"Next Album" rumor / speculation thread *UPDATE AUG 22/2023*

[DeN]

1) It's useless to talk about the eventuality of a reunion, will never happen.
2) why do you think they tour? only for pleased angry fans? personal pleasure?

no, that's their job, and that's their way to make money. Axl is 51, meaning he'll
not be touring for another 20 years, and there's no shame to do the job you like
to do money for a living, so no, that's not ridiculous at all.

[rebelhipi]

1) It's useless to talk about the eventuality of a reunion, will never happen.
2) why do you think they tour? only for pleased angry fans? personal pleasure?

no, that's their job, and that's their way to make money. Axl is 51, meaning he'll
not be touring for another 20 years, and there's no shame to do the job you like
to do money for a living, so no, that's not ridiculous at all.

as i said above im happy that there is no reunion.

like ive said two times before, if theyir priority is to get more rich than they already are, they would do things differently.just the way most of the bands tour and constantly re-release their material.
of course there is no harm to make money while do something you love.

[One.In.A.Million]

No matter how much I love this band, and believe me I always will consider GN'R my band, and they are number 1 in my heart. However, when all is said and done I think we all will look back in years to come and regret the one factor that draws this band back, and that is simply the inability to release anything to plan. During the early 2000's this played in their favour as everyone was expecting the world from Axl, but now we know that Axl's grand plan don't exist. Just getting a live DVD officially released seems like a uphill battle with whomever it concerns. Once again, not laying the blame at anyone's door here, but it's a damn shame that there seems to be a huge issue with Guns to do anything by plan and to timescale.

[JAEBALL]

@oneinamillion

Well said... the constant delays to CD added to the mystique of it in a way...

but it was very frustrating ..... was the last album worth the wait? yes.. there are some great songs there, but if nothing more comes... we will all look back and think what IF

and in the end will hurt the legacy of the name Guns N Roses that they could only put out 1 or 2 records in a thirty year span or whatever it would be... it makes it easy to be critical... you know i read and hear a lot of people on the internet call the Axl criticisms unwarranted... but he makes himself an easy target with a lot of things...

you can argue quality over quanitity... but most people on this forum will enjoy whatever is released anyway

I hope this is not the case and they are able to produce more and in a timelier fashion

[draguns]

As much as I like Axl and the others who I  idolized as a kid, the "what ifs" and "could have beens" occurred a long time ago for this band. Hopefully,there will be a new album with this lineup soon. They really do have chemistry together!

[freddiebrph]

1) It's useless to talk about the eventuality of a reunion, will never happen.
2) why do you think they tour? only for pleased angry fans? personal pleasure?

no, that's their job, and that's their way to make money. Axl is 51, meaning he'll
not be touring for another 20 years, and there's no shame to do the job you like
to do money for a living, so no, that's not ridiculous at all.

1) are you Axl?  its funny how you say "it will never happen".  unless you are him, you are just giving an opinion. 
2) most bands tour to support the newest work.  Sure, big bands like gnr play alot of the older hits to please the fans, but tours usually come to an end. Then start again after something new happens.

[The Wight Gunner]

1) It's useless to talk about the eventuality of a reunion, will never happen.
2) why do you think they tour? only for pleased angry fans? personal pleasure?

no, that's their job, and that's their way to make money. Axl is 51, meaning he'll
not be touring for another 20 years, and there's no shame to do the job you like
to do money for a living, so no, that's not ridiculous at all.

1) are you Axl?  its funny how you say "it will never happen".  unless you are him, you are just giving an opinion. 
2) most bands tour to support the newest work.  Sure, big bands like gnr play alot of the older hits to please the fans, but tours usually come to an end. Then start again after something new happens.

1.Axl has already said this, more than once.. So not an opinion. He even went as far to say that Duff and Slash were the only ones who were even capable of doing the work involved. But then added that having lived through it once, he wasn't gonna go through it again, ever.
2. Yeah I know you said most, but the Rolling Stones haven't toured on the "New" stuff, since its not new...

[jarmo]

The idea of releasing albums and tour to sell those albums is old.

True, most bands still follow the old cycle of album, tour, album, tour....

But then certain bands don't need to put out albums to go on tour. Metallica has been "escaping the studio" to go on tour for years now. While other bands go on tour based on something they did in the past (playing a full classic album, recreating an old tour etc.).

A huge tour doesn't equal lots of record sales any more. For example, U2's 360 tour didn't make their latest album their biggest one.


In reality, it seems like most bands put out albums as an excuse to go on tour. So they can add a few new tracks to the setlist and have some kind of new stage show. But most of us know they don't need to add those new songs, people will still go see them. I'm talking about big name bands. Hardcore fans obviously love to hear the new songs and the more obscure tracks, but the majority want to hear the hits.



/jarmo

[Siamese Democracy]

The idea of releasing albums and tour to sell those albums is old.

True, most bands still follow the old cycle of album, tour, album, tour....

But then certain bands don't need to put out albums to go on tour. Metallica has been "escaping the studio" to go on tour for years now. While other bands go on tour based on something they did in the past (playing a full classic album, recreating an old tour etc.).

A huge tour doesn't equal lots of record sales any more. For example, U2's 360 tour didn't make their latest album their biggest one.


In reality, it seems like most bands put out albums as an excuse to go on tour. So they can add a few new tracks to the setlist and have some kind of new stage show. But most of us know they don't need to add those new songs, people will still go see them. I'm talking about big name bands. Hardcore fans obviously love to hear the new songs and the more obscure tracks, but the majority want to hear the hits.



/jarmo

Not to mention today's generation won't even pay for music.  They will email the mp3, download it, or rip it off of YouTube.   Why should Axl invest in such a venture when the fans won't recpriocate with buying the music?

[Scabbie]

The idea of releasing albums and tour to sell those albums is old.

True, most bands still follow the old cycle of album, tour, album, tour....

But then certain bands don't need to put out albums to go on tour. Metallica has been "escaping the studio" to go on tour for years now. While other bands go on tour based on something they did in the past (playing a full classic album, recreating an old tour etc.).

A huge tour doesn't equal lots of record sales any more. For example, U2's 360 tour didn't make their latest album their biggest one.


In reality, it seems like most bands put out albums as an excuse to go on tour. So they can add a few new tracks to the setlist and have some kind of new stage show. But most of us know they don't need to add those new songs, people will still go see them. I'm talking about big name bands. Hardcore fans obviously love to hear the new songs and the more obscure tracks, but the majority want to hear the hits.



/jarmo

Not to mention today's generation won't even pay for music.  They will email the mp3, download it, or rip it off of YouTube.   Why should Axl invest in such a venture when the fans won't recpriocate with buying the music?

Good point. Let's call it a day and accept GNR as a live band that tours the hits. 

[Gavgnr]

Seems a pessimistic view though for us fans that would love a new release

[Scabbie]

Seems a pessimistic view though for us fans that would love a new release

Axl has a lot going for him. Plenty of finished/almost finished songs in the 'vault' (whatever or wherever that is!), a loyal and talented band of musicians with songwriting experience who want to record and write. Millions of Facebook fans, a recording contract and guaranteed source of income for touring. The love and support of Beta, Fernandez etc. So as long as he wants to create and share his art with the world then in my opinions there's hope still yet and plenty of opportunity to make money.

I'm sure there are plenty of reasons why he might want to or finds it hard to release new material, but if the intent is there, people will help him.

[jarmo]

I'm not saying GN'R won't release anything. Just saying the old way of doing things isn't necessarily how the game is played today.

I think there's good in this too. When you think about it. When sales are a less bigger deal in motivating what is put out, maybe the art itself can be more important and less focus is placed on sales figures as a measurement of quality....


Artists will put out music because it's their outlet. They write a song, record it and then let the public hear it.




/jarmo

[GnR-NOW]

Would it be possible for GNR to put new music out through their website or have an exclusive album purchase as opposed to a store release.

[draguns]

@GNR-Now-I think you'll see a lot more artists putting music on their website. I think the old days of having music in stores are done. In my opinion, I like having everything digital. For me, it's just easier to store.

[Scabbie]

I'm split. Some albums I like on digital, others cd and some vinyl. Digital is convenient but boring to purchase.

[Scabbie]

If a rerelease of chin dem as a double album with original artwork is on the cards I'd pay handsomely for a vinyl copy!

[jarmo]

I think more and more artists/record companies realize that they have a hardcore fanbase and then there's the rest.

The hardcore fanbase are the ones who spent the extra cash on getting those deluxe limited super editions with cool bonuses like bonus tracks, artwork, a book, a postcard, DVD/Blu-ray etc. The rest might buy the release if they happen to see it at Walmart or iTunes. Or just get it for free illegally. Or just won't bother whatsoever.

Now when you go to a concert, let's say the venue has a capacity of 15000. Only a few of those would be the hardcore fans. Many of them will be in the front row and/or have spent all day waiting at the gates to be let in.

The hardcore fans would love the band to play their latest release in full and throw in some obscure tracks into the set. The majority of the crowd wants to sing along to the hits while drinking another beer and recording their favorite song on their mobile phone (or calling somebody when the band plays it so they can hear).



So yeah, bands have all kinds of options on putting out music these days. Maybe the key is to not try to sell to the masses but be more modest and aim at the ones who are prepared to pay for the art and don't mind doing so.



/jarmo

[Gavgnr]

Some good points raised, but would the labels be interested in something that would have niche appeal?

I hope so, but it makes you wonder.

For me, I would happily pay around ?50-?80 for a deluxe box set from guns including unheard, rare or remixed tracks with correct artwork, etc. Obviously this wouldn't appeal to the majority of casual fans though. Would this disincentive the label?

[jarmo]

It seems like labels are aware.

How many new releases on major labels do you see released in multiple configurations these days?




/jarmo