Jump to content

We're really too hard on Axl/GN'R here.....


STFU Miser
 Share

Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, EstrangedTWAT said:

Goddamn it....stop reminding me that Slash's weird lumpy biceps are full of savory delicious brown gravy.   I'm gonna try to get onstage next time and poke his bicep with a fork and let it drip all over some instant mashed potatoes.   Then I'll have to fight Axl for the mashed potatoes.  That will be harder than getting onstage in the first place.

Of all the AFD guys, Slash has aged in the most interesting way. I would compare him to a blown up surgical glove that is right on the edge of popping. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Wilco said:

 

I'd say long before. 2-3 hour waits for shows, cancelled at the last minute shows, and riots for ending shows prematurely during the UYI tour, along with rants up to 5-10 minutes in length between songs I have to think didn't do him, or the band any favors.

There was a decent bank of goodwill everywhere except the States 06-10 but fatty shit all the beds after that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

□ [Heretodaygonetohell.com:  Jarmo]

I meant, he's not gonna do something only to please others.  The thing people don't seem to realize is that he's not motivated by scoring points by just pleasing others.

 

That’s self-absorption.  He won’t do anything for anybody else, you admit it.

 

I don't think he will release music “just to give the fans something”.  If he's not ready to release it, he won't.  Even if it upsets you and millions of fans.  Others might not do the same, but obviously Axl has never been motivated by this.

 

He wouldn’t have a mansion without his fans.  He wouldn’t be beating up supermodels without the fans or have a record company paying many millions of dollars to pretend he was recording music.  He wouldn’t even have people defending how he won’t do anything for the fans without the fans, but he’ll take money from them.  He’s the only thing that matters.

 

The other side of that coin is that he's not releasing anything until it's ready to, and until it's up to his standards. I'm sure some fans would prefer quantity over quality. But that's not how GN'R is....

 

Some fans want Guns’n’Roses music.  That’s not how G’n’R is.

 

Basically, what you want is compromise and doing what others want. Instead of doing what you want, when you want it and how you want it.

 

Sensible people recognize that others have value and the importance of taking seriously what others want.  Child rapists do what they want when and how they want.  So what does Axl do to fill time since he’s not making music since he doesn’t get it exactly the way he wants?  Or is there kept secret for a reason?

 

Has Axl ever come across as that person to you?

 

But school starts much too early and this hotel wasn’t free, so party until your connection calls, honey, I’ll return the key.

 

There's a difference between doing things and keeping your integrity, and not wanting to do things at all.

 

There’s a difference between doing something and doing nothing which has nothing to do with integrity.  “Integrity” would be wanting new music to come out hell or high water and doing what it takes to make it happen.  No, Axl has never come across as that kind of person.  Even tyrants have to accept what others want or their armed defenders will turn against them.  They didn’t get where they were by thinking no one else mattered.

 

[other poster]

Its the other way around. I think Axl and GnR wants to give the fans the best GnR can offer.

That's basically the essence of what I think as well.

 

Even the best must be meaningless since they can go so many decades without any.  Try doing that with food, see how long you last.

 

Some hate this, but I think the reality is that they don't want to release things just for the sake of releasing something.

 

Some people like cupcakes better.  I for one care less for them.

 

Maybe someday he’ll rule the world and can force everybody to buy his music and praise it.  Nothing less is acceptable than guaranteed worldwide success with no dissidence.

 

It's a luxury to have to be able to decide when it's ready, instead of being told it is. Once again, some people hate that as well.

 

Some people require everyone to admire their luxury instead of actually doing anything with it.  What would the reaction be if the plumbers in Axl’s mansion said “we’ll repair the toilets when we’re damn good and ready and there’s nothing you can do about it”?

 

Slash releasing music under his own name gets compared to GN'R, but it's not GN'R.

 

It just sounds like G’n’R and people like hearing it.  There’s room for multiple viewpoints, people can think one album is better or worse than another because there are multiple creative works to compare.  That’s not G’n’R.

 

It's like any solo project, the people doing them have less “pressure” and maybe more freedoms that in their bands. They don't necessarily have to live up to people's expectations on what it should sound like.

 

How are you measuring “pressure”?  How are you measuring “freedoms”?  How did you suddenly get to defining every solo project in the history of the world this way, no exceptions permitted?  I can think of solo albums where the musician had to compete with all the pressure of competing with the band whose latest album they had only showed up a few hours a week to make, how did we suddenly get permitted to think of other bands?

 

Chinese Democracy was a GN'R album, but some thought it wasn't because it didn't fit their idea of what a GN'R album should be.

 

It was made by the only band-member who had made any decisions for the previous fifteen years.  And he had employees come and go too.  The employees can make music elsewhere but that isn’t Guns’n’Roses.

 

It can be seen by the concerts of November 7, December 6, 2002 and February 12, 1988 in Phoenix.  Axl didn’t show up to any of those, but for one date, band-members ignored him and went on stage to play music anyway.  The other two had only employees, they got paid whether or not Axl did anything.

 

Talk -> Not good, they just talk and don't release anything.

No talk -> Not good, there's no talk so there can't be any new music coming.

 

Breathing -> Not good, Guns’n’Roses is too busy doing that to put out music.  They can’t do both at the same time like every other band.  They’re so totally different.

Not breathing -> Not good because they can’t release music if they’re not breathing.

Putting out music -> Not good because *SOME* people aren’t remotely interested in listening to it.

 

Some people like cupcakes exclusively, while myself, I say there is not nor ought there be nothing so exalted on the face of God's grey Earth as that prince of foods... the muffin!

 

I can think of one ongoing thing that could've forced plans to be changed..... A thing that made the whole entertainment industry basically stop.

Not saying that's a reason, because people know better than me. I'm just making excuses after all.....

And the fact that 2020 was a year most of us just want to forget, doesn't matter.... After all, there is no reason why the album should've have been out before it was done. Right? Cheesy.

 

Very cheesy.  You’re pretending that 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011, 2010, 2009, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1998, 1997, 1996, 1995 and 1994 never happened, all so you can say that 2020 prevented any progress.  G’n’R finally got around to wanting to do something but 2020!!!  It’s totally not their fault!!!!

 

How is it blind faith when my opinion is based on facts and history....

 

Facts and history show that only hired employees of Guns’n’Roses can spend decades making music.  It takes blind faith to waste time and energy blaming 2020 for decades of non-productivity.  And we’re not allowed to compare this band to any other in history because…?  Music isn’t what this band does.

 

To the record company, it's all about selling the product. But to an artist, all that would be about presenting the end result of the creative work. Obviously, if you're proud of something you did, you'd want it to get noticed....

 

Blind faith again.  You have to do something to be proud of it and this band hasn’t been proud of anything it’s done for decades.  Axl doesn’t want us to hear it but he still wants our money.  Because ART!!!

 

□ [other poster]

Surely the record company would be interested in promoting the product also as it would boost revenue?

That's what you hope for.

But at the end of the day, they want to make a profit. Sometimes you need to spend money to make money.

 

At the end of the day, you’re dead and much less productive than when you were alive.  The record company spent many millions of dollars to make an album that didn’t remotely sell what actual Guns’n’Roses albums sold.  Fifteen million dollars was the official cost, I suspect it was more than that.  How much more would you need to spend if those fifteen million dollars came out of your pocket?  You’d need a lot of other bands to bring in enough money to cover that but they’re not special, you can do whatever you want with them.

 

It's a business after all. Who pays for promotion? Who should be compensated for what? Did the record company pay for the recording (studio time etc.) or not? If not, should whoever paid for it be reimbursed by the record company somehow? Should the band just hand over the masters and let the record company deal with it? Or is there a need for some kind of mutual promotional relationship?

 

The record company spent $15,000,000+ and got one album to pretended was made by an actual band and didn’t remotely make a profit.  That doesn’t pay for recording studios, producers, advertising, secretaries, painters, electricians and more, but you think they should all be grateful to get one solo album by someone who pretends to be a functioning band.

 

Just some of the things that you can come up with without being that versed in the music business.

 

Just a quick look at the other names on the record company’s roster shows that different decisions were based for what different artists wanted or needed.  But they all had something to work with, actual music by actual musicians who demand everything be done their way.

 

And whoever wants to start going around in circles again about this being an “excuse”, find a new hobby..... Question is asked, I provide answer(s). Good or bad, that's up to someone else. But at least it's a theoretical conversation topic.

I'm not saying there are issues. We don't know.

 

Never see you giving the slightest thought to people who actually release music, who actually want to hear music, companies who make it possible all the music being spent.

 

I'm just saying it doesn't take long to realize GN'R isn't the Foo Fighters. Remember how the last studio release was handled? Obviously it wasn't like with the Foo Fighters, AC/DC or any other band.

No where am I saying this is a reason for anything.  Just pointing out facts and answering a hypothetical question.

 

I have no idea which album by which band you’re talking about, you rarely get specific.  AC-DC’s new album was released like their previous album a couple years before.  These two albums got a lot less promotion than the one before that, Black Ice, which only took two months to record.  It came out a month before Chinese Democracy and sold a lot more copies.

 

Knowing how seriously Axl takes his art, it's safe to assume he expects the same from everyone involved.....

 

It doesn’t take being serious to do nothing, one doesn’t even need to breathe.  One of the two main AC-DC members stopped breathing a few years ago and they still release albums.  No, Axl will not be doing that but you won’t say there are any issues.

 

Two options. They don't plan on releasing anything in the next two weeks, or they are gonna release it without prior announcement (a surprise release)....

 

Third option, they want to release something but no one’s willing to do it for them and they’re just too lazy to do anything themselves.  Fourth option, they actively oppose releasing anything no matter how many people want to hear it.  Fifth option, they want to release something in the next two weeks and will start promoting it in one week.

 

It took two minutes to see more options than you’ve had in all these years, but you’re not saying there are issues.  No, you would never say that.

 

Explain this to me: GN'R is GN'R, any other band isn't. That's a fact, how is that an excuse?

 

Other bands make music.  Guns’n’Roses doesn’t.  That’s a fact.

 

What's so bad about that? Instead of whining about how he's not like Dave Grohl year in and year out?

No, because to me the artists don't need to do shit if they don't want to. Some take years to release albums, some release multiple new albums per year. It's all part of the game. We're all different. And the sooner you accept it rather than try to put everyone in the same mold, the better. Smiley

 

The point isn’t to change him, the point is to acknowledge the truth.  Axl doesn’t want to do anything, he doesn’t have to and no one will ever make him until he’s totally dead.

 

He’s the sole owner of the band and it’s been almost 25 years since he said they’d be releasing an album with at least 12 songs and at least three bonus tracks.  You have to count “Oh My God” just to reach that number of released songs since then and the album had zero bonus tracks.  20 years ago he said the album would have 18 songs with about 10 bonus tracks and then they’d release the second album and finish the third.  He also said the album cover was ready and sure has complained about the one that was actually released years later.

 

And there’s no explanation for any of this.  The band’s sole owner is only surrounded by people who share his lies.  Either you see nothing bad about it or you’ll keep your mouth shut about the truth.  Doing nothing is doing nothing.

 

I just keep seeing the “Other bands manage to release albums” line.... Which is true, but completely ignores the fact that we're talking about different people and different businesses.

 

They’re talking about musicians who release music with music companies.  Obviously that’s not Guns’n’Roses.  They sell socks which have the name of a 30-year old song a music band had written and released on an actual album.

 

That’s not art, that’s a cult.  Everybody is forced to change on behalf of the master who never changes.  You never caught Charles Manson giving in to a record company, no wonder Guns’n’Roses so eagerly promoted his music, back when the band had multiple co-owners.

 

Do you think there are differences between artists, in regards to how things should be done/what they expect from let's say the record company?

 

There are bands who leave record companies, filling a contract by turning in garbage the company refuses to release, there are bands and record companies who break in court.  Those are differences but G’n’R is still on the same contract with Geffen after all these decades.

 

Or do you think every artist is the same. They record something, hand it over and do whatever the record company tells them to do? In some cases, nothing, just release it and not promote it at all.Because promoting something costs money, and not all artists make money on selling records....

 

Promotion requires going out in public to try to get people to buy their new music.  Guns’n’Roses doesn’t do that.  The employees do that when they’re releasing music.

 

Seems like everyone's belittling the band for actually taking it seriously. Instead of just releasing it.

 

Taking it seriously requires actually doing something.  Covering thirty five year old songs doesn’t do that.  Spending fifteen million dollars of other peoples’ money to make a batch of sounds that people aren’t interested in hearing and you won’t even go out and try to convince people to buy it isn’t serious.  Only sycophants would believe it is.

 

Artists are different.  Lazy unproductive people are basically all the same.  You can tell by the lack of production.

 

The beauty of this all is that it's all hypothetical discussions.....

Some say: “There's no “excuse” why new music can't be out on _________ because Foo Fighters/AC/DC/Metallica/Sisters Of Mercy manages to release music.”.....

 

Who are these “some”?  You’re certainly not interested in any differing viewpoints, you spend time and energy to deny actual facts because they don’t make your superiors look good.

 

I'm saying, maybe there can be reas... excuses

I understand wanting to hear new music, we all do. But I don't necessarily understand why fans feel the need to almost hope for the worst for the band, just so they can get the new music. I mean, if the band doesn't think it's the right moment, then why not just respect their choice?  Huh

 

“The band” is not the eternal master.  He’s going to die whether or not he does anything.  People with actual lives know they have to move forward with what they have now and other people are relevant in the process.  But “the band” refuses to acknowledge the truth.

 

It's not necessarily about them making money. Maybe it's more about it getting proper promotion? Maybe it's about the record company working for the band, instead of the other way around? And like I sad earlier, it could be about who pays for what....

 

It’s not about making money but they charge a lot of money.  It’s about “proper promotion” which you’re never giving any definition of.  Does the band have to be involved for music to get “proper promotion”?  You sure don’t catch this band telling the world ‘hey everybody, here’s our new music, right here, can’t miss it, we’d like you to hear our new music, we have new music, it’s right here.’  Would that be “proper promotion”?

 

How much does the record company have to pay the band for the privilege of working for them?  I want you working for me, how much do you have to pay me, not counting the fifteen million dollars you’ve already paid?  Would that be “proper promotion” or “improper promotion”?  Would anyone in their right mind even call it “promotion”?

 

You know, remember back in 1991 when the band wanted to release 30 songs in one day? Do you think that was the record company's dream? I kinda doubt it...  But the band got their way. Are you unhappy about it?

 

The record company would have been fine releasing 30 songs in one day, bands had done that before.  In 1968, the Beatles released 30 songs in one day and those weren’t the only songs they released that year, or the next year or the year after that.  Or the previous year, previous two years, previous three years…  It’s not hard to find other bands who released 30 songs in one day.

 

Yeah, some bands have clearly stated they don't wanna release new music. Because the world has changed. But GN'R isn't one of those bands.

The band hasn't said a word about their plans regarding new music. Some take that as a bad sign....

 

Sure they have.  They said they’ll release the second part of the trilogy while on tour for the first one, then they’ll finish the third part shortly after they end the tour.  That’s more than a couple words.

 

They said they’ll release a video within a week, “soon is the word.”

 

They said they’ll be looking very seriously about what they’re going to do next after they’re done with a group of Las Vegas shows and had already finished the second part of the trilogy and a remix version of the album.

 

They also said that next album would have at least twelve songs and three original b-sides.  Just think, Saddam Hussein might have heard that and looked forward to the release.  He still had a decade to live, what could change?

 

The world has changed.  According to you, Axl Rose hasn’t.

 

Some people treat this nonsense seriously as an excuse to do nothing.  Some people know their luxury only came from the fans.  Some people don’t use emotions to analyze a situation but some others just say they’re full of hate.  Some people like bananas on pizza.

 

It’s delusion to pretend there’s any actual production when all you do is yammer about “some people.”  The result is doing nothing.  Once upon a time, there were five members of Guns’n’Roses.  Even when they didn’t all agree that any song was the BEST they had to offer, they finished the song, released it and still play for a paying audience today.

 

Can you actually name one other band who’s said the world has changed so they won’t make any more music?  For that matter, do you have any proof that Guns’n’Roses isn’t one of them?  The result is the same.  Nothing.

 

You could even suggests that *maybe* they’ve completely changed their minds about releasing anything and are just too lazy to tell the fans, it’s just easier to sing “It’s So Easy.”

 

□ [other poster]

The fact is, It looks like It's never the right time to put out something  rofl rofl If they have something, they should just put it out.  .

The right time is when there's a mutual understanding between the parts involved.

Not necessarily a certain date.

 

That’s delusional.  Dates are actually required for people who know that time passes.  It’s not a “mutual understanding” to expect everything you want and no-one else gets a say.

 

□ [other poster]

But how many legs of this tour is this now?  It's starting to rival the length of a KISS or Cher farewell tour.

This tour? You're aware that NITL ended in 2019, the two shows last year were not part of the same tour....

And the upcoming tours aren't called NITL either.

 

I notice you don’t mention anything that ever actually changes.  They played the same 7 Appetite songs, the same UYI 5 songs and “Patience” at their one 2020 concert that they’d played at the last reunion concert a few months earlier and the 2016 start of the tour after Slash and Duff were re-hired.  And the same songs at the 2014 end of the “Appetite For Democracy” tour, the same songs at that tour’s 2012 beginning, the same songs at the 2012 “Up Close and Personal” tour beginning and end and the 2012 ending of the “Chinese Democracy” tour.

 

Except for “Estranged,” they played all of those songs at the January 1, 2001 concert, the first one ever without Slash, Duff, Izzy, Steven or Matt.  What else has changed?  Some employees have come and gone, they stopped playing most Chinese Democracy songs or Bumblefoot solos?  Do they play “November Rain” on a bagpipe just to be different?  Remember, it’s not about giving the audience what they want.

 

Oh, they’re changing names on concert souvenirs they aren’t giving away for free, that’s a huge change and totally unlike any other band!!!  Because ART!!!

 

Slash and Duff working on new material outside of GN'R is one thing, and GN'R is something else. I don't believe their solo work give them the same "feeling" (for lack of a better word) than GN'R does. They are two different entities.

 

It’s been thirty years since they made any music with Guns’n’Roses, how would they even remember what that was like?  One entity makes music, the other knows Slash and Duff can be replaced and likes selling socks and bongs which aren’t cheap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ChrisW said:

□ [Heretodaygonetohell.com:  Jarmo]

I meant, he's not gonna do something only to please others.  The thing people don't seem to realize is that he's not motivated by scoring points by just pleasing others.

 

That’s self-absorption.  He won’t do anything for anybody else, you admit it.

 

I don't think he will release music “just to give the fans something”.  If he's not ready to release it, he won't.  Even if it upsets you and millions of fans.  Others might not do the same, but obviously Axl has never been motivated by this.

 

He wouldn’t have a mansion without his fans.  He wouldn’t be beating up supermodels without the fans or have a record company paying many millions of dollars to pretend he was recording music.  He wouldn’t even have people defending how he won’t do anything for the fans without the fans, but he’ll take money from them.  He’s the only thing that matters.

 

The other side of that coin is that he's not releasing anything until it's ready to, and until it's up to his standards. I'm sure some fans would prefer quantity over quality. But that's not how GN'R is....

 

Some fans want Guns’n’Roses music.  That’s not how G’n’R is.

 

Basically, what you want is compromise and doing what others want. Instead of doing what you want, when you want it and how you want it.

 

Sensible people recognize that others have value and the importance of taking seriously what others want.  Child rapists do what they want when and how they want.  So what does Axl do to fill time since he’s not making music since he doesn’t get it exactly the way he wants?  Or is there kept secret for a reason?

 

Has Axl ever come across as that person to you?

 

But school starts much too early and this hotel wasn’t free, so party until your connection calls, honey, I’ll return the key.

 

There's a difference between doing things and keeping your integrity, and not wanting to do things at all.

 

There’s a difference between doing something and doing nothing which has nothing to do with integrity.  “Integrity” would be wanting new music to come out hell or high water and doing what it takes to make it happen.  No, Axl has never come across as that kind of person.  Even tyrants have to accept what others want or their armed defenders will turn against them.  They didn’t get where they were by thinking no one else mattered.

 

[other poster]

Its the other way around. I think Axl and GnR wants to give the fans the best GnR can offer.

That's basically the essence of what I think as well.

 

Even the best must be meaningless since they can go so many decades without any.  Try doing that with food, see how long you last.

 

Some hate this, but I think the reality is that they don't want to release things just for the sake of releasing something.

 

Some people like cupcakes better.  I for one care less for them.

 

Maybe someday he’ll rule the world and can force everybody to buy his music and praise it.  Nothing less is acceptable than guaranteed worldwide success with no dissidence.

 

It's a luxury to have to be able to decide when it's ready, instead of being told it is. Once again, some people hate that as well.

 

Some people require everyone to admire their luxury instead of actually doing anything with it.  What would the reaction be if the plumbers in Axl’s mansion said “we’ll repair the toilets when we’re damn good and ready and there’s nothing you can do about it”?

 

Slash releasing music under his own name gets compared to GN'R, but it's not GN'R.

 

It just sounds like G’n’R and people like hearing it.  There’s room for multiple viewpoints, people can think one album is better or worse than another because there are multiple creative works to compare.  That’s not G’n’R.

 

It's like any solo project, the people doing them have less “pressure” and maybe more freedoms that in their bands. They don't necessarily have to live up to people's expectations on what it should sound like.

 

How are you measuring “pressure”?  How are you measuring “freedoms”?  How did you suddenly get to defining every solo project in the history of the world this way, no exceptions permitted?  I can think of solo albums where the musician had to compete with all the pressure of competing with the band whose latest album they had only showed up a few hours a week to make, how did we suddenly get permitted to think of other bands?

 

Chinese Democracy was a GN'R album, but some thought it wasn't because it didn't fit their idea of what a GN'R album should be.

 

It was made by the only band-member who had made any decisions for the previous fifteen years.  And he had employees come and go too.  The employees can make music elsewhere but that isn’t Guns’n’Roses.

 

It can be seen by the concerts of November 7, December 6, 2002 and February 12, 1988 in Phoenix.  Axl didn’t show up to any of those, but for one date, band-members ignored him and went on stage to play music anyway.  The other two had only employees, they got paid whether or not Axl did anything.

 

Talk -> Not good, they just talk and don't release anything.

No talk -> Not good, there's no talk so there can't be any new music coming.

 

Breathing -> Not good, Guns’n’Roses is too busy doing that to put out music.  They can’t do both at the same time like every other band.  They’re so totally different.

Not breathing -> Not good because they can’t release music if they’re not breathing.

Putting out music -> Not good because *SOME* people aren’t remotely interested in listening to it.

 

Some people like cupcakes exclusively, while myself, I say there is not nor ought there be nothing so exalted on the face of God's grey Earth as that prince of foods... the muffin!

 

I can think of one ongoing thing that could've forced plans to be changed..... A thing that made the whole entertainment industry basically stop.

Not saying that's a reason, because people know better than me. I'm just making excuses after all.....

And the fact that 2020 was a year most of us just want to forget, doesn't matter.... After all, there is no reason why the album should've have been out before it was done. Right? Cheesy.

 

Very cheesy.  You’re pretending that 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011, 2010, 2009, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1998, 1997, 1996, 1995 and 1994 never happened, all so you can say that 2020 prevented any progress.  G’n’R finally got around to wanting to do something but 2020!!!  It’s totally not their fault!!!!

 

How is it blind faith when my opinion is based on facts and history....

 

Facts and history show that only hired employees of Guns’n’Roses can spend decades making music.  It takes blind faith to waste time and energy blaming 2020 for decades of non-productivity.  And we’re not allowed to compare this band to any other in history because…?  Music isn’t what this band does.

 

To the record company, it's all about selling the product. But to an artist, all that would be about presenting the end result of the creative work. Obviously, if you're proud of something you did, you'd want it to get noticed....

 

Blind faith again.  You have to do something to be proud of it and this band hasn’t been proud of anything it’s done for decades.  Axl doesn’t want us to hear it but he still wants our money.  Because ART!!!

 

□ [other poster]

Surely the record company would be interested in promoting the product also as it would boost revenue?

That's what you hope for.

But at the end of the day, they want to make a profit. Sometimes you need to spend money to make money.

 

At the end of the day, you’re dead and much less productive than when you were alive.  The record company spent many millions of dollars to make an album that didn’t remotely sell what actual Guns’n’Roses albums sold.  Fifteen million dollars was the official cost, I suspect it was more than that.  How much more would you need to spend if those fifteen million dollars came out of your pocket?  You’d need a lot of other bands to bring in enough money to cover that but they’re not special, you can do whatever you want with them.

 

It's a business after all. Who pays for promotion? Who should be compensated for what? Did the record company pay for the recording (studio time etc.) or not? If not, should whoever paid for it be reimbursed by the record company somehow? Should the band just hand over the masters and let the record company deal with it? Or is there a need for some kind of mutual promotional relationship?

 

The record company spent $15,000,000+ and got one album to pretended was made by an actual band and didn’t remotely make a profit.  That doesn’t pay for recording studios, producers, advertising, secretaries, painters, electricians and more, but you think they should all be grateful to get one solo album by someone who pretends to be a functioning band.

 

Just some of the things that you can come up with without being that versed in the music business.

 

Just a quick look at the other names on the record company’s roster shows that different decisions were based for what different artists wanted or needed.  But they all had something to work with, actual music by actual musicians who demand everything be done their way.

 

And whoever wants to start going around in circles again about this being an “excuse”, find a new hobby..... Question is asked, I provide answer(s). Good or bad, that's up to someone else. But at least it's a theoretical conversation topic.

I'm not saying there are issues. We don't know.

 

Never see you giving the slightest thought to people who actually release music, who actually want to hear music, companies who make it possible all the music being spent.

 

I'm just saying it doesn't take long to realize GN'R isn't the Foo Fighters. Remember how the last studio release was handled? Obviously it wasn't like with the Foo Fighters, AC/DC or any other band.

No where am I saying this is a reason for anything.  Just pointing out facts and answering a hypothetical question.

 

I have no idea which album by which band you’re talking about, you rarely get specific.  AC-DC’s new album was released like their previous album a couple years before.  These two albums got a lot less promotion than the one before that, Black Ice, which only took two months to record.  It came out a month before Chinese Democracy and sold a lot more copies.

 

Knowing how seriously Axl takes his art, it's safe to assume he expects the same from everyone involved.....

 

It doesn’t take being serious to do nothing, one doesn’t even need to breathe.  One of the two main AC-DC members stopped breathing a few years ago and they still release albums.  No, Axl will not be doing that but you won’t say there are any issues.

 

Two options. They don't plan on releasing anything in the next two weeks, or they are gonna release it without prior announcement (a surprise release)....

 

Third option, they want to release something but no one’s willing to do it for them and they’re just too lazy to do anything themselves.  Fourth option, they actively oppose releasing anything no matter how many people want to hear it.  Fifth option, they want to release something in the next two weeks and will start promoting it in one week.

 

It took two minutes to see more options than you’ve had in all these years, but you’re not saying there are issues.  No, you would never say that.

 

Explain this to me: GN'R is GN'R, any other band isn't. That's a fact, how is that an excuse?

 

Other bands make music.  Guns’n’Roses doesn’t.  That’s a fact.

 

What's so bad about that? Instead of whining about how he's not like Dave Grohl year in and year out?

No, because to me the artists don't need to do shit if they don't want to. Some take years to release albums, some release multiple new albums per year. It's all part of the game. We're all different. And the sooner you accept it rather than try to put everyone in the same mold, the better. Smiley

 

The point isn’t to change him, the point is to acknowledge the truth.  Axl doesn’t want to do anything, he doesn’t have to and no one will ever make him until he’s totally dead.

 

He’s the sole owner of the band and it’s been almost 25 years since he said they’d be releasing an album with at least 12 songs and at least three bonus tracks.  You have to count “Oh My God” just to reach that number of released songs since then and the album had zero bonus tracks.  20 years ago he said the album would have 18 songs with about 10 bonus tracks and then they’d release the second album and finish the third.  He also said the album cover was ready and sure has complained about the one that was actually released years later.

 

And there’s no explanation for any of this.  The band’s sole owner is only surrounded by people who share his lies.  Either you see nothing bad about it or you’ll keep your mouth shut about the truth.  Doing nothing is doing nothing.

 

I just keep seeing the “Other bands manage to release albums” line.... Which is true, but completely ignores the fact that we're talking about different people and different businesses.

 

They’re talking about musicians who release music with music companies.  Obviously that’s not Guns’n’Roses.  They sell socks which have the name of a 30-year old song a music band had written and released on an actual album.

 

That’s not art, that’s a cult.  Everybody is forced to change on behalf of the master who never changes.  You never caught Charles Manson giving in to a record company, no wonder Guns’n’Roses so eagerly promoted his music, back when the band had multiple co-owners.

 

Do you think there are differences between artists, in regards to how things should be done/what they expect from let's say the record company?

 

There are bands who leave record companies, filling a contract by turning in garbage the company refuses to release, there are bands and record companies who break in court.  Those are differences but G’n’R is still on the same contract with Geffen after all these decades.

 

Or do you think every artist is the same. They record something, hand it over and do whatever the record company tells them to do? In some cases, nothing, just release it and not promote it at all.Because promoting something costs money, and not all artists make money on selling records....

 

Promotion requires going out in public to try to get people to buy their new music.  Guns’n’Roses doesn’t do that.  The employees do that when they’re releasing music.

 

Seems like everyone's belittling the band for actually taking it seriously. Instead of just releasing it.

 

Taking it seriously requires actually doing something.  Covering thirty five year old songs doesn’t do that.  Spending fifteen million dollars of other peoples’ money to make a batch of sounds that people aren’t interested in hearing and you won’t even go out and try to convince people to buy it isn’t serious.  Only sycophants would believe it is.

 

Artists are different.  Lazy unproductive people are basically all the same.  You can tell by the lack of production.

 

The beauty of this all is that it's all hypothetical discussions.....

Some say: “There's no “excuse” why new music can't be out on _________ because Foo Fighters/AC/DC/Metallica/Sisters Of Mercy manages to release music.”.....

 

Who are these “some”?  You’re certainly not interested in any differing viewpoints, you spend time and energy to deny actual facts because they don’t make your superiors look good.

 

I'm saying, maybe there can be reas... excuses

I understand wanting to hear new music, we all do. But I don't necessarily understand why fans feel the need to almost hope for the worst for the band, just so they can get the new music. I mean, if the band doesn't think it's the right moment, then why not just respect their choice?  Huh

 

“The band” is not the eternal master.  He’s going to die whether or not he does anything.  People with actual lives know they have to move forward with what they have now and other people are relevant in the process.  But “the band” refuses to acknowledge the truth.

 

It's not necessarily about them making money. Maybe it's more about it getting proper promotion? Maybe it's about the record company working for the band, instead of the other way around? And like I sad earlier, it could be about who pays for what....

 

It’s not about making money but they charge a lot of money.  It’s about “proper promotion” which you’re never giving any definition of.  Does the band have to be involved for music to get “proper promotion”?  You sure don’t catch this band telling the world ‘hey everybody, here’s our new music, right here, can’t miss it, we’d like you to hear our new music, we have new music, it’s right here.’  Would that be “proper promotion”?

 

How much does the record company have to pay the band for the privilege of working for them?  I want you working for me, how much do you have to pay me, not counting the fifteen million dollars you’ve already paid?  Would that be “proper promotion” or “improper promotion”?  Would anyone in their right mind even call it “promotion”?

 

You know, remember back in 1991 when the band wanted to release 30 songs in one day? Do you think that was the record company's dream? I kinda doubt it...  But the band got their way. Are you unhappy about it?

 

The record company would have been fine releasing 30 songs in one day, bands had done that before.  In 1968, the Beatles released 30 songs in one day and those weren’t the only songs they released that year, or the next year or the year after that.  Or the previous year, previous two years, previous three years…  It’s not hard to find other bands who released 30 songs in one day.

 

Yeah, some bands have clearly stated they don't wanna release new music. Because the world has changed. But GN'R isn't one of those bands.

The band hasn't said a word about their plans regarding new music. Some take that as a bad sign....

 

Sure they have.  They said they’ll release the second part of the trilogy while on tour for the first one, then they’ll finish the third part shortly after they end the tour.  That’s more than a couple words.

 

They said they’ll release a video within a week, “soon is the word.”

 

They said they’ll be looking very seriously about what they’re going to do next after they’re done with a group of Las Vegas shows and had already finished the second part of the trilogy and a remix version of the album.

 

They also said that next album would have at least twelve songs and three original b-sides.  Just think, Saddam Hussein might have heard that and looked forward to the release.  He still had a decade to live, what could change?

 

The world has changed.  According to you, Axl Rose hasn’t.

 

Some people treat this nonsense seriously as an excuse to do nothing.  Some people know their luxury only came from the fans.  Some people don’t use emotions to analyze a situation but some others just say they’re full of hate.  Some people like bananas on pizza.

 

It’s delusion to pretend there’s any actual production when all you do is yammer about “some people.”  The result is doing nothing.  Once upon a time, there were five members of Guns’n’Roses.  Even when they didn’t all agree that any song was the BEST they had to offer, they finished the song, released it and still play for a paying audience today.

 

Can you actually name one other band who’s said the world has changed so they won’t make any more music?  For that matter, do you have any proof that Guns’n’Roses isn’t one of them?  The result is the same.  Nothing.

 

You could even suggests that *maybe* they’ve completely changed their minds about releasing anything and are just too lazy to tell the fans, it’s just easier to sing “It’s So Easy.”

 

□ [other poster]

The fact is, It looks like It's never the right time to put out something  rofl rofl If they have something, they should just put it out.  .

The right time is when there's a mutual understanding between the parts involved.

Not necessarily a certain date.

 

That’s delusional.  Dates are actually required for people who know that time passes.  It’s not a “mutual understanding” to expect everything you want and no-one else gets a say.

 

□ [other poster]

But how many legs of this tour is this now?  It's starting to rival the length of a KISS or Cher farewell tour.

This tour? You're aware that NITL ended in 2019, the two shows last year were not part of the same tour....

And the upcoming tours aren't called NITL either.

 

I notice you don’t mention anything that ever actually changes.  They played the same 7 Appetite songs, the same UYI 5 songs and “Patience” at their one 2020 concert that they’d played at the last reunion concert a few months earlier and the 2016 start of the tour after Slash and Duff were re-hired.  And the same songs at the 2014 end of the “Appetite For Democracy” tour, the same songs at that tour’s 2012 beginning, the same songs at the 2012 “Up Close and Personal” tour beginning and end and the 2012 ending of the “Chinese Democracy” tour.

 

Except for “Estranged,” they played all of those songs at the January 1, 2001 concert, the first one ever without Slash, Duff, Izzy, Steven or Matt.  What else has changed?  Some employees have come and gone, they stopped playing most Chinese Democracy songs or Bumblefoot solos?  Do they play “November Rain” on a bagpipe just to be different?  Remember, it’s not about giving the audience what they want.

 

Oh, they’re changing names on concert souvenirs they aren’t giving away for free, that’s a huge change and totally unlike any other band!!!  Because ART!!!

 

Slash and Duff working on new material outside of GN'R is one thing, and GN'R is something else. I don't believe their solo work give them the same "feeling" (for lack of a better word) than GN'R does. They are two different entities.

 

It’s been thirty years since they made any music with Guns’n’Roses, how would they even remember what that was like?  One entity makes music, the other knows Slash and Duff can be replaced and likes selling socks and bongs which aren’t cheap.

If anyone wants to know what mental illness sounds like, this is it  :facepalm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...