the wait, it will not change the world, it will not be a huge sensation, it will satisfy us (hopefully) and Axl will be redeemed. To think that CD will have videos on MTV 24/7 is just ridiculous, most see him as a drug-addled relic of the 80's (not me). Unfortunately for Axl "Where's Slash?" will haunt him for the rest of his days, and to say that he will never escape his past success is only a compliment to Guns N' Roses. In the public eye, Guns N' Roses were a great band and Axl is "That dude from the 80's, boy they had funny hair!".

I agree the esteem Axl is held in on this forum gets overblown. A lot of fans are blindly loyal to him.

But I also think you underestimate the public's view of Axl. Axl, and GN'R, are seen as more than "dudes from the 80's with funny hair." We aren't talking about Poison here. GN'R is a well-respected band, Axl a well-respected musician. Think Rolling Stone would've given the story the attention it got if it was a Bret Michaels sighting? Of course not.

Obviously none of us can predict the future and we don't know how big this album will end up being. I'm pretty confident in saying that it'll be a pretty big hit and critically acclaimed, at the very least. Do we really care if it sells more than American Idiot? I don't think that should be the focus here and I don't think that's what Axl is most concerned with. The goal was always to make good music, not generate big sales. Leave that to the Hilarys and Ashleys of the world, and all the shitty wannabe rock bands out there today.

Axl doesn't cement his place in music history with just another big selling rock album. He does it if Chinese Democracy is so good that it's considered a classic album years from now. I'm not sure we should really expect quite that much, but I have faith Chinese Democracy will at least be in the conversation.

Mass popularity relies on everyone, not just Rolling Stone and musicians who respect GN'R. To most people, GN'R are the same thing as Poison. I don't care if it sells remarkably either, I'm just pointing out that it's unrealistic (in my opinion) to think that it will.

What I think you are missing is that the reason Rolling Stone made it such a big headline is because Axl and GN'R are not considered the same thing as Poison. Those who do think that are idiots who obviously aren't that interested in music, ie. the typical modern day mainstream rock fan who doesn't have a clue what good music actually is. We shouldn't care what they think. They are wrong. GN'R and Poison are on two completely different levels, it really cannot be disputed. Anyone who knows even the slightest bit about the two bands knows this, so I don't know how you can argue that "most people" see the bands the same. How much did Poison's Greatest Hits sell vs. GN'R's Greatest Hits?

I'm not intending to bash Poison here, they are just a convenient comparison. Bands like them have their place and I listen to them from time to time when I'm in the mood for that sort of music.

Sales of Chi Dem will depend upon a lot of things, the two most important of which are the singles and promotion. It should have both in spades. Nobody knows how receptive to either the music audience will be. I think that's the wild card, but the GN'R name will ensure at least good sales. I don't think we can predict with any accuracy how big this album will get. I just know it'll be given every opportunity it needs to get there so I don't think we can rule anything out completely.

Edited by KBear
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Ohdistortedsmile1789

I never got into GNR just for Axl, they were a band that had great songs, and 5 different personalities. I admire Axl and he is one of my favorite rock singers, but I think the esteem he is held in on this forum is fairly overblown. I am waiting for "Chinese Democracy" like the rest of you, and atleast until the album comes out, I'm not aligning myself with any faction. But if "Chinese Democracy" comes out and is worth the wait, it will not change the world, it will not be a huge sensation, it will satisfy us (hopefully) and Axl will be redeemed. To think that CD will have videos on MTV 24/7 is just ridiculous, most see him as a drug-addled relic of the 80's (not me). Unfortunately for Axl "Where's Slash?" will haunt him for the rest of his days, and to say that he will never escape his past success is only a compliment to Guns N' Roses. In the public eye, Guns N' Roses were a great band and Axl is "That dude from the 80's, boy they had funny hair!".

I agree the esteem Axl is held in on this forum gets overblown. A lot of fans are blindly loyal to him.

But I also think you underestimate the public's view of Axl. Axl, and GN'R, are seen as more than "dudes from the 80's with funny hair." We aren't talking about Poison here. GN'R is a well-respected band, Axl a well-respected musician. Think Rolling Stone would've given the story the attention it got if it was a Bret Michaels sighting? Of course not.

Obviously none of us can predict the future and we don't know how big this album will end up being. I'm pretty confident in saying that it'll be a pretty big hit and critically acclaimed, at the very least. Do we really care if it sells more than American Idiot? I don't think that should be the focus here and I don't think that's what Axl is most concerned with. The goal was always to make good music, not generate big sales. Leave that to the Hilarys and Ashleys of the world, and all the shitty wannabe rock bands out there today.

Axl doesn't cement his place in music history with just another big selling rock album. He does it if Chinese Democracy is so good that it's considered a classic album years from now. I'm not sure we should really expect quite that much, but I have faith Chinese Democracy will at least be in the conversation.

Mass popularity relies on everyone, not just Rolling Stone and musicians who respect GN'R. To most people, GN'R are the same thing as Poison. I don't care if it sells remarkably either, I'm just pointing out that it's unrealistic (in my opinion) to think that it will.

What I think you are missing is that the reason Rolling Stone made it such a big headline is because Axl and GN'R are not considered the same thing as Poison. Those who do think that are idiots who obviously aren't that interested in music, ie. the typical modern day mainstream rock fan who doesn't have a clue what good music actually is. We shouldn't care what they think. They are wrong. GN'R and Poison are on two completely different levels, it really cannot be disputed. Anyone who knows even the slightest bit about the two bands knows this, so I don't know how you can argue that "most people" see the bands the same. How much did Poison's Greatest Hits sell vs. GN'R's Greatest Hits?

I'm not intending to bash Poison here, they are just a convenient comparison. Bands like them have their place and I listen to them from time to time when I'm in the mood for that sort of music.

Sales of Chi Dem will depend upon a lot of things, the two most important of which are the singles and promotion. It should have both in spades. Nobody knows how receptive to either the music audience will be. I think that's the wild card, but the GN'R name will ensure at least good sales. I don't think we can predict with any accuracy how big this album will get. I just know it'll be given every opportunity it needs to get there so I don't think we can rule anything out completely.

You are missing the point, for Chinese Democracy to be massively popular, the stupid people who think Poison are the same thing will need to buy it. "Those who do think that are idiots who obviously aren't that interested in music, ie. the typical modern day mainstream rock fan who doesn't have a clue what good music actually is." You've just described the typical music buyer, the same music buyer who will determine whether CD is massively popular.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rolling Stone did a short piece about Axl being seen at a party and he answered a few questions. If you check the website today, their top story is on Courtney Love completeing her stint in rehab. The article is MUCH longer than Axl's. RS didn't fall all over themselves over an Axl citing, we did.

As far as the possiblity of not giving Bret Michaels as much attention, the guy hasn't been in hiding for years. I see him all over VH1. He also hasn't spent 13+million dollars of his record label's money making an album for over a decade. There's lots of reasons why Axl may get more attention, but it's not always because of positive circumstances.

As for the album selling well, we don't know. We can only hope, and obviously we'll all do our part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never got into GNR just for Axl, they were a band that had great songs, and 5 different personalities. I admire Axl and he is one of my favorite rock singers, but I think the esteem he is held in on this forum is fairly overblown. I am waiting for "Chinese Democracy" like the rest of you, and atleast until the album comes out, I'm not aligning myself with any faction. But if "Chinese Democracy" comes out and is worth the wait, it will not change the world, it will not be a huge sensation, it will satisfy us (hopefully) and Axl will be redeemed. To think that CD will have videos on MTV 24/7 is just ridiculous, most see him as a drug-addled relic of the 80's (not me). Unfortunately for Axl "Where's Slash?" will haunt him for the rest of his days, and to say that he will never escape his past success is only a compliment to Guns N' Roses. In the public eye, Guns N' Roses were a great band and Axl is "That dude from the 80's, boy they had funny hair!".

I agree the esteem Axl is held in on this forum gets overblown. A lot of fans are blindly loyal to him.

But I also think you underestimate the public's view of Axl. Axl, and GN'R, are seen as more than "dudes from the 80's with funny hair." We aren't talking about Poison here. GN'R is a well-respected band, Axl a well-respected musician. Think Rolling Stone would've given the story the attention it got if it was a Bret Michaels sighting? Of course not.

Obviously none of us can predict the future and we don't know how big this album will end up being. I'm pretty confident in saying that it'll be a pretty big hit and critically acclaimed, at the very least. Do we really care if it sells more than American Idiot? I don't think that should be the focus here and I don't think that's what Axl is most concerned with. The goal was always to make good music, not generate big sales. Leave that to the Hilarys and Ashleys of the world, and all the shitty wannabe rock bands out there today.

Axl doesn't cement his place in music history with just another big selling rock album. He does it if Chinese Democracy is so good that it's considered a classic album years from now. I'm not sure we should really expect quite that much, but I have faith Chinese Democracy will at least be in the conversation.

Mass popularity relies on everyone, not just Rolling Stone and musicians who respect GN'R. To most people, GN'R are the same thing as Poison. I don't care if it sells remarkably either, I'm just pointing out that it's unrealistic (in my opinion) to think that it will.

What I think you are missing is that the reason Rolling Stone made it such a big headline is because Axl and GN'R are not considered the same thing as Poison. Those who do think that are idiots who obviously aren't that interested in music, ie. the typical modern day mainstream rock fan who doesn't have a clue what good music actually is. We shouldn't care what they think. They are wrong. GN'R and Poison are on two completely different levels, it really cannot be disputed. Anyone who knows even the slightest bit about the two bands knows this, so I don't know how you can argue that "most people" see the bands the same. How much did Poison's Greatest Hits sell vs. GN'R's Greatest Hits?

I'm not intending to bash Poison here, they are just a convenient comparison. Bands like them have their place and I listen to them from time to time when I'm in the mood for that sort of music.

Sales of Chi Dem will depend upon a lot of things, the two most important of which are the singles and promotion. It should have both in spades. Nobody knows how receptive to either the music audience will be. I think that's the wild card, but the GN'R name will ensure at least good sales. I don't think we can predict with any accuracy how big this album will get. I just know it'll be given every opportunity it needs to get there so I don't think we can rule anything out completely.

You are missing the point, for Chinese Democracy to be massively popular, the stupid people who think Poison are the same thing will need to buy it. "Those who do think that are idiots who obviously aren't that interested in music, ie. the typical modern day mainstream rock fan who doesn't have a clue what good music actually is." You've just described the typical music buyer, the same music buyer who will determine whether CD is massively popular.

There are plenty of people who don't fall into that category. Nevertheless, a lot of the typical modern day rock fans who do will end up actually buying Chi Dem anyways, if only because of the singles and promotion. Some of these people probably even know GN'R is better than Poison.

In fact, where your argument falls apart for me is the statement that most people think GN'R equals Poison. I bet if you ask 10 random people on the street, 9 will pick GN'R. 80's hair and glam metal is considered a joke by many, but some bands transcended that label, and GN'R was one of them. In reality, GN'R doesn't even really belong under that label, but they are known as part of that scene. One of the Behind the Music episodes (probably 1987) talked about GN'R, and described them as the band that brought the edge back to hard rock, which was dominated at the time by the pop driven hair metal bands. GN'R differentiated themselves, VH1 recognizes it, I'm sure most fans do as well.

Chinese Democracy won't be the biggest album of all-time, but it'll be big enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Ohdistortedsmile1789

I never got into GNR just for Axl, they were a band that had great songs, and 5 different personalities. I admire Axl and he is one of my favorite rock singers, but I think the esteem he is held in on this forum is fairly overblown. I am waiting for "Chinese Democracy" like the rest of you, and atleast until the album comes out, I'm not aligning myself with any faction. But if "Chinese Democracy" comes out and is worth the wait, it will not change the world, it will not be a huge sensation, it will satisfy us (hopefully) and Axl will be redeemed. To think that CD will have videos on MTV 24/7 is just ridiculous, most see him as a drug-addled relic of the 80's (not me). Unfortunately for Axl "Where's Slash?" will haunt him for the rest of his days, and to say that he will never escape his past success is only a compliment to Guns N' Roses. In the public eye, Guns N' Roses were a great band and Axl is "That dude from the 80's, boy they had funny hair!".

I agree the esteem Axl is held in on this forum gets overblown. A lot of fans are blindly loyal to him.

But I also think you underestimate the public's view of Axl. Axl, and GN'R, are seen as more than "dudes from the 80's with funny hair." We aren't talking about Poison here. GN'R is a well-respected band, Axl a well-respected musician. Think Rolling Stone would've given the story the attention it got if it was a Bret Michaels sighting? Of course not.

Obviously none of us can predict the future and we don't know how big this album will end up being. I'm pretty confident in saying that it'll be a pretty big hit and critically acclaimed, at the very least. Do we really care if it sells more than American Idiot? I don't think that should be the focus here and I don't think that's what Axl is most concerned with. The goal was always to make good music, not generate big sales. Leave that to the Hilarys and Ashleys of the world, and all the shitty wannabe rock bands out there today.

Axl doesn't cement his place in music history with just another big selling rock album. He does it if Chinese Democracy is so good that it's considered a classic album years from now. I'm not sure we should really expect quite that much, but I have faith Chinese Democracy will at least be in the conversation.

Mass popularity relies on everyone, not just Rolling Stone and musicians who respect GN'R. To most people, GN'R are the same thing as Poison. I don't care if it sells remarkably either, I'm just pointing out that it's unrealistic (in my opinion) to think that it will.

What I think you are missing is that the reason Rolling Stone made it such a big headline is because Axl and GN'R are not considered the same thing as Poison. Those who do think that are idiots who obviously aren't that interested in music, ie. the typical modern day mainstream rock fan who doesn't have a clue what good music actually is. We shouldn't care what they think. They are wrong. GN'R and Poison are on two completely different levels, it really cannot be disputed. Anyone who knows even the slightest bit about the two bands knows this, so I don't know how you can argue that "most people" see the bands the same. How much did Poison's Greatest Hits sell vs. GN'R's Greatest Hits?

I'm not intending to bash Poison here, they are just a convenient comparison. Bands like them have their place and I listen to them from time to time when I'm in the mood for that sort of music.

Sales of Chi Dem will depend upon a lot of things, the two most important of which are the singles and promotion. It should have both in spades. Nobody knows how receptive to either the music audience will be. I think that's the wild card, but the GN'R name will ensure at least good sales. I don't think we can predict with any accuracy how big this album will get. I just know it'll be given every opportunity it needs to get there so I don't think we can rule anything out completely.

You are missing the point, for Chinese Democracy to be massively popular, the stupid people who think Poison are the same thing will need to buy it. "Those who do think that are idiots who obviously aren't that interested in music, ie. the typical modern day mainstream rock fan who doesn't have a clue what good music actually is." You've just described the typical music buyer, the same music buyer who will determine whether CD is massively popular.

There are plenty of people who don't fall into that category. Nevertheless, a lot of the typical modern day rock fans who do will end up actually buying Chi Dem anyways, if only because of the singles and promotion. Some of these people probably even know GN'R is better than Poison.

In fact, where your argument falls apart for me is the statement that most people think GN'R equals Poison. I bet if you ask 10 random people on the street, 9 will pick GN'R. 80's hair and glam metal is considered a joke by many, but some bands transcended that label, and GN'R was one of them. In reality, GN'R doesn't even really belong under that label, but they are known as part of that scene. One of the Behind the Music episodes (probably 1987) talked about GN'R, and described them as the band that brought the edge back to hard rock, which was dominated at the time by the pop driven hair metal bands. GN'R differentiated themselves, VH1 recognizes it, I'm sure most fans do as well.

Chinese Democracy won't be the biggest album of all-time, but it'll be big enough.

You are thinking like a GN'R fan, which is entirely the wrong way. Most people don't understand the differences between Guns and other 80's rock bands. Some of the modern rock fans will buy it? Sure, but it would need support from all kinds of places to reach a mass audience, and I just don't see it happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rolling Stone did a short piece about Axl being seen at a party and he answered a few questions. If you check the website today, their top story is on Courtney Love completeing her stint in rehab. The article is MUCH longer than Axl's. RS didn't fall all over themselves over an Axl citing, we did.

As far as the possiblity of not giving Bret Michaels as much attention, the guy hasn't been in hiding for years. I see him all over VH1. He also hasn't spent 13+million dollars of his record label's money making an album for over a decade. There's lots of reasons why Axl may get more attention, but it's not always because of positive circumstances.

As for the album selling well, we don't know. We can only hope, and obviously we'll all do our part.

The Rolling Stone piece was front and center though, in huge print on top of a red background. I'm not sure how they could've done more, it was probably a five minute interview that Axl gave, and a vague one at that. Obviously they wouldn't devote an entire issue to that story, nor would they keep the story on the front page for months.

Fair point about the differences between Michaels and Rose. The reasons Axl might get more attention may not always be positive, but when it comes to music and talent we all know, and I maintain so does the general public and certainly Rolling Stone, that Axl gets the nod. And yes, Axl spent $13 million, but then again no label is gonna hand Poison that kind of coin, for the exact reasons I am trying to argue.

Edited by KBear
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never got into GNR just for Axl, they were a band that had great songs, and 5 different personalities. I admire Axl and he is one of my favorite rock singers, but I think the esteem he is held in on this forum is fairly overblown. I am waiting for "Chinese Democracy" like the rest of you, and atleast until the album comes out, I'm not aligning myself with any faction. But if "Chinese Democracy" comes out and is worth the wait, it will not change the world, it will not be a huge sensation, it will satisfy us (hopefully) and Axl will be redeemed. To think that CD will have videos on MTV 24/7 is just ridiculous, most see him as a drug-addled relic of the 80's (not me). Unfortunately for Axl "Where's Slash?" will haunt him for the rest of his days, and to say that he will never escape his past success is only a compliment to Guns N' Roses. In the public eye, Guns N' Roses were a great band and Axl is "That dude from the 80's, boy they had funny hair!".

I agree the esteem Axl is held in on this forum gets overblown. A lot of fans are blindly loyal to him.

But I also think you underestimate the public's view of Axl. Axl, and GN'R, are seen as more than "dudes from the 80's with funny hair." We aren't talking about Poison here. GN'R is a well-respected band, Axl a well-respected musician. Think Rolling Stone would've given the story the attention it got if it was a Bret Michaels sighting? Of course not.

Obviously none of us can predict the future and we don't know how big this album will end up being. I'm pretty confident in saying that it'll be a pretty big hit and critically acclaimed, at the very least. Do we really care if it sells more than American Idiot? I don't think that should be the focus here and I don't think that's what Axl is most concerned with. The goal was always to make good music, not generate big sales. Leave that to the Hilarys and Ashleys of the world, and all the shitty wannabe rock bands out there today.

Axl doesn't cement his place in music history with just another big selling rock album. He does it if Chinese Democracy is so good that it's considered a classic album years from now. I'm not sure we should really expect quite that much, but I have faith Chinese Democracy will at least be in the conversation.

Mass popularity relies on everyone, not just Rolling Stone and musicians who respect GN'R. To most people, GN'R are the same thing as Poison. I don't care if it sells remarkably either, I'm just pointing out that it's unrealistic (in my opinion) to think that it will.

What I think you are missing is that the reason Rolling Stone made it such a big headline is because Axl and GN'R are not considered the same thing as Poison. Those who do think that are idiots who obviously aren't that interested in music, ie. the typical modern day mainstream rock fan who doesn't have a clue what good music actually is. We shouldn't care what they think. They are wrong. GN'R and Poison are on two completely different levels, it really cannot be disputed. Anyone who knows even the slightest bit about the two bands knows this, so I don't know how you can argue that "most people" see the bands the same. How much did Poison's Greatest Hits sell vs. GN'R's Greatest Hits?

I'm not intending to bash Poison here, they are just a convenient comparison. Bands like them have their place and I listen to them from time to time when I'm in the mood for that sort of music.

Sales of Chi Dem will depend upon a lot of things, the two most important of which are the singles and promotion. It should have both in spades. Nobody knows how receptive to either the music audience will be. I think that's the wild card, but the GN'R name will ensure at least good sales. I don't think we can predict with any accuracy how big this album will get. I just know it'll be given every opportunity it needs to get there so I don't think we can rule anything out completely.

You are missing the point, for Chinese Democracy to be massively popular, the stupid people who think Poison are the same thing will need to buy it. "Those who do think that are idiots who obviously aren't that interested in music, ie. the typical modern day mainstream rock fan who doesn't have a clue what good music actually is." You've just described the typical music buyer, the same music buyer who will determine whether CD is massively popular.

There are plenty of people who don't fall into that category. Nevertheless, a lot of the typical modern day rock fans who do will end up actually buying Chi Dem anyways, if only because of the singles and promotion. Some of these people probably even know GN'R is better than Poison.

In fact, where your argument falls apart for me is the statement that most people think GN'R equals Poison. I bet if you ask 10 random people on the street, 9 will pick GN'R. 80's hair and glam metal is considered a joke by many, but some bands transcended that label, and GN'R was one of them. In reality, GN'R doesn't even really belong under that label, but they are known as part of that scene. One of the Behind the Music episodes (probably 1987) talked about GN'R, and described them as the band that brought the edge back to hard rock, which was dominated at the time by the pop driven hair metal bands. GN'R differentiated themselves, VH1 recognizes it, I'm sure most fans do as well.

Chinese Democracy won't be the biggest album of all-time, but it'll be big enough.

You are thinking like a GN'R fan, which is entirely the wrong way. Most people don't understand the differences between Guns and other 80's rock bands. Some of the modern rock fans will buy it? Sure, but it would need support from all kinds of places to reach a mass audience, and I just don't see it happening.

I can't really argue my point any more than I already have. I don't know what'll happen - you might end up being correct. I'll cut and paste my prediction from above as to the absolute minimum I see this album doing, and that is:

I'm pretty confident in saying that it'll be a pretty big hit and critically acclaimed, at the very least.

I don't see how that is being overly optimistic. I think my best-case scenario is more optimistic than yours is, but when you assume the promotion will be there, and you assume the singles will be there, and the album quality as a whole, well I find it pretty hard to be too negative. I'm not arguing the band will be as big as they used to be, but U2 kinda big is very possible, even likely I would say.

Edited by KBear
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The album will have moderate success due to the curiosity of some fans..

However, when the general public realizes that this band isn't the Guns N' Roses they remember,.. expect a backlash of sorts.

You need to realize that beyond these little Guns N' Roses communities, no one respects Rose's decision to continue using the name.

Hell,.. in 2002, Rolling Stone magazine named them the most "Freaky-Deaky Looking Band of the year"..

Does that sound like the same Guns N' Roses that was held in such high regard?

I know it's hard for some of you to understand this because you are young and idolize Rose, but, to the millions who experienced the real band.. he is no substitute for the original Guns N' Roses.

Axl, Slash, Duff and Izzy were all catalysts to the success of the original band. Each played an important role in the songwriting and musical direction of Guns N' Roses.

This album will do more to hurt Axl's ego since he's labelled it a 'Gn'r' effort.. without actually having 'Gn'r'.

-Kickingthehabit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The album will have moderate success due to the curiosity of some fans..

However, when the general public realizes that this band isn't the Guns N' Roses they remember,.. expect a backlash of sorts.

You need to realize that beyond these little Guns N' Roses communities, no one respects Rose's decision to continue using the name.

Hell,.. in 2002, Rolling Stone magazine named them the most "Freaky-Deaky Looking Band of the year"..

Does that sound like the same Guns N' Roses that was held in such high regard?

I know it's hard for some of you to understand this because you are young and idolize Rose, but, to the millions who experienced the real band.. he is no substitute for the original Guns N' Roses.

Axl, Slash, Duff and Izzy were all catalysts to the success of the original band. Each played an important role in the songwriting and musical direction of Guns N' Roses.

This album will do more to hurt Axl's ego since he's labelled it a 'Gn'r' effort.. without actually having 'Gn'r'.

-Kickingthehabit

Honestly I think most people are over this, at least they should be by now. Good God, it's only been 7 years now since the last of the old band left. I'd rather have the old guys back just as much as you but fans have to accept the way things are, at least for now.

If some fans out there still think GN'R is Axl, Slash, et al...after fifteen years of no new music, after the VMA performance which was seen by millions, after the 2002 tour, after Velvet Revolver...I mean hey, I know most aren't hardcores like us, but if you think this is still GN'R circa 1991 you must be living under a pretty fuckin' heavy rock. Anyone I've talked to that follows rock music in the slightest may not know a lot about Guns, but they know it's not the same group of guys.

Chinese Democracy's undoing will not be the masses realizing it ain't the GN'R they remember, it'll either be because the album isn't very good (not likely), or because the mass market isn't receptive to Axl's kind of music (quite possible, although there'll be enough who are to ensure it isn't a complete flop - at least a moderate level of success, as you say).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that many people Still do not know who is in the line up now. I know many who thought it was Slash wearing a bucket on his head at the VMA's, and the 20 or so dates on an aborted tour did little to solidify their popularity. Yes this "new" band in one form or another have been around for several years, the problem is they don't ACT like a band. There are no pictures, no posters, no in-depth interviews, no videos and most of all no music/no albums to indicate this band even exists.

Edited by Patience 4 Axl
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that many people Still do not know who is in the line up now. I know many who thought it was Slash wearing a bucket on his head at the VMA's...

But that was four years ago. At that time sure, I'm sure most people thought Axl and Slash were still together. But how can this still be the case, after the VMAs, tour, and especially VR? Behind the Music has been aired about a zillion times too, and details the fact the band broke up. These are all things that reach the mainstream music fan.

I'm sure most fans don't know who's actually in the band today, but the ones who think it's the same band as it was back in the day have got to be a small minority by now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...