Here Today... Gone To Hell!

(I'm sure this topic has already been raised somewhere else, but I don't have the time or patience to comb through all the threads that have popped up since the "reunion" rumors have begun to pick up steam.  The point is: feel free to move this to the appropriate thread if it has been discussed elsewhere.) 

So my thesis is this: Anyone who wants Chinese Democracy II should probably not be rooting for a "reunion."  And by "reunion," I mean Slash and Duff joining Axl, Fortus, Dizzy, and Frank Ferrer on an extended world tour (because all signs point to that being the arrangement on the table).  I usually don't buy into false dichotomies, but in this case, it's difficult for me to imagine Slash being too happy with Chinese Democracy II being released under the Gn'R brand before or during a world tour that features him and Duff.  And, while I appreciate the optimism of those of you saying Slash and Duff could lay down tracks on CD II (like Bumblefoot did prior to CD I's release), it's naive to think Slash or Duff want any part of CD II, nor would they likely want to use a Gn'R reunion tour as promotional tool for an album they had no role in creating. 

So, let's say the "reunion" happens, what does that mean for CD II?  Is it indefinitely shelved?  Maybe one day it gets released as an Axl Rose solo album (despite Axl's past objections to releasing CD as a solo act)?  Maybe this is part of why Axl would agree to a reunion tour in the first place?  Maybe he is carving out a deal with the record label to "buy back" the CD II recordings in exchange for a reunion?  I realize this is all speculation, but I personally would much rather have CD II in my hand than have another 2-3 years of "oldies but goodies" played on the road, regardless of the players involved.

I'm sure CD II will get released at some point, but I'm worried a "reunion" would move that release date back at least 5 more years, if not more.  But maybe that's what Axl wants?  Perhaps a reunion takes the heat off of him in terms of releasing new music and exposing himself to more critique, much of which came from folks who weren't going to be pleased with the music unless Slash was involved.  Can't say I blame the guy, CD seemed to suffer from unfair critique based on what it was not (Appetite) and who was not on it (Slash) rather than what it was (mostly good music), which to me seems unfortunate because some good music was there that the public, for the most part, missed out on.

Why go to all that trouble again when you can just go on a reunion tour, bank some tremendous cash, foster good will amongst the public and casual Gn'R fans, and maybe, one day, release CD II on his terms rather than a record label's?                     

Some interesting  speculatio, but  not sure why the record company would have anything to do with a tour. Sure the catalog would get a pump in sales, but the tour is going to sell for nostalgia...That's if a reunion is in the cards....

that era ended in 2011 when the tour ended.

I can only hope.

i dont know ax, but i cant see him doing this. scrapping everything he worked for, for what exactly? cash? acceptance? i think hope and believe cd 2 will be released under the gnr banner, and if it were to come out under his name instead, that to me feels like his vision for gnr wasnt followed through all the way, like it was stopped/compromised halfway or something. i wouldnt really care that much as id be so stoked over the music, but i think he would.

i know where youre coming from and i hate even entertaining this train of thought. i would be so bummed if cd2 was pushed back in favor of a reunion. i hope this does not happen. and i dont think it will.

and yes, cd suffered lots of unfair critique. its pretty sad. fuck it though, i love it and thats all that matters to me. never been a fan of reviews, most things i like tend to not get rave reviews.

would be buried and never come out.

Are you talking about those songs that Axl recorded in the late-1990s?

That's been my impression as well so far.

Your concerns are legitimate and logical but also unnecessary. Firstly, all of them arise from theory, nothing official having been announced or spoken by anyone who counts, but if Slash and Duff both rejoin the band, no immediate reasons for their resistance to adding or accepting preexisting work seem apparent. It's music, and whether or not someone is a writer or owner, the initial steps committing to the organization would seem to suggest an acceptance for what it is, regardless of what it might mean to the acceptor's past involvement and/or personal feelings.

This speculation, this theory seems peaceful and exciting, and mostly hopeful, whether or not it occurs for real. I can understand your fears, if you'll permit me to regard them as such, but I encourage you to look the other way, to have faith in Axl, remembering what he said, how he related his feelings about CD to Kurt Loder (though it was 9 years prior -- forget that por favor, a different time it was), he and they didn't do all of this to keep it buried.

what I think is, that he should have invested in better producer, or someone to direct the final cut of the songs. 15 years of fcking around made their penis numb... they needed sm1 else to warn em of minute details.

Many songs could have turned out a lot greater.
I only find a handful of songs on CD to be "Perfect". Most of them have some aspect "perfect", but other parts just fck it up.

For example, Madagascar, Sorry, Shackler, Blues, CD are perfectly tuned, composed and produced songs

but on the other hand
Better is a great song, but it has that weird guitar noise at 2:20 - that part is out of tune, and unimaginative - sm1 should have written an actual solo there.
also, intro and outro culd have been done by female back vocals... Axl singing it is just creepy (if sm1 can remix that, I'd appreciate it ;D)

TWAT is 2 songs blended into 1. With the first song (2min) being boring and annoying, and the other song (post 2 mins) being among the best by GNR. IMO The first part should have been rewritten, or reworked or removed cus it seems like a filler intro  to the song.

I'm pretty much sure, everybody here cant wait for the song to get to the "back in time to the place in my soul" part, cus its so fkin better than first 2 mins (its just a 2 min Axl rant :P- almost 0 music there)

and TIL on the album just makes my balls hurt... make it a rock song... not a little mermaid soundtrack :P

sm1 should have warned them about that

But that's just you. And don't get me wrong, I appreciate your opinion, but I'm tired of hearing fans say stuff like "they should have done this and that and not that and this". In the end every band should do whatever they want to do or they end up doing something that is not genuine. Something that is not them.

GN'R has always been a little out of tune, off beat and annoying. But all the while they have been maybe the most genuine rock band. I think that's just awesome.

being genuine is not an objective - dont fix if it aint broken. sometimes you cant reinvent a wheel. And I think some parts have stayed for "legacy" reasons, instead of "re evaluating" them.
its kinda sad that TWAT, or IRS basically stayed the same for 10 years, and that CITR is considered worse of after its been released than the demo of it.

offering suggestions to someone else's work, especially doing it long after it was released and is now inalterable, is pointless, other than for useless, undeniable and clearly misguided self-promotion of yourself as some delusional, musically creative expert.

Opinions are always fine and acceptable, as well as are descriptive observations, but blatant instructions or solutions for fixing the, your uniquely noted problems with this creation are rude, disrespectful and ultimately ridiculous, your thoughts contributing nothing other than to your readers' possible and unwanted distress.

Also, your point addresses nothing to this thread, only using the CD link for your personal needs.

True. You can't achieve genuineness by trying. You either are genuine or then you're not.

I'm pretty sure the reunion is on there's too much smoke this time without a fire. The fact so many industry people are commenting is a good sign. Could the Chinese Democracy II stuff be released in conjunction with this tour?? Would be a bit weird.

Remember the "Stay of Execution" theory? Even though that is now defunct my guess is there was a plan to release material under that banner.

Anyway we've been told there is a "plan". I also keep thinking about Richard saying a reunion would have to be about more than money...

definitely dont agree with your critique of the songs you listed, especially til. i really dug the orchestral arrangement. it was top notch. not to mention, having all of that traditional and organized beauty mixed with axls at times dirty and uncoventonal sounding vocals (dirty in a good way) was one of the things that got me hooked on gnr in the first place. to me it was an all around awesome follow up to november rain.

the better intro always stuck with me. ax was on top of the world, and the next thing you knew, the whole industry was talking shit about him. wonder what that felt like to go through? i hate the idea of him giving that verse to someone else. it might turn out good, but it might also lose some of its meaning. the way he did it was memorable and unique, unlike your parroting of rolling stones claim that it sounded creepy ; )

im sure they took every precaution they could think of. my guess is thats part of the reason it took so long. i think if ax was happy with it, even after all those years, then im glad he went for it. much better than giving the final say to someone else and kicking himself for it later if he didnt like the way it turned out.

good on you for bringing up that quote mr hays. i forgot about that one. it does make me a little less anxious about whats to come.

I never thought he was working on all of this to keep it buried... he is just trying to dig it out at his own pace.  :)

I hope Slash and Duff do indeed rejoin GNR... That would be very special.. and Axl still releases a record of his old songs,  don't care if its a "GNR"release or something else.

Best of both worlds.

I really don't get all the hate for Chinese Democracy. It is a great album that could have achieved more commercial success with proper promotion. Whenever GNR tours again I hope to hear songs from CD in the setlist along with awesome new music. :beer:

I don't see much of any hate on this board for it... at all. Some people don't like every song, that's normal with most records by any band... I think.

As for why the outside world might not love it... is it really hard to understand why? We don't need to re has the bands history for that do we .

I think when Axl sent out those signed plagues to it seemed everyone except me, that it signified the end of the CD era

I guess I just don't understand people starting topics with somewhat sarcastic or snide comments like would reunion "end" Chinese democracy era. Like it 's a bad thing.

It definitely did feel that way.

And is that a hell of a lot different than where it stands now?  And has been?

Why are we pretending they are hard at work on this?

We are essentially asking if they will shelve something that's already been long shelved.

Ha!  Can?t argue with you there.  I am still in the camp that these two things (reunion and CDII) are not mutually exclusive.  Maybe it?s because I?m a sucker, but with all the buzz and hype surrounding a reunion, why wouldn?t Axl (and the label) want to capitalize on that with the release of CDII?  Now, maybe how it gets released would change (e.g. they don?t tour behind it) but I don?t see how or why it would get shelved completely.

I guess Axl might want to re-work unrelease material with the help of the old boys.
Anyway.. I hope those songs see the light of day.

Why would Slash and Duff be looking to help though?  That's the part I can't see.

Sure, we'd love to do a reunion tour.  And hey, if that helps you move up the release of an album by a bastardized version of our own band that does not include us, by all means, let us help you on that.  After all, you've been so good to us over the years, Axl.  Especially Slash.

Come on.

Agreeing to share a stage with him again is one thing.  Agreeing to help on the other?  That's something else.

This is going to sound kinda dumb..

Maybe Axl will use the name Guns N Roses for a reunited band that plays nothing written after 91 and between arena tours with that band he releases music and tours theaters/clubs with Stay Of Execution featuring Chinese Democracy era members.

The thing that made me think of this is how the name Black Sabbath came to only mean a band featuring Ozzy after the 1997 reunion and the band with Dio singing became known as Heaven & Hell to avoid confusion.

Its not totally out there.

But in terms of Heaven & Hell, did they still play Ozzy era tunes in the setlists?  A band playing only post 2000 GNR songs and nothing but is not going to be in high demand.

They only played Dio era stuff and they released a new album.

A band featuring Axl Rose playing whatever material they play will always sell out at least clubs forever.

All the attention of the reunion could actualy make any side project stronger. (We're off in hypothetical land.. I don't consider latter day GNR a "side project".. I'm talking about that band shifting into being Axl's band "Stay Of Execution")

Who said anything about them helping to promote CDII?  A reunion will help any sale of any Guns product in its own right?Slash and Duff don?t have to sing the praises of Silkworms.  Also, not sure I agree with your characterization of how they feel about CD music in general.  Duff played CD songs on tour last year, so presumably he?s down with them.  There are a handful of CD songs Slash could easily play. 

IMO, there can?t just be a partial thawing of the ice.  In other words, Axl?s not going to agree to a reunion if it means the death of CDII.  And rightly so?and I would think Slash and Duff and anyone else on the reunion train would realize this.  Thus, I think any reunion naturally involves a discussion of how to handle CDII.  Especially if this is going to be Axl?s last hurrah of touring. 

Yeah, we just disagree.

I think any sort of reunion tour is only to celebrate their time in the band.  I don't think there are going to be CD songs in any setlist.

I see them coming back as mutually exclusive.  A reunion tour to celebrate the good old days, or Axl continues with his "vision" at his own snail's pace without them.

I also don't share your opinion that the others would be real down with helping promote "Axl's vision".  You are not the first one to use the example of Duff playing a few shows to explain how things must be all good in the hood, but I'm not sure I agree.

I think when these guys are asked about "Axl's Guns N' Roses" the reaction is somewhere between an eye roll and the jerking off motion.  I don't think they respect it or think its worthy of carrying their name.  As a result, I think they would be loathe to appear to be giving it their stamp of approval like this.

I could be way off base.  Who knows. 

I'm sure Fernando's big announcement will fill in all these blanks.

So the argument now is that a person (Slash) who has recorded with acts such as Motorhead, Insane Clown Posse and Chris Daughtry, would automatically be against recording something on a record Axl has worked on with other people? Out of spite?

Many assumptions here. First you'd have to assume there's a relationship that would make this even possible. Then you'd have to assume Axl wanted him or them on the track(s). So, assuming both of those happened and he did ask, you'd think they would automatically say no?



/jarmo

I wouldn't imagine that there would be either.  Some people can suggest that the newer lineups are the same Guns N Roses all they want, but they're not.  They're different lineups from different eras.  Slash and Duff aren't going to rejoin for a more "official" or "classic" version of the band to play songs that weren't theirs, nor will reunion fans want to hear a Chinese Democracy song in place of what could've been a performance of an older song.


I don't agree either.  Duff joining Axl onstage was not a Guns N Roses reunion.  Duff was filling in for Tommy Stinson when needed.  That's it.  Afterwards, Duff and Axl went their separate ways once more with no ostensible future plans.


Not out of spite, out of recognition that all those other acts are not Guns N Roses.  Slash is more likely to take recording and/or performing under the Guns N Roses banner a lot more personally and wouldn't easily agree to Axl's whims.  It's not the same as performing with some other band that isn't his.

I agree.

If this comes off, I'm going to have about 20 people I know of that are going to want to go.

Number of people in that 20 that will want to hear 'Shackler's Revenge' = zero.

Hell, number of people in that 20 that will know 'Shackler's Revenge' is even a thing = one (me)

All these articles stoking the fires for this...are we really thinking they are telling people "Great news, you haven't missed your last chance to hear 'Chinese Democracy' songs played live"?

Personally, I'd rather have a new album than a reunion tour.  Actually, I want both.  But if the reunion comes at the expense of ever hearing that material, I'll be very dissappointed.

I could buy the "Heaven and Hell" scenario - but there's an important difference.  Black Sabbath with Dio was basically the classic lineup with a different singer (albeit Vinny Apice replaced Bill Ward after the Heaven and Hell album) - a singer who was a well-established, household name who had already had major success with Rainbow.  Two of the three albums he had already made with Sabbath (before H&H was used as the band name) are classics - and the third was a reasonable success as well.  Heaven and Hell, basically, were surely a much better touring proposition than Axl And Dudes, especially if something resembling the original* Guns N' Roses is available as an option.


*with apologies to Emily.

I get that.  And I'd very much like to hear it as well.

But doesn't this become a "bird in the hand" situation?

How long has Axl allegedly been working on getting this follow up album out?  And how is that coming along?

I understand your point, but would be remiss to not point out there is likely more than a good chance that album might never come out, reunion tour or no.

I don't know if it's likely to never come out... but there certainly isn't a time frame for one to expect it.

So a tour with Slash and Duff doesn't equate to it being delayed.

Agree with your second point.

As to your first point, I think each year that passes without a release diminishes the chances it ever comes out. 

I certainly see no counterargument that the passage of time is somehow *increasing* the chances.  At best, maybe you can argue, even as time passes, things never move off "whenever Axl feels like it", which is where we've been since forever.

But even there, I'd say the passage of time decreases his chances of "feeling like it".

In this hypothetical scenario where Axl asked Slash to record a part on a already written song, you think the answer would be no because "it's not GN'R"?
In other words, Axl giving him the chance to put his mark on something that was gonna be released anyway, he'd turn it down just because of that?

I don't know. I mean, if (a big if) it ever got to that point, wouldn't it be a great way of showing evidence of a better relationship? You know, "I know you weren't in the band when we write this song, but I'd love to hear what you could come up with for it!".

But it's all hypothetical. I'm just not convinced that if it ever got to that point, acting like it's 2005 (or something) again, might not be the answer....  :hihi:




/jarmo

Anything is possible with this band.

Nothing surprises me anymore.

Hopefully we get to hear the majority of songs that were written in the CD era.

Not

 :smoking:

Basically anything recorded that could have ended up on Chinese Democracy, but didn't.  I would especially love to hear those late 90s songs with Buckethead solos/guitar overdubs.  But I'm guessing that the "Oh My God," industrial type songs probably won't be released for quite some time, if ever. 

I too wanna here the 1998-2000 late 90s stuff (like oh my God, CD, CITR) but I think I'd like to hear some things with 2010 in there too.

It's still not "original" GNR, history doesn't vanish because you Don't like it, or because it's inconvenient.

Axl has never toured with "Axl and Dudes" it's always been GNR.  :-*

I wish we could listen to songs and bands without questioning whether it's original or not. So what? Black sabbath with dio rocked, so did the original... Doesn't mean we can't love the dio version. I like the guns n roses that has been touring in 2001-2007. It's not original, but it's good.

We can't even use "original" without actually talking about Hollywood Rose + La Guns. You either like the band or don't like it. Who gives a shit if it isn't the classic version. Id rather see Axl playing new music ahead of time like CD instead of playing all of his old songs and like 4 recent songs.

Do you find it odd he has not elected to play a "new" song at a concert since 2006?

2001-02 tours : Madagascar, Chinese Democracy, Street Of Dreams, Silk Worms, Rhiad & The Bedouins

2006-07 tours : Madagascar, Chinese Democracy, Street Of Dreams, Better, I.R.S., There Was A Time

2009-10 tours : nothing

2011-12 tours : zip

2013-14 tours : nada

If they are supposedly sitting on all this great stuff they are excited about...where is it?  We see above he did have a track record of doing this very thing in the past.

Wha' happen?

He decided that instead of having people's first taste being a live version in concert or on Youtube, like in the past for some of the material, that he wouldn't do that with these songs?
But I'm sure you thought about that already and you're just asking for the sake of somebody discussing with you. :)



/jarmo

As you see it, he soured on the premise entirely?

A lot of fans really got into those songs they obtained in that manner.  We see that from how fans were mouthing lyrics back to him for songs not even out yet. 

I think, therefore I am.

No seriously, I think it's a possible reason.
Some of the element of surprise of the last album was a bit lost due to the live versions floating around and obviously the illegal stuff that came later.

Of course fans were into it. But that doesn't mean it's only a good thing to play songs live before they have a release date...

Another reason for playing them last time could be that he wanted to show the world, the doubters, that there were new songs. It wasn't only words in a magazine or whatever.
It's possible that the hypothetical need has changed....



/jarmo

I think Jarmo's probably onto something there.  The alternatives are a) there are no new songs to speak of or b) Axl doesn't think they're very good.  There's no lack of rumblings and rumours about this band, but I can't recall anyone claiming that. 

Big time agreed on this part.  

I felt the RIRIII concert (which many fans, myself included, played the shit out of for years) served that purpose.  It also gave a great deal of hope and generated excitment.

The leaks in 2006, I think, even more so.  Those dark years of 2003-2005 were grim times.  I know they weren't happy the leaks got out, but they accomplished the same thing.  OK, they haven't given up.  And there are more than just the handful of songs we already heard.

So, thinking along those lines, I think he could have bought himself some more time and goodwill with a new song in one of Appetite For Residency runs.  Smaller gigs with more hardcore fans.  Would have been a nice treat, I think.

Well, that's what's hard to reconcile, I think.

For the record, I don't believe either of those are true.  Well, the first example truly isn't.  Songs do exist.

But what about that second one?  On the 2001-02 and 2006-07 tours, we see he was truly excited by his band and their work.  Its evident onstage.

Was the same true from 2009 onwards?  Could the lack of even one new song seeing the light of day, combined with all the tales about how that band didn't do a whole hell of a lot or recording be a sign Axl has doubts?

Recall that he was crushed when that one producer (forget which, there were so many) told him of his batch, he had 3 good songs.  Maybe that stung him harder than we know.  Maybe that's why there seems to be no real progress on the follow up.

Then you throw in his Revolver interview which would seem to refute that, but where is the proof he followed through on his claims of what was next?

Lot of questions, very few answers.

Also, many of the tours after the album's release were to promote that album. Not the next album.
If you went to any of the shows, you'd know that it's not completely impossible that some of the people there had never heard those Chinese Democracy songs. So for them, they were "new".


All these possible reasons give you a better idea why it might have changed. There's a bigger picture, it's not just about a few hardcore fans at each show and the ones who sit at home waiting for a Youtube clip of a new song. :)




/jarmo

I think if there ever was a time for GNR to reveal anything new, I think we should look at 2013 and onwards.

I feel they worked Chinese Democracy until 2012, and there wasn't any need for new stuff on those tours, as Jarmo said.

Yes, I think you both make good points.

The shows from 2009 through the beginning of 2012 was really the tour to support CD.  Not terribly likely they would be onto introducing new songs quite yet.

But the 2012 residency onwards kicked off the going through the motions part of all this.  Really can't say they were still promoting CD at that point, can you?

I find it especially troubling there was not anything in 2014.  Those shows were all gravy.  South American shows for the umpteenth time, and yet another no pressure residency.

Also consider, Axl's Revolver interview was before that residency.  So if, as that interview let on, he was looking to once again focus on the follow up...wouldn't one think there was at least a chance we'd hear a new song at those Las Vegas shows?

Isn't it more than a bit ironic that the only completely out of the blue song at those shows was 'Yesterdays'?

He was gonna look at it after. So the focus wasn't on the next album during the shows.....

No matter how you try to justify it, in my opinion, the decision not to makes more sense than to play a new song for a select group of hardcore fans. No matter how much we would've enjoyed it.
Now, if the album had a release date when those shows happened, then I could agree with some of what you were saying...



You were expecting Marseilles?





/jarmo

I think it would speak to his level of seriousness about continuing on.

Not playing one doesn't automatically equal him not being serious, but it opens up something of a can.

And, cards on the table, as much as I'd have loved a new song as a sign there is a future, the reality is that nothing would prove that more than a leak. 

No, it doesn't. It doesn't have to mean anything.
It only means something like that because you want it to and it fits your "agenda".
You wanted it to happen, so you make up reasons that would prove you right. In reality, it doesn't have to mean anything.

Silkworms was played live in 2001. It wasn't even on the album. What does that mean? Whatever you want it to...


You've been given all these plausible reasons, but you just put them all aside and continue with "but they should have".
It's just somewhat odd, this disregard for plausible reasons and continuing the quest.

I mean, at what point could you admit that there's plenty of plausible reasons to not do it and move on? What does it take? Maybe your grand idea wasn't as goo as you thought in this case? These things happen.... :)
No, I'm not angry. I'm just curious what makes somebody keep doing that.  Because it makes no sense to me. :hihi:



/jarmo

Just throwing out a few speculative alternatives that might have worked for him in some way.

I mean, we see what he's been doing and how that's all going, which I think we can all agree has just been gangbusters.

I guess I'm just trying to imagine if there was any way to improve on what is already a pretty awesome situation he's got going on. 

Probably not possible though, you're right.  Hard to improve upon perfection.

But if you have a big pile of reasons against and one small pile for, doesn't it make you go "Hmmmmm. Maybe it does make sense after all."?

So, playing a new unreleased song in say 2013. What's the purpose? I'm assuming your belief is backed up with more than "Uhhh, I would've liked it". Or?

Sarcasm noted.
Once again, so much for wanting to have a discussion. The silliness starts when you don't have anything else left.... Too bad. I tried. :)
 



/jarmo

See, now this is tricky because you keep asking me questions and then bemoan when I keep talking about it.

I don't dispute your points.  They are valid arguments.

I just don't see them as so obviously the reason not to do it that you do.  Or in such strong terms.

One man's slam dunk case is another man's "well, that's one way to look at it, I guess".  That sort of thing.

What would be the biggest reason not to play new songs on a tour that's promoting the previous album, or a tour that's not promoting the next album?

What's the one plausible reason that would make you think your opinion is wrong? I'm really curious.

I'm sure your default answer to it is "he's not serious about it" or something. Which I already gave an answer to.
And if that's the case it's unfortunate that it seems like your negative mindset is obstructing you from seeing other plausible reasons for you not getting to hear new songs on Youtube.



/jarmo

* Not Exist Name For New Disc Of GNR

** Reunion Is Whit Classic LineUp AFD -> Axl / Izzy / Slash / Duff / Steven ->  Why ? They NEVER Performed World Tour

 8)

You figure:

WTTJ, Think About You, My Michelle, Rocket Queen, Night Train, Anything Goes, Paradise City and, others were played as early as January '86 but AFD wouldn't come out until July 1987.

Used to Love Her and OIAM were played live as early as January 1988 and Lies didn't come out until Dec 88

RIO was January 1991 - you got 5 new songs played. UYIs didn't come out until Sept '91

You had Attitude and little clips of SIDHY you played live as early as 1992 and TSI didn't come out until Nov 93

Maddy, Chinese D, Rhiad, and the Blues were played from 2001 to 2002 and Better, Catcher etc was played in 06 - 07 despite the album not coming out until Nov 2008

Every iteration of GN'R would play at least one song off the next record. Every version except the 2009-2014 band.

Yeah, funny how we used to watch and listen to all those songs on Youtube back in 1991....

Different times.

Amazing how an unsigned band who hasn't released an album would play songs that ended up on the next album. Wow!  :hihi:


Maybe they just didn't feel like playing anything new so there'd be none of that "But I remember that version they played that one time before they recorded the song. I prefer that to the recorded version because there's a note there that's not on the recorded version" stuff? Maybe the whole idea is for us to hear the songs closer to their release instead? Could it be?

It's kinda funny that the need to hear something new is so big that it makes it impossible to understand the other side of the coin.
It's great that you want to hear it, but it'd be kinda nice if something managed to get through and register regarding why they didn't play anything new.... Until then, more of the same.


Edited to add: So if they released one of the covers all this would become moot?
The Seeker was released on the live DVD/album. Yay!

And they did use The General as an intro for quite some time.... Still in 2010 even. :)



/jarmo