Chinese Democracy Reviewing Rules

[ARC]

Chinese Democracy Reviewing Rules:

1) Don't judge on the time taken to make the songs.

This is going to be the biggest point critics' are going to make..."this is what we get after ten years!". It's totally stupid. No one knows how much time was actually spent on the individual songs or the album as a whole. I've heard timespans of five years, ten years and even fifteen years! "There Was A Time" could have been written in two years or it could have been written in a week - no one but the band knows. Also, just because Axl has not released anything major in ten years does not mean he has spent every single second working on this record.

2) Don't judge the album expecting/wanting to hear 'classic' GN'R

This is a completely different band to 'classic GNR', as we have heard. Even though it's called Guns N' Roses, judge it as if it wasn't...

3) Don't compare the new tunes to the classic ones.

Different band = different music

4) Admit to liking the songs!

If you like the songs, say so. Don't grumble about them being "...umm...okay...not too bad...", or hide your love for them because you're an old-school fan and you don't believe the new band is Guns N Roses.

5) Don't jump on the bandwagon

I gaurantee you, when the album is released a lot of critics are going to poison your mind with their blinkered view of Axl Rose. Don't fall for it...! Even the ones who shoot down Axl the most are probably secretly rocking out to "TWAT" with their "Chinese Democracy" t-shirts on...! Don't be like these critics - who have to censor what they say to please the taste of their emo-loving editors - instead, be like Axl Rose and have some balls!

[Gaymo, the Hobbit]

Sir, yes Sir!!

[Timmy]

first, we'll need a release date

!

[mrlee]

if i like it, ill say i like it. if its a pile of crap ill say its a pile of crap. ill give my reasons for either. But i disagree with not being able to compare to original albums, as the name is still guns n roses, this isnt a debut, this a follow up...just a over due one lol.

[Thorned Rose]

I really think that not putting on any bias because of the 8 year wait is BS....

It has taken a long time, so I expect great songs... period.

So that is that. Trying to judge CD and the songs we have like Axl released an album 2 years ago is stupid. There hasn't been any official Gn'R stuff since the End of Days soundtrack.

Time is a big issue. If the songs aren't special then neither was our wait of "years"

[Timmy]

if i like it, ill say i like it. if its a pile of crap ill say its a pile of crap. ill give my reasons for either. But i disagree with not being able to compare to original albums, as the name is still guns n roses, this isnt a debut, this a follow up...just a over due one lol.

Yes it is a debut, for most of the band anyways. ?It's a totally different band that plays totally different music.

Apples to oranges dude...

[the dirt]

I suppose you thought of publishing these rules so people can follow a concrete example of how to properly review the songs the band produces...

[ARC]

But i disagree with not being able to compare to original albums, as the name is still guns n roses, this isnt a debut, this a follow up.

A follow up...? It's different people making the music - how can you compare...?

Do you compare Bon Jovi's last album to... say...Aerosmiths' first album..? No. Why? Because it's different people making the music.

The name is just a name. It didn't make the music. It can't. It's just words. Words don't play guitar.

[Thorned Rose]

Lets not get off the area here.

Axl Rose is the lead singer/writer, and Dizzy Reed joined in 1990. Also, we do not know what songs/ideas that were from 92-98 before everyone left that will be in CD.

You can compare.... you can.

Same name, 2 people from the band... and probably a lot of ideas that "slash" didn't want to do.

[Naupis]

ARC-

People would follow the rules to a T if the album was not being released under the Guns N' Roses brand name.

Axl wants the media exposure and brand recognition the Guns name brings with it, so he also has to deal with the comparissons/expectations associated with releasing an album under that brand name.

[C0ma]

Chinese Democracy Reviewing Rules:

1) Don't judge on the time taken to make the songs.

This is going to be the biggest point critics' are going to make..."this is what we get after ten years!". It's totally stupid. No one knows how much time was actually spent on the individual songs or the album as a whole. I've heard timespans of five years, ten years and even fifteen years! "There Was A Time" could have been written in two years or it could have been written in a week - no one but the band knows. Also, just because Axl has not released anything major in ten years does not mean he has spent every single second working on this record.

2) Don't judge the album expecting/wanting to hear 'classic' GN'R

This is a completely different band to 'classic GNR', as we have heard. Even though it's called Guns N' Roses, judge it as if it wasn't...

3) Don't compare the new tunes to the classic ones.

Different band = different music

4) Admit to liking the songs!

If you like the songs, say so. Don't grumble about them being "...umm...okay...not too bad...", or hide your love for them because you're an old-school fan and you don't believe the new band is Guns N Roses.

5) Don't jump on the bandwagon

I gaurantee you, when the album is released a lot of critics are going to poison your mind with their blinkered view of Axl Rose. Don't fall for it...! Even the ones who shoot down Axl the most are probably secretly rocking out to "TWAT" with their "Chinese Democracy" t-shirts on...! Don't be like these critics - who have to censor what they say to please the taste of their emo-loving editors - instead, be like Axl Rose and have some balls!

1) Don't judge on the time taken to make the songs.
It's going to happen.... He did it to himself. And it's not a stupid point.
In most peoples eyes, even the 'haters', Axl is a musical genius. Therefore based on the time frame and the ammount of times songs have been re-worked (allegedly) we should be getting "The Greatest Album Ever Recorded"
So yes the gact that it took him 10 years to create and release it is relevent. It's not like he has a day job and is doing the "music thing" on the side.

2) Don't judge the album expecting/wanting to hear 'classic' GN'R

If Mick Jager reformed the Stones with Studio musicians and an Indie Bass player and called it the Stones, guess what, he is going to be flamed and they are going to be compaired to the Stones.

If Paul decided to call himself and 3 random musicians 'The Beatles', guess what,...... do I really need to continue on with this.

3) Don't compare the new tunes to the classic ones.

That is the only measuring stick on which we have to measure Axl's progress.... didn't 90% of the people here compare Contraband to old GnR material (I guess Axl should be given a different set of rules than the rest of the original band)
All of this could have been avoided by Releasing Chinese Democracy as W. Axl Rose and not Guns N' Roses.

 
4) Admit to liking the songs!

Fair enough, but this again goes back to the 10 year issue. Someone may like a song, but may have been expecting alot more after 10 years and all the talk of 'Big Guns'.
I like IRS for example, but 1. it doesn;t hold a candle to anything on AFD and after all of this time the guitar work is very bland. It's alright....... Explain to me how my opinion of the song is wrong.... and how i have to simplify it to yes I like it or no I don't???

5) Don't jump on the bandwagon

What band wagon the love Axl, or Hate Axl bandwagon?

The old fans will probably love the album, and the fact that we would rather have the old band doesn't take away from that. So when an obvious fan of the old band posts a postive review is that jumping on the bandwagon (the bandwagon that most of them have been on since the 80's (not 2002))

[BLS-Pride]

ARC-

People would follow the rules to a T if the album was not being released under the Guns N' Roses brand name.

Axl wants the media exposure and brand recognition the Guns name brings with it, so he also has to deal with the comparissons/expectations associated with releasing an album under that brand name.

We got a winner. The smarter fans of music will pick up what he is trying to do.. Move in different directions and hopefully they will remember that while reviewing each song. Cause thats what needs to be done.. I have a feeling each song of CD will be a much different then the next.

[C0ma]

if i like it, ill say i like it. if its a pile of crap ill say its a pile of crap. ill give my reasons for either. But i disagree with not being able to compare to original albums, as the name is still guns n roses, this isnt a debut, this a follow up...just a over due one lol.

Yes it is a debut, for most of the band anyways. ?It's a totally different band that plays totally different music.

Apples to oranges dude...

If it's a different band, then use a different name. Even Jefferson Airplane changed their name to Jefferson Starship when they changed all members and decided to suck.

[ARC]

1) Don't judge on the time taken to make the songs.
It's going to happen.... He did it to himself. And it's not a stupid point.
In most peoples eyes, even the 'haters', Axl is a musical genius. Therefore based on the time frame and the ammount of times songs have been re-worked (allegedly) we should be getting "The Greatest Album Ever Recorded"
So yes the gact that it took him 10 years to create and release it is relevent. It's not like he has a day job and is doing the "music thing" on the side.

2) Don't judge the album expecting/wanting to hear 'classic' GN'R

If Mick Jager reformed the Stones with Studio musicians and an Indie Bass player and called it the Stones, guess what, he is going to be flamed and they are going to be compaired to the Stones.

If Paul decided to call himself and 3 random musicians 'The Beatles', guess what,...... do I really need to continue on with this.

3) Don't compare the new tunes to the classic ones.

That is the only measuring stick on which we have to measure Axl's progress.... didn't 90% of the people here compare Contraband to old GnR material (I guess Axl should be given a different set of rules than the rest of the original band)
All of this could have been avoided by Releasing Chinese Democracy as W. Axl Rose and not Guns N' Roses.

 
4) Admit to liking the songs!

Fair enough, but this again goes back to the 10 year issue. Someone may like a song, but may have been expecting alot more after 10 years and all the talk of 'Big Guns'.
I like IRS for example, but 1. it doesn;t hold a candle to anything on AFD and after all of this time the guitar work is very bland. It's alright....... Explain to me how my opinion of the song is wrong.... and how i have to simplify it to yes I like it or no I don't???

5) Don't jump on the bandwagon

What band wagon the love Axl, or Hate Axl bandwagon?

The old fans will probably love the album, and the fact that we would rather have the old band doesn't take away from that. So when an obvious fan of the old band posts a postive review is that jumping on the bandwagon (the bandwagon that most of them have been on since the 80's (not 2002))

You make good points but, guess what, a lot of neautral fans and critics are going to be jumping on bandwagons, and they're probably going to be negative.

"Oh, it's not really Guns N Roses - lets slam it no matter how good it is..." etc. etc...

I guess I'm making the point that it should be judged on what it is, and not what it isn't - i.e. Guns N Roses

[Naupis]

If Paul decided to call himself and 3 random musicians 'The Beatles', guess what,...... do I really need to continue on with this.

Thankyou for pointing out what 99% of the GNR community tends to forget when discussing the Guns situation.

People on this board think there is some conspiracy toward Axl that the media hates him. That is simply not the case, he just has continually gotten killed in the press the past few years because of the name issue.

Him calling his band GNR is no different than PM touring as the Beattles with a back-up band. McCartney doesn't face that fire storm because he doesn't call his solo stuff Beattles stuff. Axl wouldn't face a quarter of the scrutiny he does if he wasn't passing this off as GNR stuff.

I don't care he kept the name, but at least people should realize him doing so promotes/encourages the negativity that follows him.

[mrlee]

But i disagree with not being able to compare to original albums, as the name is still guns n roses, this isnt a debut, this a follow up.

A follow up...? It's different people making the music - how can you compare...?

Do you compare Bon Jovi's last album to... say...Aerosmiths' first album..? No. Why? Because it's different people making the music.

The name is just a name. It didn't make the music. It can't. It's just words. Words don't play guitar.

yet people compare the more recent oasis albums to the older ones when, its only the 2 brothers left, original. New gnr, have 2 original members, axl rose and dizzy reed.

I dont care if its a different line up, there are loads of bands who have line up changes, they still have the name so people by the album in anticipation because they are fans of the band.

Its like saying we can only compare 70s ac/dc albums and not any of the later ones because the only original members left were angus and his bro until recent.

[The Dog]

But i disagree with not being able to compare to original albums, as the name is still guns n roses, this isnt a debut, this a follow up.

A follow up...? It's different people making the music - how can you compare...?

Do you compare Bon Jovi's last album to... say...Aerosmiths' first album..? No. Why? Because it's different people making the music.

The name is just a name. It didn't make the music. It can't. It's just words. Words don't play guitar.

yet people compare the more recent oasis albums to the older ones when, its only the 2 brothers left, original. New gnr, have 2 original members, axl rose and dizzy reed.

I dont care if its a different line up, there are loads of bands who have line up changes, they still have the name so people by the album in anticipation because they are fans of the band.

Its like saying we can only compare 70s ac/dc albums and not any of the later ones because the only original members left were angus and his bro until recent.

I agree completely.  I'd say in most cases the avg. person doesn't even notice a line up change when its a diff basist or drummer.  By your logic AxlRoseChild, if Marilyn Manson records album A with 1 group of musicians and then Album B with a different group of studio guys you can't compare the two.....doesn't work that way.  By keeping the name, its only fair that the new songs be compared to other Guns CDs/songs.

What I find interesting is, the name Axl Rose is pretty popular on its own.  I think its just as popular and recognizable as GNR.  I don't think he needed to keep it GNR to get all the benefits that come along with it.  Personally, I'm glad he did b/c GNR stands for something to me - which is why if this CD is COMPLETELY different from what we're used to, people are going to say, what is this, its not GNR!!!  and they'll have a right to. 

[WAR41]

If Paul decided to call himself and 3 random musicians 'The Beatles', guess what,...... do I really need to continue on with this.

Thankyou for pointing out what 99% of the GNR community tends to forget when discussing the Guns situation.

People on this board think there is some conspiracy toward Axl that the media hates him. That is simply not the case, he just has continually gotten killed in the press the past few years because of the name issue.

Him calling his band GNR is no different than PM touring as the Beattles with a back-up band. McCartney doesn't face that fire storm because he doesn't call his solo stuff Beattles stuff. Axl wouldn't face a quarter of the scrutiny he does if he wasn't passing this off as GNR stuff.

I don't care he kept the name, but at least people should realize him doing so promotes/encourages the negativity that follows him.

Thank god there are people here like you guys... sometimes I feel like I am talking to members of a cult on here.  "Oh look this bean is shaped like Axl.... I'll just put him on the shelf with the other Axl beans."  I am considered an "Axl hater" on here because of saying things like this when it is the absolute truth.  I really do like Axl's music, I still love old GNR, and I will listen to new GNR when it comes.

As far as the original post, I think it is ridiculous... as others have said VR was compared to old GNR, Oh My God, and all the new songs played live. 

[jameslofton29]

I gaurantee you, when the album is released a lot of critics are going to poison your mind with their blinkered view of Axl Rose. Don't fall for it...! Even the ones who shoot down Axl the most are probably secretly rocking out to "TWAT" with their "Chinese Democracy" t-shirts on...! Don't be like these critics - who have to censor what they say to please the taste of their emo-loving editors - instead, be like Axl Rose and have some balls!

I agree with your other points(well,most of it), but disagree with^^one. The media conspiracy does not exist. The only way the media will "go negative", is if this turns into another 'AFD Rehash starts now' tour. Then, they will go negative and be brutal.

[ARC]

yet people compare the more recent oasis albums to the older ones when, its only the 2 brothers left, original. New gnr, have 2 original members, axl rose and dizzy reed.

... but there's a HUGE difference ...

The two brothers in Oasis are the two main members/frontmen of the band. The only real comparison in this context would be if Axl and Slash were left in Guns N Roses. They are not.