Here Today... Gone To Hell!

If you notice in the 99 rolling stone interview the songs 'twat, irs, and catcher in the rye' were all listened to.

Now if you consider that the leak of catcher in the rye is from a analogue source (a tape) I would say this is not the version that we will hear on the album.

In 99 digital recording was becoming prominent but the top notch studio (which axl would have used) were still using analogue gear. Since we know that the album has likely be re-recorded a few times, I would say that since 3 out of the 4 recent leaks were from back in 1999 the probablity that axl re-recorded these tunes in a digtal format is EXTREMELY high. And what we've heard (with the exception of better) is not anywhere near what the final project will sound like.

thoughts?

Do we think the album versions of the songs will sound better then the demos ?

Well yes oviously  :hihi:

Didn't the RS interview say that there were no vocals on the tracks, and Axl had to discribe and sing some parts to make it make sence?

I'm pretty sure that was the same interview.

I think he said  just some songs had no vocals but some did.

Oh, and of course the music will be better, these demos are very rough around the edges.

CD will sound very clean and smooth.. hopefully it's not too overproduced tho. :-\

Whatever the case may be I'm sure CD will be an excellent sounding cd quality wise... I mean over 13 mil has been poored into this project :P.

Here is the quote.

Song after song combines the edgy hard rock force and pop smarts of vintage Guns N Roses with surprisingly modern and ambitious music textures. In addition to the album's almost grungy title track, tentative song titles include ''Catcher in the Rye,'' ''I.R.S,'' ''The Blues'' and ''TWAT,'' which he says stands for ''there was a time.''

Another song, called ''Oklahoma'' - heard tonight only as an instrumental - was inspired by a court date with ex-wife Erin Everly. ''I was sitting in my litigation with my ex-wife, and it was the day after the bombing,'' Rose remembers with a wince. ''We had a break, and I'm sitting with my attorneys with a sort of smile on my face, more like a nervous thing - it was like, 'Forgive me, people, I'm having trouble taking this seriously.' It's just ironic that we're sitting there and this person is spewing all kinds of things and 168 people just got killed. And this person I'm sitting there with, she don't care. Obliterating me is their goal.''

Oklahoma was the only song without vocals

I think we should refer to the recent leaks not as "demo's" but as 'earlier versions'.

They are more advanced than demo's but not quite the finished article.

Thanks Dave!  I guess I wasn't sure what was said afterall : ok:

And I agree with 'Axl Rose Child' 100%.

It makes you wonder tho, how much have these songs changed throughout the years?  I think in each song there are areas that could be improved, but IMO all 4 leaks are great tracks.

Yeah it's not like they're scratching outtakes are "demos".

They are full songs and could still be on the album the way we have them. We don't know that though.

Anyways... good point John Lennon fan!

I'm thinking they've likely be re-recorded... being the perfectionist axl is I can't imagine him using recording technology from 96-99 on tracks release in 2006 (God willing).... there have been huge advances in technology since then. It did say in the New York times article that album has been re-recorded a few times.... So i'd say these versions will not be anything close to the final product. Song like better and IRS don't even have the layers of backup vocals axl is famous for. Listen to CITR there are at least 4-6 back up vocals on there just like on songs like locomotive, coma etc.... I think these leaks are just sctraching the surface of what axl has planned and will likely be nothing like whats in store

Dizzy said they have like 3 or 4 versions  of each song

Yeah i've always thought that there may be very little buckethead on the album because its quite likely axl has parts for each part of the song from every player... maybe they just went back and replaced bucket's parts with other tracks.

I'm thinking CITR and one of the two twats were mostly the takes of that time.

Its from the jan 2000 article and not 99 innit, Crashdiet?

Thanks dave for the quote. It should make it clear that Oklahoma is not IRS as well.
I hope some knowitall won't say the thing has changed like from panic to the big mouth. (only booker would understand this simile :P )

Here's a quote from the 99 RS interview.
Loder: People that hear "Oh My God," they might say that, "Gee, the new Guns is all this sound," but I think that what you're saying is that it's a bunch of different kinds of sounds.

Rose: It's a lot of different sounds. There's some other really heavy songs, there's a lot of aggressive songs, but they're all in different styles and different sounds. It is truly a melting pot.

I go back to listening to Queen -- you know, we're still hoping to have Brian May come in and do some tracks, and I got a fax today that he's coming in -- Queen had all kinds of different-style songs on their records, and that's something that I like. 'Cause I do listen to a lot of things, and I really don't like being pigeonholed to that degree, and it's something that Guns N' Roses seem to share [with Queen] a bit. With "Appetite," even though it seems to have the same sound, if you really go back, you can pull all the little parts from different influences. That's not really the case by the time we're on "Use Your Illusion." People are kind of set in their ways. ["Chinese Democracy"] is coming from all over the place.

http://www.heretodaygonetohell.com/articles/showarticle.php?articleid=28

I don't agree

Just because you can tell CITR was at some point analog, doesn't mean it was recorded in 1999.  It could've somehow made its way onto tape (i don't know why) and then converted back to digital

Yea and Brian said that was definitly him on the leaked demo version we all have. And he didn't record with Axl 'till around 2002/03. I know this becuase i have a radio interview with him. Therefore this version of the track couldnt have been done in '99

Post this interview.

*Do we think the album versions of the songs will sound better then the demos ?*


Sure hope so  :hihi:

I think the leaks are to soften up GnR fans into liking the new music. A give'em (leak'em) 1 track per week strategy. Then when the album arrives, the fans will get to hear a superior sounding proper version of an album of which half the tracks have been listened to already.

Can you imagine if there were zero leaks and zero live versions, and the average Gunner picked up CD, they may well think, what's this?  :hihi:

Brian May was with Axl long before 2003 (not sure about recording though) and was played new GnR material. May was impressed at the time. With the leak of Catcher in the Rye, didn't Brain May say, he thought the track sounded as fresh as ever. Giving the impression he had worked on it years previous.

Yes jan 2000.... but the article was written in 99.

And who ever said Brian May recorded in 2002 or 2003 is way out to lunch. It says in the rolling stone article he recorded the parts when robin left...

The album would not be recorded in analogue... You can't use protools with tape... no one does that anymore. Back in 96-99 digital wasn't quite up to top professional standards.. But I say that CITR has totally be re-recorded. There is no way axl isn't using protools or some other digital medium. not a chance

Just to clarify, alot of producers/engineers prefer tape to digital for 'warmth'.  I bet alot of the tracks were recorded onto tape and then transfered onto a digital medium.

Maybe the leak was recorded in a tape or it was made to sound like it's from a tape. DAT recordings doesn't sound like the mp3 we have.

 i doubt it... i own a recording studio myself. and while the 'warmth' factor was an issue 3 years ago... now a days it makes no difference. the loss of sound from tape to digital is substantial.

I think it would be EXTREMELY unlikely that axl would be using any tape on CD

Yeah I'm guessing that the whole project went Pro Tools years ago. It would certainly account for some of the, shall we say odd transitions in some of the demos. That's the beauty of demoing on Pro Tools though. With a little planning you can record a song and then chop it up and move the parts around or edit in new sections easily. It's not always going to be perfect but for demos it serves as a quick way to move an arrangement around and experiment.

That's what the demos sound like to me.