Here Today... Gone To Hell!

Not here to argue for or against this guy's taste, or his opinion of the Album, or Axl.

I just thought he made some really interesting points about Axl's intentions and aspirations for the record. Worth a read at least.

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/9499317/justin-timberlake-daft-punk-chinese-democracy-effect

 

Thanks, cool read!

Good Report

 : ok:

Great article for a good debate. The funy thing is the guy who wrote it should know his article is also old and late. This article belongs in early 2009. Anyway better later than never.  I just want to point out a couple of things I don?t see very clear.

He claims Axl wanted to invent the wheel with CD. How can he be so sure? All I can say is that Axl wanted to do something different. It makes sense because Axl was no longer the same person he was in 1985. A lot of water under the bridge in many ways in his life.

The writer also claims to know what fans want from Axl. I?m afraid there is no easy and simple answer to that. Some fans want a reunion of the old GN?R at all cost, no matter what. And others love the new band. And they think Better and Sorry are the best songs ever.

Water under the bridge? Have you listened to Chinese democracy?

I think this tells you all you need to know about the success (or lack thereof) of CD:

I bought Chinese Democracy three days before its release date at an independent record store that displayed the album early. I put the CD in my car, listened to the first song ("Chinese Democracy"), and then got maybe 30 seconds into the second song ("Shackler's Revenge") before removing the CD from the player and never playing it again until last month. 

That's unfortunate.  I wonder how many other people did not even bother to give it a chance just based on its reputation?  I would disagree with the author's contention that CD is too different from the rest of GnR's catalog.  Yes, there are parts that kind of "push the envelope," but Street of Dreams, IRS, This I Love, Catcher in the Rye, and There Was a Time all could have easily fit in during the UYI era.  I think CD had a little bit of everything for everyone, but it was marketed poorly (to put it mildly).  Maybe if things would have been different had they released one of the aforementioned songs as a single to bring back fans of the UYI era?  I've had multiple people (who were fans of the UYI era) tell me they didn't bother listening to anything beyond the single Chinese Democracy because they assumed it was representative of the entire album.  I had to persuade them to give Street of Dreams or This I Love a listen.  Of course, they were pleasantly surprised with these songs... 

One can only hope that over the course of the next decade people will go back and give CD another listen and it will steadily earn some begrudging respect (as it did with the guy who wrote this article).

I have thought about this of late.  I think its hard to say that it was marketed poorly simply because by the time the album was released it took on a mythical status.  Everybody who was a rock fan was curious to hear this album.  Then they heard a few songs and decided it was not for them.  If we were not in the digital age would it have sold more?  Of course, but that has affected everyone and GNR still struggled to measure up against other artists sales-wise with the release of CD.  From a traditional marketing standpoint you are probably right, but don't think people were not aware of the release of this album. 

anyone givin an opinion about a album without hearing it, is just stupid

But.... the author did listen to the album.  That is the whole purpose of this review.  Am I missing something?  ???

  Plenty of great reviews of cd out there as well.That whole "the songs don't sound finished" just escapes me.

This review is much more philosophical. The guy is talking about evolution and regression. As for "the songs don?t sound finish" It?s his personal opinion. It?s clear in the article that the songs were not what he wanted. But the point he is trying to make is that CD was a wake up call or warning for other artists. And that?s the positive side of CD. Basically he is saying that if you want to spend 10 years or more making a new album it?s ok. Just don?t do it the Axl?s way.

I think you all bring up good points.

I was shocked, surprised, slightly pleasedand slightly disappointed by this article. I kinda liked that about it. The author is clearly ignorant about details here and there. That can be frustrating. He also simply expresses a different opinion about the final product than me, but that's okay too. But as someone previously stated, the authors philosophical POV, and CD's connection to the bevy of comeback albums was really interesting to me.

I'm just happy it appears a few folks found it as interesting as I did.

In some ways, I think the writer was right in saying that Axl tried to make the perfect album. In a MTV interview, Axl did say he wanted to bury AFD and maybe he was trying to do that with CD.   

I think CD went a little astray to what the GNR brand is as well. I do think that some songs like "Street of Dreams" and "There Was a Time" would have fit in the UYI lineup. However, something like "Shackler's Revenge" isn't really a GNR type of song. I can see it being a good Nine Inch Nails song, but not a GNR.  "This I Love" is a great song live because DJ brings back that bluesy sound while Axl bring back his voice. On CD, the song goes too much towards an Andrew Lloyd Weber sound which isn't Guns style. I know some people might not want to hear this, but I do think Axl would have had more leeway to be creative if he had retired the Guns name and went by his own name. When you think of Guns N' Roses, you think of the band as a bluesy hard rock band with attitude. 

This brings me to my third and final point. Axl just didn't have the right people. Too many people came in and out of the band which made the album disjointed. Buckethead and Robin Finck didn't fit in the band -neither by looks nor musical style-. I think the people that now are in the lineup actually wants to be in Guns and not looking for a paycheck. DJ brings back that "classic" GNR sound while Bumblefoot can experiment. I think the chemistry of the band is much better now than when CD was made.

CD was a lot to ask for in Axl as a result of high expectations and the breakup of the original band (I still would pick the originals to play even though I like the lineup with DJ and Bumblefoot). I think if a new album comes out that will be the comeback album since the lineup fits and much better chemistry is involved.

Only problem with your theory is that he said it in 1990. I think it was...
And I think just like you, people took the meaning of what he said out of context.



Regarding your comments about certain songs not being GN'R type songs.

So you would say Patience was a GN'R type song? Or November Rain? None of them sound exactly like Appetite For Destruction.


Some people have this "obsession" with putting bands in categories and boxes. And if they dare to do something outside of that, it's "not their style".


Hell, wasn't You're Crazy written as a slower song originally until it was made into the "GN'R style song" everybody heard on Appetite? So who's to say what's a band's style and what's not?
Maybe the "problem" is that since somebody who's not into a certain sound or certain types of songs, it's just easier to say the band shouldn't sound like that, than to admit that the "problem" is the person's limitation. Not the band.


For example, if a person thinks the keyboard is the worst invention ever, do you honestly think that person is gonna enjoy an album where the instrument is heavily used? So is the problem the artist using the keyboard, or the person's dislike for the instrument?

It's a matter of taste, but to use your own personal taste as a rule to say things like "this isn't the band's sound" is just kinda silly. It might not be the sound you prefer. But sticking to something safe and repeating yourself can get boring too.

What's wrong with creativity?




/jarmo

I always thought Better was the one song, that would tell everyone GnR was back & people would take notice.  Then again management at the time obviously didnt help CD & we all know about the label.  Don't really agree with the article itself, I do miss the days of waiting for it to be released though.

I agree - UYI had a lot of diversity and creatvivity which in some ways makes them longer lasting than Appetite and awesome albums.

IF CD truly was intended as a double album I really hope it will be released someday exactly as intended. 5 years on I'd love to hear Axls thoughts on Chinese Democracy

Yes, Axl said he wanted to bury AFD. He made a mistake. But hey! Mick Jagger made same mistake long before Axl. Jagger said he didn?t see himself playing Satisfaction all his life. Well, he is still singing Satisfaction. I understand that as singer you get tired of a particular song or album. But reality,the industry, show promoters can put people in places they don?t want to be.

I think you?re right about the NIN type of sound. And there I disagree with the article. The article claims Axl wanted to do something revolutionary. The way I see it, Axl just wanted to make a NIN type of album. Something like NIN meets GN?R. Axl wanted to experiment and that?s fine with me. However if every single new GN?R album is a different kind of experiment. In that case I?m not sure is the right way to go.

Keep in mind that in the 80s and early 90s before Nirvana,power balads were trendy. Ozzy, Skid Row, Bon Jovi, Poisson, etc. They all have songs following the patron of Patience or Don?t Cry. And there Axl went the extra mile with November Rain, epic balad. People were very used to that and it was very popular. Although those songs are not AFD type. In that context made sense if GN?R were playing balads as well. That doesn?t mean that the whole world like it. I knew people who were disapointed with that because they wanted GN?R to be more like Iron Maidden. I don?t see it that way. GN?R never was Iron Maidden. Although the music magazines and MTV were mixing all into Heavy Metal. I guess the industry just went that path at the time.

Having said that. I think Lies was more a transition album than an official follow up of AFD. The real follow up was UYI. The same way I think TSI was another transition album. Is Chinese Democracy the follow up of UYI? What is exactly CD?

In terms of "You're Crazy" and "Patience", they were still a GNR type of sound. They had that bluesy feel towards the song especially since it was slower. Princess Lea was right in that power ballard were huge in the late 80s/early 90s.  Every band or  music artist had a power ballad. I think "November Rain" even went beyond that and was such a hit because of the added elements without losing the GNR sound.

There isn't anything wrong with creativity. At the same time, you can't lose your focus as to what you are. You have to expand and grow, but keep with who you are. I think Axl tried too much to reinvent what GNR was and lost focus as to what the band was/is during the making of CD.  Guns isn't a Nine Inch Nails type of band. If I want to listen to that type of music, I will listen to Nine Inch Nails.

Right or wrong, we all have a brand and what we are about.  You expect a certain sound from the Rolling Stones, Bon Jovi, Foo Fighters, etc. Same thing individually. My brand  and who I am as a person is that I'm this disabled guy who has limitations that I work around or overcome. I hate when people ask me if I need help with something when I don't. I hate when people discriminate me because of my disability.  I am looking at doing side gigs as a writer and public speaker. I would love to get married and be known as a good son, brother, boyfriend, husband, father and friend. I want to be looked at beyond my disability. However, my bread and butter is really the story of a guy who has these limitations and works within limitations to succeed.

So you're saying the songs were GN'R's sound, but in reality a song like November Rain which features a lot of piano doesn't sound like any song on Appetite For Destruction. In other words, something was brought into the mix and it became part of the GN'R sound. Nothing weird in that, just like there's nothing weird with bringing in keyboards and making it part of your sound.

I've mentioned this in the past, but a band like U2 went from a certain sound, to something else to Achtung Baby and then to Pop. Achtung Baby doesn't sound like Pop and it doesn't sound like Boy.

So is the band's sound defined by what the most popular album is?

There's plenty of bands in the history of mankind that have changed. The Clash went from White Riot to Straight To Hell....






This is amusing. People like to call it some kind of Nine inch Nails sound. They weren't the first band to use keyboards or sound industrial.

But because they were popular with that sound, everybody who dared to do the same is labeled like that.

He kinda had to not only reinvent GN'R but rebuild it since most people who played on the old albums quit. Imagine GN'R trying to make a blues rock album. You'd be saying how wrong it is for them to try to sound like the old band!  ;)  :hihi:





The Rolling Stones experimented with disco! :D

Bands change, some more, some less. Sometimes the change comes with a line up change, sometimes it's because a new trend (like disco) or sometimes it's a producer influence.

Not everybody can be like AC/DC! ;)





So you don't want to be treated as what people's perception of your label is. You want to be treated as an individual, not as part of a label and whatever people think when they think of that label.

Same thing with musicians. Maybe their limitation isn't physical, it might be just a matter of wanting to do things or maybe not being able to change. Not everybody can learn a new instrument, a new way of recording, using new equipment, writing a new kind of song and so on. But those who do, well why not try it...





/jarmo

Not everyone can be like AC/DC, and good is that. It would be boring as hell...

This article was a very interesting read, and I hope more and more will do as the writer, give CD a second chance, only without the pre-judging. I think that most of the 'storm' is overwith, and people will forget it was popular to don't like CD. I don't believe the idea behind CD was to re-invent music, but To make the best album possible. You guys who says it doesn't sound like GnR are way of track IMO. Some songs has that industrial sound, but most of the songs actually could fit right into UYI, more or less.

I think he meant (and it's my opinion too) the songs are so overproduced that they sound, paradoxically, like demos. You know, you can take pieces of different solos here and there in order to build a better one; you can mix a couple of riff, one recorded in 1999  and one recorded in 2006 or there are simply too many vocals recorded trough different years...And probably you haven't  played those songs all togheter at least once in order to get the right feel, sound, mood etc..  : ok:

You can try to hide all this kind of things with pro tools & co. but this is possibly even worse. That's why I like more the live performances of CD songs than the studio ones, because it's not like listening to a musical puzzle.  :)

Chinese Democracy marketed itself by the amount of musicians, money and time it took to make.
It was a legend before release.

That said, is it possible people were turned off by the first few songs and gave up on it?
Yeah, I can maybe see that. Especially with the expectations built up for so long, right or wrong.
I thought then and still feel that Chinese Democracy is a very bland song, and underwhelming intro.
Especially when accustomed to songs the caliber of WTTJ, Reckless Life, Civil War and RNDTH.
To this day I fail to see Axl's fascination with it as a song and album title.

I find Shackler's Revenge to be one of the most horrid songs my ears have heard.
Part of that is probably due to the fact that disco beats literally make me nauseous, and shock as I didn't expect to ever hear a song with Axl vocals I didn't enjoy(besides My World, which is at least good for a laugh). Still, I listened to it multiple times to see if I was missing something, if it was a grower. Turns out it wasn't, but it didn't prevent me from listening to the rest of the album and discovering songs and ideas I do appreciate. To the casual fan, maybe it's not worth the effort. Maybe they need instant gratification.
Maybe it's their loss.

I was surprised Street of Dreams wasn't the first single, as I felt that was a song fans of UYI could identify with and the song most resembling the style of the old band.
I personally think Street of Dreams and CITR are great songs, but I know plenty of GN'R diehards who were unimpressed with them and Chinese Democracy as a whole.

In the end I don't think CD is a hidden gem. I think it's an uneven album, and will continue to be viewed as such.
I do think the songs they got right(Street of Dreams, CITR) hold up well against anything else that's been released in recent history.

As far as experimenting, expanding sounds go, I don't have a problem with it. Thing is, right or wrong, many fans view it as Axl Rose personally experimenting with the GN'R sound and taking it into directions it never would have gone if the classic band hadn't disbanded.

Shackler's is a great example.
Axl needed certain people out of the way in order to take GN'R in that direction.

For fans of that sound, it's a good thing, but you should also see how it could alienate some of the fan base.
On the other end, Prostitute would also fall in that category. I enjoy that song, and am glad it happened.
Does it sound like GN'R to me? No, but I like the song and that's what matters in the end.

So you're saying people hold it against him for having a new band and using their talents to create something that doesn't sound like an exact clone of the old band?

That's weird.


Several of the songs sound like a natural progression from Use Your Illusion. Some are a bigger step away than others.

For example, Axl playing the piano melody from Prostitute as his piano solo before November Rain in 2002 and 2006-7 kinda shows you that those songs aren't that far away from each other.

People just focus on the layers they don't like and label some of the songs as not being a "GN'R sound".




/jarmo

  Fresh ears are required for CD not polluted by the history or apparent recording process,which seems always too take center stage.

Sure, but that's your opinion that some songs sound like natural progressions.
In others, mine included, they don't, and several sound like complete and total departures.

I don't think anyone's looking for "exact clones". Some were taken aback by the stark contrast in directions.

Like I said, there are positives and negatives to it. For me personally, there are songs I strongly dislike, and then songs I really enjoy.

The name debate will never end, because it is not black and white.
The majority, if not all of GN'R's pre CD output was blues based rock n' roll. It varied from stripped down to complex, but was rock n' roll at it's bones.

It wasn't until Izzy, Slash and company were out of the picture that it went in the industrial tinged direction(one example). A direction it wouldn't have had they stayed.
I agree, it doesn't make sense for new members to try and replicate past members styles. It makes sense to utilize their talents and create something fresh.
You could say that is the heart of the confusion in keeping the name.

I love bands who change their sound to some extent from album to album.  IMO, when you do the same thing album after album, it gets very boring.  AFD was a time and a place for Guns.  To try to create that sound over and over would be phony.  Its like rappers who are millionairres rapping about slinging rocks and being all gangsta.  Its fake.  I love the fact that each Guns album shows progression and that Axl is not afraid to do what he wants.  That should be embraced more.

I hope this analogy works ok. I love Tarantino movies like many other people. Some will always say that Pulp Fiction is his best ever. Other enjoyed all of them but they like Kill Bill more. And others may think Django Unchanged is his best. There are different points of view. But they all can agree that all the movies are Tarantino movies. Django is not a sequel of Pulp Fiction. I don?t think people want sequels of Pulp Fiction. I clearly don?t. But I wouldn?t be very happy if Tarantino decides to direct a romantic comedy. Despite the fact that it could have a great cast, great story and great performances. That?s not what people expects from Tarantino.

So you can claim with a straight face that a song like This I Love is a departure from the old band's sound?





Of course. Maybe the same kind of people who were "upset" when Metallica cut their hair....?




You don't know that. Bands do change and try new things even though they don't change members. It comes down to the simple fact that people change.





Maybe the confusion isn't the name but what people associate with it.

I mean, some people think of GN'R as a glam hair band!  :rofl:




/jarmo

I hear some similarities to UYI on CD.  Individual songs here and there would definitely fit as Illusions songs. 

One of the interesting things about CD is that it feels like the songs span over a decade of writing, and they probably do.  When bands record an album, such as AFD, its written at a specific point in time and it reflects the mindset of the band members at that point.  CD reflects likely a decade of writing with different band members constantly coming and going.  It is a true 'melting pot' of songs.  I mean look at This I Love, wasn't it supposed to be about Stephanie Seymour?  That was a LLLOOONNNGGG time ago.  For some this is great.  For others it is not so great.  I fall into the latter group.  I like individual songs on CD, but not the whole album.  In fact there are some songs I think are very underwhelming (Chinese Democracy the song falls into that category). 

I gave Axl credit when CD was released that he finally got his vision out.  I still believe its an eclectic mix of songs and for me the overall album is at the bottom of the GNR catalogue.  But funny enough, I really love There Was a Time.  I might even put it in my top 10 GNR songs.  But that isn't enough to give the entire album an A++. 

I think some songs sound like total departures, not all.
This I Love may not be a total departure, but I can't say it fits seamlessly with the back catalogue either.
Lyrically I find it very watered down in comparison to Axl's prior work.
Maybe that would be the case no matter who's playing behind him. Who knows.
I know it's rumored that track was a UYI holdover.

I could care less about Metallica's hair styles. Musically, I began losing interest in them with Black, and altogether with Load. Not bad music, I like some parts here and there, but the majority isn't my thing.
The core members collectively chose to take the band in that direction, and I respect that.

True nobody knows for sure, but I'm pretty damn confident Izzy wouldn't be into disco beats!
His critics would say he's loyal to the rock n' roll sound almost to a fault. There's a reason Axl allegedly added My World to UYI II w/o the band knowing. The ex-members have for the most part stuck to down and dirty rock, so I think we know where they stand.

How people could lump GN'R in with the hair bands is indeed confusing!

I'm curious to hear some more reasons to this besides your dislike for the lyrics.





You mean the same guy who's recorded reggae tracks?






/jarmo

Chinese Democracy came out at a weird time, people weren't buying music because they could get it for free in seconds. Artists who had put recording on hold for a while have been resurfacing and putting new music out, in Justin Timberlake's case, it was because he was on a successful run of movie roles.

It's So Easy was born as an acoustic song.

November Rain dates way back before AFD, just like Don't Cry.

The same bitches who complain about CD were the same bitches who would complain about Estranged and other songs from Illusions when the record was released. And now they say these songs are classics. Good. If we measure the way history conducts this band,  This I Love among others will be classics for sure in a while ! 

I bet my ass the same bitches will be complaining about something new 10 years from now, saying it's not the same as CD.

Agreed, I put GH in the car the other day, and when Sympathy for the Devil came on I got to thinking about what Album it could have been put on, and other than Appetite for Destruction, it could have go on any of 'em.... A good song is a good song god damn it!, and CD id full of 'em. : ok:

Normally I wouldn't respond to such a juvenile post, but hell it'll kill a few minutes..
Your post is chock full of non-points. What does It's So Easy being born acoustic prove exactly?
Why does it matter that November Rain dates back before AFD?

There are very few similarities between the back catalogue and Chinese Democracy.
The reasons are obvious and have been discussed many times over.
These reasons are more likely why the "bitches" as you so eloquently describe people who don't share your opinion don't consider Chinese Democracy tracks to be instant classics.
It's an entirely different band playing an entirely different style of music. Many were underwhelmed with the results.

No album hit me the way AFD did upon first listen. That record changed everything for me. Yet when UYI was released, I was not anything resembling disappointed by it.
Estranged was instantly one of my favorite songs, and remains so to this day.

Nothing off of Chinese hit me like the early albums. I don't get the hype behind This I Love.
You do, and that's fantastic. Us bitches are overjoyed that you like it.

As for your bet, fans yearning for a sound similar to Chinese are in the minority, so you're ass may be in jeopardy.

As to why I don't feel it fits seamlessly with the back catalogue?
At the risk of sounding redundant, it just doesn't sound like a song the classic lineup would write/play to my ears.
I know it's rumored to be a holdover, so if that's the case, perhaps there's a reason for that. Maybe they didn't feel it was up to snuff? or didn't represent them well?

Lyrically it almost feels like it was written by someone not the caliber of Axl.
Musically it obviously sounds as if it were written by another band of musicians.

Maybe the better question is how/why you feel it does fit seamlessly?

Izzy playing reggae didn't shock me personally a bit.
Players like Clapton, and his idol Richards went through periods of infatuation with it.

I'm not a fan of reggae, but don't feel it's the departure that the uptempo disco beats Shackler's Revenge is.
Sounds like a soulless and rigid drum machine, not something that would lend itself well at all to Izzy's loose playing style.
His reggae tracks were also recorded under his name, not the GN'R banner.
My point was that GN'R would not have gone in that direction with Izzy on board.

And again, this is speculation on my part. I understand we're playing make believe.

Oh yeah. Because they also didn't want to do November Rain. You got a point there....
But they did record November Rain....

So to say you don't think they would've been able to do This I love is just an assumption.

How many were surprised by the acoustic tracks on GN'R Lies? A band that was known for their songs based on electric guitars went acoustic. And then added piano and keyboards for the next albums...



Because to me it's essentially a song based around an amazing  singer and a piano. Which is true for multiple GN'R songs.

Take November Rain and strip it off everything except the piano and vocals. Both songs have a similar core. Both songs represent a particular kind of GN'R's music to me.

The step seems pretty minimal between said songs to me.




No need to bring up Baron von Storm.... ;)

Just kidding!


Calling Brain's drumming soulless.  :no:





Yes, and I disagree. I think some people just focus on the wrong things on certain songs.

you put a keyboard on a song and people focus on that. You use a drum machine and people focus on that etc etc.








/jarmo

I don't remember being surprised upon first listen of "Lies"
Pretty standard for rock n' roll bands to go the acoustic route really.

I grew up on bands like the Stones, Faces, Queen etc, so acoustic guitars, pianos, keyboards all seemed right in place as far as I was concerned.

Again, I don't have a problem with bands experimenting. I just didn't like the results (of Shackler's).
I stand by the opinion that it's a direction GN'R would not have gone in with classic members on board.

As far as This I Love goes, don't get me wrong, I love the idea of a stripped down song featuring Axl and a piano.
Again, just wasn't overly impressed with the results. Musically it is okay, but lyrically a bit "cat in the hat" ish to my ears.
Part of that is on me for high expectations, due to the fact that I hold Axl to a high standard as a songwriter.
His past work raised the bar pretty high. Plus considering the amount of time spent on the record, my expectations were probably built up even more.

Touche on Sorum!
I lobbed that one over for you, haha.

For the record, I appreciate Brain's talent as a drummer, just not into the Shackler beat.
Even though it dominates the song, I could get by it if there were other elements to appreciate, but for me, there just wasn't much.

Oh My God works well to me because Axl's lyrics/vocals are so powerful, it almost doesn't matter whats going on behind him.

Having acoustic guitars in songs is one thing, releasing an EP with a mostly acoustic side is another. Especially when the band in question is known for their electric hard rock debut album...





And I disagree.

Because we don't know.





I guess we have different ways of seeing things.

Sometimes it's great to have lyrics that make you think. Sometimes they are more simple and make you feel something, instantly.

And sometimes you hear a great song, but then listen to the lyrics and they're just stupid. That has never happened with GN'R though.  : ok:






Both songs have similarities don't you think?




/jarmo

I guess that CD not sounding like the classic lineup is no real surprise, I mean Axl kinda went through a lot to get his vision of what GnR is out there.

In terms of CD compared to previous Guns albums. For me it's the best, I think the old albums represent a different time in my life and as much as i love them i dont listen to them much. I've listened to CD pretty much every day since it came out and I just love it all. I think i might be an Axl fan boy because i love everything he has ever sang. For me Axl is Guns n Roses, just wish we had more music from him but I'm sure he does too.

Congratulations. I also wish Axl would have released more because I feel the time that's went by is equivalent to the waste of his talent/rasp.
Btw: The old albums don't represent a different time in "your life", they're a statement of the time they've been made in.

And that?s perfectly fine with me and I respect that. However you can?t expect every single fan out there to think and feel the same way. You think Axl is GN?R and I?m sure you have good reasons to feel that way. I don?t feel that way and I have my own reasons. At the same time I don?t think Slash is GN?R or Duff is GN?R. Off all their solo projects or supergroups they?ve been in the only one I like was Duff with Neurotic Outsides. But I don?t think that band and album were the best thing ever. The only reason that would make me to go to a show of a Slash band or Duff band was the hope that they might play It?s So Easy or some other old song. At some point I stopped doing that. I thought it wasn?t worthy to go see them just to listen one or two songs I love, get picture with them and an autograph. The big difference I see with the current GN?R is that they play a lot of those old songs.And it?s Axl singing them. So I find it it?s worthy to pay for a ticket. Sorry if some people feel offended. But that?s how I feel and this is my truth.

My problem is when fans get too judgmental and make claims that people who don?t like CD never liked Estrange. Did they conduct a poll about who like or didn?t like Estrange and CD? Why are there people who think they have the right to judge other fans? I don?t hate CD. I like a couple of songs. But as an album I don?t think CD is better than AFD, Lies or UYI. If I respect others opinion. Please respect mine.

I know there are many fans out there who still follow what Fink or Buckethead are doing.I couldn?t care less about those two. But if others like whatever they are doing, fine with me. The same way I couldn?t care less about Tommy or DJ might be doing. But if fans love all that and they are happy about it, well, good for them.

I don?t mean I want a reunion. If a marrige is not working then a divorce is the only solution to the problem. If there is a reunion I?ll be very happy. But I?m not dreaming about it nor I think they should it just to please me, other fans or the industry.

I think some of the unfinished demos got out there more than people think and it caused people to pre-judge the entire album.  There are a lot more people, besides the Grantland Writer, that wrote off the album before they ever listened to it as a whole.  I don't expect everyone to like it but I think there is something good there for most fans of rock 'n roll. I just wish people would not write off an album before even listening to it.

Interesting opinions..For those of us that were around in September of 1991 remember some UYI criticism..There were some that wanted AFD II (Axl felt it would have been too easy and lazy of the band) than there were others who felt it was too bloated and should have been condensed to 1 album (the nerve). Actually at roughy 70 minutes each UYI was more like "a double 1/2 alum"
CD is definitely a departure from previous releases due to lyrical content of some songs and musical direction of others. Many are  keyboard heavy something Izzy and Slash were against from the days when Axl incoorporated them last minute onto PC..
 But to say CD doesn't sound like the hey day of GN'R is soo wrong..SOD,TWAT, TIL, ITW and Madagascar are all GREAT songs that could have made up UYI III..Sorry is also a great song that Slash could have fit in comfortably on..
Point is although different it still sounds like GN'R to me!!

I didn't see anyone else address this, so I will...

Axl said this in 1989, and if you watch the entire interview and GNR segment (it's on youtube), you'll see it's obvious what Axl meant -- that he didn't want his life or the band to be pigeonholed into one style of music, song, direction, or aura.  That statement was made while the band was reeling from the overwhelming success of Appetite for Destruction, which he also mentioned.

99% of people who recall the quote, "I wanna bury Appetite..." have only heard that brief sound byte, so they've never heard it in proper context.  I completely understood it, since I was watching it when it aired in 1989, and I still have that MTV Rockmentary on tape.



Yeah, I remember it.  I heard all sides at the time, but for the most part, I was lucky enough to be around those who just appreciated the fuckin' music, that we finally had more Guns N Roses music.  The thing I thought sucked was the absence of Steven on drums, but otherwise, I was happy with most of the music, and so were fans generally.  The most criticisms I heard came years later and are often applied retroactively as if people back then had a problem with the music.  I don't remember the music ever being much of an issue back then.  The late shows and rioting were giving GNR its problems then, not the song selections.

From the article:
They wanted a competent re-creation of music they knew they already liked.

But...that is was CD IS!

I find it to be much more influenced by classic rock than I expected. Gonna admit omg owns most CD. :headbanger:

/flameshield on


I think cd is good, but mediocre and sounds too much like old gnr. Imo it needs more Buckethead and voice-acrobatics.

Maybe a bit more influence of electronic stuff too, but thats me =p



Edit:
I gotta say that Bumblefoot (except for axl) really made me go from liking the livemusic to going 'this rocks' @ rio (lisboa). He is pretty good.

I agree with all of this.  'Street Of Dreams' is the most accessible song of the bunch.  Would have been a better first single than the title track.  Love the older live arrangement of the 2002 tour, but the studio effort is a bit of a mess.

Ultimately, the album failed to make any sort of impact because it had no hits because there are no real choruses.  Its a problem.  Not to say everything needs to be poppy, but you should be able to answer the simplest of musical questions, that being, "how does it go?"

You would struggle with that.  You would not struggle to tell someone how 'Jungle' or 'Paradise' went.  But how would you explain 'There Was A Time'?  And I thought that was the best of the bunch, by far.

Eh. Just one more guy who did all his research on the Internet, pulled out the most outrageous details, and used them to talk smack about the album. The fact that he's writing about it five years later shows that it not only has relevance, but some sort of resonance.
I rank CD right near AFD, and above most of the UYI stuff. But that's just me. I really didn't want Axl to come out with another album where he's singing about strippers, booze and drugs. Recording the same album over and over again and releasing it with a new name to cash in is Bon Jovi's game, not GNR.
I like the new band, I like most of the new songs. The ones I don't care for, other people adore.

I like it more than I don't.  Still listen to the tracks I like fairly often, and some I'd put right up with some of the classic line-up's material.

As for relevance, I don't see it.  Its supposedly "the most talked about album EVER!!" but no one could tell you a song off of it, unless they perhaps just took a shot with a title track.   

It just shows that the making of CD should be told and what was going on for those 15 years it took. It can't be told in an essay or in an interview. People are always going to talk about it as an underrated album, an overrated album, a shitty album, or a great album, but they're still going to talk about it.

"The Great Unreleased Album" that some people wanted it to be, makes for a good rock n' roll story.

Seems like the whole problem for some people stems from two facts. First, their inability to understand their own (or anyone else's) limited perception of reality. And second, the fact that AFD was a concept album. That concept being blues-based hard rock.

Since AFD in all its greatness is what most people first came to know about GNR, it's also what some use to define GNR with. The problem is that the band obviously made a very conscious decision to NOT try and define what their sound is all about in their debut album, but rather only show what they are capable of when sticking strictly in the realm of hard-ass rockers. Okay, SCOM is more like hard rocking soft-ass song, but still...  ;D

So it follows that people who define GNR mostly through AFD are victims of their own limited world view and the inability to grasp the fact that even the band itself didn't define by or limit themselves to what was on AFD. Very unfortunate, really, as GNR has and always had so much more to offer.

Not sure there is a "problem" per se. Think it's more the reality that people view Chinese Democracy for what it is.
A record made by an entirely different band than the one that recorded AFD, Lies, UYI, and one with a sound they (people with the "problem") don't enjoy as much as the former.

The problem might be the thinking that those who don't enjoy Chinese Democracy as much as others don't "get it", or are holding on to the past, need to be more open minded, be reminded that GN'R was always Axl's vision, etc etc. It really could simply be the fact that some don't enjoy the music itself on Chinese as much as others, regardless of the musicians, circumstances.

True. I think what I was trying to say was that especially those who define GNR through AFD and renounce CD (maybe even UYIs) are not on the same page even with the AFD-era band claiming this or that not being "true GNR".

Bottom line: It's a matter of taste, but GNR was always much more than just AFD as far as musical tastes go. So a narrow view of what's "true GNR" has never been in line with reality. There's a difference to liking an album and liking a whole band.