Here Today... Gone To Hell!

i dont know if some remember that wednesday i posted
that in mtv there was an special
about cd coming out this year was going to talk about chinese democracy
well that day they talked about placebo
and i think kanye west..and then started roomraiders
well...yesterday i was seeing mtv again and in the second part of this program
they talked about chinese democracy
and the upcoming tour, and they said that chinese democracy is set to be released on november
i couldnt post this yesterday due to personal problems..
so sorry
this is mtv speaking...but i doubt it

(sorry about my english)

BTM says that too :hihi:

Axl pretty much decides when it comes out.

We won't know the release date until he says it pretty much.

I still think it will be june

It should be before the full leg US tour

i go for september... like richard said
the rumors says that part of video of the new single will be footage of the ny concerts...
also that in late may-early june the new single will be out...
so i think that is a very good plan tour europe with a kickass single out and full promotion
and then drop CD and start touring NA in Sept

The Lisbon concert is the 27th of may? well, I think Axl will tell us the release date that night:

''People, tomorrow morning go to music stores. Chinese Democracy will be there''

Massive heart-attacks, people leaving the concert early to get the first copies, riots at every music store, etc  :rofl:

I know it's impossible, but would be KILLER!!!   :beer:

If it is November, I think tha is the dumbest thing they could do.  Get it out this summer.  Take advantage of people coming to see you again.  Fuck November, fall, next Christmas. 

honestly, drop that joint in early June or something.

I agree.

With all these concerts set up, CD is coming this summer. between June and August early Sept at the latest.

there would be no reason to have all these concerts.

Plus if new material is gonna be played in concert, the album has to be on the horizon.

I would think that the album would come out this summer sometime, as like others have said it just doesn't make sense to have a tour without plans for the album, again anyway...


plus, would def be cool if CD promo's could be purchased or even given away at the NYC shows  :P

all of us had the same thought in 2002...

and round and round we go. January I was hoping for a March release, in Feb I started thinking maybe May, May is just around the corner and I'm keeping my fingers crossed for August. Knowing me, around august I'll be thinking "CD would be a nice Christmas present...." and then it's January again.....  :(

I'm just really excited about the tour. I do hope the album will surface this year and I'm quite optimistic about it. November would be a mistake in my opinion. They should release the album during the European tour. But whatever happens, at least we have a tour coming up and that's more than we had in years!  :peace:

Hopefully at the NY shows, Axl will give some information about the CD. Something more than "people will hear music this year."

or 'soon'  :hihi:

"You'll see it. I'm not sure if soon's the word"

 :'(

june would be really fuckin' great... but... we'll just have to wait and see.

MTV is and always has been just as clueless as the rest of us.

AMEN. I don't think MTV has any sort of pulse on whats really happening in music, let alone with real rock and roll anymore like Guns N' Roses

LOL, yea last november...........

does anyone remember when it was ment to be out novemember last year?

I basically think the plan is to play the shows in Europe as a warm up, and to test some new songs live.
then release the album as they start the US tour...but we're gonna have to see if they get that far.

could be any music though, did he say people will hear new music off cd..?

Axl is no fool.  We'll hear IRS, TWAT & Better.

Wasn't it November of 2004 that CD was supposed to come out per that VH1 special?

I say no later than September of this year for cd's release.

These shows were geared toward the fans who've kept these boards going..........I predict info on the first night.

Everyone knows anything less would be a dissapointment.

Exactly my point. Axl's message was vague so it could be anything. Maybe he meant we'll hear new Ashlee Simpson :nervous:

I agree, perfect timing before the US tour starts... : ok:

Do people still believe in what MTV says?  :hihi:

I gave up entirely on MTV untill I saw that LC girl  :drool: on Laguna Beach.  :hihi:

has it ever occured to any of you that this has been Axl's plan all along
       after gnr broke up, and began to fade away and become a joke
instead of rebounding fast to make up for it, he layed low, recorded
every once in a while and keep the rock n roll legend alive

and he hasnt released it when rumors spead because he prolly wants to be unpredictable

and thats been his plan since 96

No because that's a dumb plan.

Dude, if he is still "testing out the songs live", my head will explode. They had an entire tour that was a warm up in 2002!

I still say June :beer:

I was thinking June also but I don't really know. But I'm 100% for sure it will be out this year.  : ok:

I think they are just guessing but i'm also guessing late summer or fall...

MTV is so old news these days...

I heard MTV is returning to their rock oriented format. Does this mean they'll actually be playing videos again? That would be good for GNR.

Not November again lol :P

perhaps this is a stupid question, but has a US tour been confirmed??

Nope, just rumours so far. Would make sense though, after the European leg of the tour.

well i think we should wait to see how the 'tour' goes first!!!if that ends up a disaster, then i think we can kiss goodbye to CD for another 2years

If the CD doesn't come out this year, I'd say it's safe to give up. The tour in 2002 was a failure, it's been 4 years since that...if the new band and Axl can't gel now, it's just never going to work. I'm very hopeful for it all, I'm really thinking positive and believing it's gonna work out, but if it doesn't...well....

I would like to agree, it has been 4 years, theres a tour coming up in 3 weeks, it would only seem logical to drop CD relatively soon.  However, if they don't does that mean theyre done? I dont know, I think no one will ever take the seriously again but how hard is it to make a comeback in music.  Mariah Carey had a nervous breakdown on TRL and now it big again.  I ve been saying releasing CD cures all.

You don't need a new album for a reunion tour.......

j/k, they could just do the typical greatest hits with two new studio cuts of the breifly reunited band. ?

Damn, I should have posted this in dead horse.

You know what kind of people don't take GNR seriously? The ones who haven't heard the new music. I hate people, and I don't mean you so please don't take it that way, who don't take the new GNR seriously and haven't heard the new music. The new GNR could get every ounce of credibility the old GNR had if they would let the public hear the new music.

As far as Mariah Scary goes? That's fucking mainstream pop bullshit. Doesn't matter what she does, the public loves her. She could make a CD recording of her taking a crap and it would still go double platinum. And that kids, is what we call, pathetic.

Well, they made that mistake with the last tour. This time, they need to arrange the tour to coincide with a release date for CD.

I think the new band has great chemistry and is gelling pretty well with Axl.  The issue is mainly of the album's release as it has been for the last few years.

NEVER! This new band will never have the credibility the old band had and it all has to do with Axl useing the name Guns N' Roses. I agree that if people can put aside their issues with the name and give the music a fair chance they'd see the music for what it is and give their due props, but the general public will ALWAYS scoff at the fact that this band is parading as Guns N' Roses. In fact I'm one of those people who think useing the name is ridiculous.  I'll never change my stance on that issue. It'd be like Bono going solo and calling his band U2. I just choose not to dwell on it anymore. This is gonna be Axl's own fault. he's drawing the enevitable comparison to old Guns N' Roses by useing the name. In a  sense he's put himself and this band behind the 8 ball right off the bat. the old band was a unti who needed each other to survive. their credibility lied in the hoinesty of the music, the rawness of it all. the new band are higherd guns and there will no doubt be a sense that this band isn't as genuine as the original. Like it or not that's just the plain and simple fact of it all.

What Axl needs to do is market the new GNR as a new breed of Guns and Roses. Axl has an advantage here, unlike other "new" bands like The Doors of the 21st Century or the new Lynard Skynard; AXL'S MAKING NEW MUSIC. The new Doors and the new Lynard all jsut play the old songs. Here, Axl has new band mates and is making music with them. I think it's fine that he calls the band Guns and Roses, just so long as he distinguishes between the two different bands. In my opinion, there are indeed 2 Guns and Roses, and I'm cool with that.

and something tells me that if Bono went Solo and called it U2, you'd still stick by him

i think it'll be september. it'll be marketed as the first new GnR release of original music in 15 years.

don't you know its never coming out!!!! :'(

Ummm... you mean the same way I still support Axl. Sure I'd want to hear the music and see him live but I would never in a million years support Bono calling his new band U2. In fact U2 is more of a true band than any band has ever been.? They were a "band" before they were a band. It's been the? same 4 guys since 1976 and they were friends even before that. U2 more so than any other band ever is greater than the sum of their parts. Trust me when I say this; Bono has too much respect for his bandmates/freinds to ever pull that sort of stunt and despite what you think a massively huge overwhelming number of U2 fans, myself included would think it an outrage if the band continued to call themselves U2 if even Larry or Adam left the band.

? ? As for you point about Guns N' Roses haveing an advantage over these old band like the Doors and Queen and Lynard Skynard because they're making new music, well yeah. That is true but still the general public is always going to think of this band as a mockery of Guns N' Roses. In the long run mayeb this band can distinguish themslves from the old band by gaining younger fans who aren't familiar with the old band but you'll always have fans like myself who slightly or more than slightly resent the fact that Axl calls this band Guns N' Roses. Imagine if Velvet Revolver was called Guns N' Roses. The outrage from the Axl fans would be huge and yet VR is? much more Guns N' Roses than Gusn N' Roses are. Personally I think it's a cop out for Axl to use the name. It gaurentees publicity no matter what. It'll sell albums based on the curiosity factor and don't tell me it won't. The average music listener(not music fan) knows Guns N' Roses. They don't necessarily know Axl Rose.? Like I said before I'm over the anme thing and can deal with it I just thik it would've been alot cooler and more gutsy on Axl's part to come up with a new name.

So assuming that it's not OK for Axl to use the name GNR.? ?But it was ok with the original members.? ?At what point does it transition from "ok" to "not ok"?


Phase I - AFD Line-up
.....
Phase x - Current Line-up.

We had a bunch of changes between then and now.

So is it ok for them to use the GNR name if they have one band member change?? What if they had two changes?? Or three?? At what point does it just become "wrong"?

uggh...people are talking about U2 on here...excuse me while i go vomit!

It's stops being o.k. when it's obvious one member wants to take full creative control and essentially forces the rest of the original members to leave.? Steven's departure was a decsion made by the entire band, Izzy quit on his own because it had gotten too big and it wasn't his thing anymore. You're still left with? 3 original members. Not to mention the fact that the band had been through numerous lineup changes since 1984 anyways. The core group(Izzy, Slash, Duff, Steven, Axl) had only been together for what?? 3 years tops before members started interchanging. So the departures of Izzy and Steven where not a real surprise. The way Slash and Duff left, got fired, quite, were forced out or whatever was a surprise to an extent and? has a lot to do with the name issue now not being o.k.? Also Slash and Duff were not cool with the name thing in the begining and I'm sure they're not cool with it now. In fact I've heard it straight form Duff's mouth how embarrsed he was with the disaster that was the 2002 tour because to him that was his band(Guns N' Roses). Thosse ghuys aren't cool with it don't kid yourself. They've just put it behind them.The same way myself and many others are not cool with it. I think it's stupid but it is what it is.? I think it's ridiculous how some of you try to justify it when the same people doing so would trash the shit outta Slash and Duff if they had the name Guns N' Roses. All we'd hear would be people bitching and moaning about how can they be Guns N' Roses without Axl Rose.


Nice to see you have somethig intelligent to add ::)

Brilliant. Everyone needs to take a reading of that. Great post indeed.

Thanks Bono,  great answer.

I'm a KISS fan and they're had more than their share of line-up changes too.   I don't think there's a simple answer to the question I posed and you didn't disappoint me :)

Well thank you. Thank you very much :hihi:

Most people have a valid point, Guns is different to different people. I was not old enough to see them when they were big, so it is most likely easier for someone my age to say it is guns n roses. Maybe someone who was my age when the were touring on the illusions albums has much harder time accepting this as guns, and that is fine by me as well. To me, it is about the music, and axl seems to be heading in the right direction, though he really needs to get this album out. I think people may be more ready to accept them as guns once that happens. However for the record i would love to see slash and axl on stage together, as i never had the chance. Hopefully one day that will happen again.

About calling either this incarnation of Guns and Roses "Guns and Roses" or calling Velvet Revolver Guns and Roses, you gotta think about how your looking at it. To say that Velvet Revolver is more GNR, do you mean in the respect that more members of the old GNR are in VR?

The ONLY reason I'm OK calling this version of Guns and Roses, Guns and Roses, is the music. Velvet Revolver doesn't sound like Guns to me, but Axl's new GNR sounds like the GNR sound, just updated.

I don't think we should judge who's more Guns and Roses based on how many ex-gunners are in a band, we should judge it on the music itself.

TOPGUNner for Prez :peace:

I think the new music speaks for itself as you are saying. If you take a track like Better and put it up against anything on Contraband, it's obvious who was the creative director in Guns N' Roses. Better sounds like GN'R, everything on Contraband does not.

It's easy to argue and say "Well, VR was't trying to make a Guns album so that's why it doesn't sound like GN'R". The two arguments to that are 1) VR couldn't make a GN'R sounding album and 2) Just the overall quality is no where near the same between the two.

All the people that want to compare the two lineups and constantly question the new bands cred should really think about everyones motives. Why would these new guys be in this (having mostly come from their own successes) just to be a part of something they can get trashed for CONSTANTLY. Maybe it's for the love of the music?

Does anyone think Megadeth is the same band? It's a bit odd because the "classic lineup" ( Mustaine, Ellefson, Fridman, Menza for me and a lot of people) was not the first recorded lineup it was 3 albums in, and they've pretty much had a rotating drummer/lead axe till Ellefson left. I think 'Deth get away with it, because it was all gradual rather than hear nothing for ages then suddenly "hello! we're guns n roses!"
Imagine if they'd released 7 good albums since illusions (no one can say axl can't write good songs, you may prefer the older stuff and that's all gravy, but that doesn't make maddy/blues/better/twat/etc bad songs.) say album 2 matt leaves, bummer, but ok, maybe in a bit (album 4?) slash YES EVEN SLASH leaves, now people would be saying "I prefer GnR post slash/ with slash" but they'd mostly see g'n'r. one by one only axl's left. but i still think it's guns n roses. they just didn't release enough material between changes to wean us forward as individuals leave. no GnR-Gnr without Izzy-Gnr with new guy-GnR-Gnr without steven-GnR with new guy-GnrGnR without slash-gnr with new guy-gnr.
 That's my 2p's worth anyway.

makes sense  mean when i think of megadeth i think of mustaine so i mean that would just be the gnr thing

I think, Axl could tell as at the upcoming shows. But in my mind...Single in MAy...album in june...US tour starts octorber/november like the 2002 tour...runs till the end of the summer 2007...then new album in november of 2007...tour in till 2008...then maybe new band stopds...slash and the boys come back in to the band...then they make new album...and tour till one of them dies...well thats what i think :beer: ROCK AND ROLL HAL OF FAME 2013!! : ok:

p.s. don't get me wrong i love the new band and the the new music.

Thats the only time you may EVER see the old band back together, when they get inducted into the rock and roll hall of fame. Maybe they'll reunite to accept the honor, play one song, and that's it. It would be historic

yeah man GOODTIMES GOODTIMES!! there coming lol man i love gn'r :rofl:

Why does MTV hold always say that month. :no:   It would make more sense in the summer. :yes: