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

[Buddha_Master]

I always thought Axl was a very prolific songwriter.

I gotta ask: based on what?

On all those times Axl stated how much material has supposedly been recorded. That plan of having an album come every year after Chinese Democracy so the band could continue to tour and not have to stop to then record.

Yea he's no Lennon/McCartney but I... schmuck believed Axl when he says stuff. I just want new stuff so bad. 

[Ali]

still they do give much more than the "overall audience". throwing them some bones here and there is a nice thing and easy to do!
f.e. i bet the moderator of this forum liked that, too, back in 2005/2006, and still does.

The hardcore fans don't pay any more for a show than everyone else, though.  This isn't the Grateful Dead we're talking about either.  I think what you're saying would make more sense if it was a band with a following that including a larger percentage of people that follow the band around for multiple shows.  And, I don't know what you mean by "throwing them some bones" anyway.

Ali

[LongGoneDay]

In no scenario does it make sense for a record label to keep one of it's artist from releasing new material.
No sense in creating excuses for the man. We all know he could release new music if he pleased.

Axl's lack of creative output (1 album in 22 years) since the classic lineup disbanded is on him, and him alone.

It's a shame, but clearly the inspiration to create is and has been gone.
The good news is that inspiration can return.

[jarmo]

You don't know anything about his creative output. There's a difference between creating and releasing. Which you obviously fail to see.

It makes no sense for a record company to not release something? Are you kidding me? They're in the music business. Not music charity. If they don't think they can make money on something, they can say no. It's all about quarterly profits these days. Not very long term.

These are the people that shelved Duff's second solo album when it was actually done and ready for release. The same kind of people who didn't show any kind of interest in Chinese Democracy once the band started touring. Did you see it promoted even once since it was released and the band was on tour? 

f.e. i bet the moderator of this forum liked that, too, back in 2005/2006, and still does.

What?

They do more for their hardcore fans these days than you'd like to admit. 

But yes, a special edition of Chinese Democracy with bonus content aimed at the hardcore fans would be amazing.





/jarmo

[LongGoneDay]

You don't know anything about his creative output. There's a difference between creating and releasing. Which you obviously fail to see.

It makes no sense for a record company to not release something? Are you kidding me? They're in the music business. Not music charity. If they don't think they can make money on something, they can say no. It's all about quarterly profits these days. Not very long term.

These are the people that shelved Duff's second solo album when it was actually done and ready for release. The same kind of people who didn't show any kind of interest in Chinese Democracy once the band started touring. Did you see it promoted even once since it was released and the band was on tour? 

f.e. i bet the moderator of this forum liked that, too, back in 2005/2006, and still does.

What?

They do more for their hardcore fans these days than you'd like to admit. 

But yes, a special edition of Chinese Democracy with bonus content aimed at the hardcore fans would be amazing.





/jarmo

I know a lot about his commercially released creative output.

I know that at the end of the day, he's released 1 album in 22 years. I'm not interested in the albums he "may" have created. If a tree falls in the woods..
I know that Axl Rose is, or was a pretty big deal in the music industry. I know his peers seem to have no problem releasing albums at will.
Maybe there could be some resistance, but common sense tells me that if Axl truly wanted to release an album, it would be done.

Duff's solo album got lost in the shuffle during the merger of labels at the time.
Even still, he's released 9 full length albums, not including Beautiful Disease in the time Axl has managed his lone effort.

I heard plenty of promotion regarding Chinese Democracy in Boston.

[jarmo]

I know that at the end of the day, he's released 1 album in 22 years. I'm not interested in the albums he "may" have created. If a tree falls in the woods..

So you have no interest in knowing facts and therefore you shouldn't comment on the subject of creative output....

I know that Axl Rose is, or was a pretty big deal in the music industry. I know his peers seem to have no problem releasing albums at will.
Maybe there could be some resistance, but common sense tells me that if Axl truly wanted to release an album, it would be done.

His so called peers are not signed to the same label nor do they have had to go through what Axl did with their bands. Nice of you to compare apples to oranges there to justify your non existent point.

Duff's solo album got lost in the shuffle during the merger of labels at the time.

Yeah, it got "lost". Somebody just "forgot" to release it.

Seriously, if they had thought they could've made a bunch of money on it, they would've released it. A bunch of albums got "lost" at that time.

Still do. This is the music business.

I heard plenty of promotion regarding Chinese Democracy in Boston.

Really? When the band was on tour in 2010, 2011, 2012 or 2013?

I've sen concert posters promoting Greatest Hits instead of Chinese Democracy... That says a lot!




/jarmo

[LongGoneDay]

It's a fact that 1 album has been released in 22 years.
It's not a fact that more are to follow. That's just speculation, which happens to be the title of this thread.

If you want to subscribe to the theory that the record label is the reason Axl is averaging 0.045 albums per year since 1993, go right ahead.
Speculation on your part.

Guns N' Roses is a pretty big name in relation to Duff McKagan. Pretty sure the record label might be willing to take a chance on those guys if the material were there.

Even if the evil record company holding all of Axl's masterpieces ransom scenario were true, my guess is they'd probably be willing negotiate a way out of the contract if they thought they had no use for them financially. In owning the name, Axl probably has some cash lying around which could help facilitate an exit.

I heard promotion for Chinese Democracy. It's no secret that the album is out. Never was.

[Ali]

In no scenario does it make sense for a record label to keep one of it's artist from releasing new material.
No sense in creating excuses for the man. We all know he could release new music if he pleased.

Axl's lack of creative output (1 album in 22 years) since the classic lineup disbanded is on him, and him alone.

It's a shame, but clearly the inspiration to create is and has been gone.
The good news is that inspiration can return.

Really?  It makes no sense?  So, a record label has never rejected an album?

Ali

[LongGoneDay]

In no scenario does it make sense for a record label to keep one of it's artist from releasing new material.
No sense in creating excuses for the man. We all know he could release new music if he pleased.

Axl's lack of creative output (1 album in 22 years) since the classic lineup disbanded is on him, and him alone.

It's a shame, but clearly the inspiration to create is and has been gone.
The good news is that inspiration can return.

Really?  It makes no sense?  So, a record label has never rejected an album?

Ali

I'm sure they have. But in the case of Axl and GN'R, I believe they may relent over the course of 22 years.

Do I believe that Axl's lack out creative output is due to the label rejecting his albums?
No, I'm not buying that. 

It would be unprecedented for a musician of his caliber.

More signs point to the lack of drive and material.
Axl has stated himself that for a time he was uninspired, motivated etc.

Countless interviews with ex and current members stating that music was there, waiting on vocals..
I'm sure they have some finished songs in the can, but nothing about the way this band has been operating since '93 would suggest to me that it's the band that has it's shit together, and someone else's fault that new music isn't out in stores. As popular a theory as that may be around here..

[jarmo]

It's a fact that 1 album has been released in 22 years.

And in your world that equals all his creative output?

No it doesn't.

He's obviously used his creativity to compose material which hasn't been released as of this moment. You know, all those song titles people have been speculating about in this very thread!

It's not a fact that more are to follow. That's just speculation, which happens to be the title of this thread.

It's a fact that he's written more songs than what's currently available on iTunes.

If you want to subscribe to the theory that the record label is the reason Axl is averaging 0.045 albums per year since 1993, go right ahead.
Speculation on your part.

Did you ever heard of the concept of negotiation? It takes at least two parts to negotiate a deal which satisfies both parties involved.

Guns N' Roses is a pretty big name in relation to Duff McKagan. Pretty sure the record label might be willing to take a chance on those guys if the material were there.

So you didn't even try to dispute what I said....


Here's a recent example of the record company being difficult to deal with:
www.guardian.co.uk/music/2013/jun/18/mia-fourth-album-interscope

Even if the evil record company holding all of Axl's masterpieces ransom scenario were true, my guess is they'd probably be willing negotiate a way out of the contract if they thought they had no use for them financially. In owning the name, Axl probably has some cash lying around which could help facilitate an exit.

Sometimes this happens, sometimes it doesn't.

Remember when Prince used to write the word Slave on his cheek and changed his name? Do you remember who he was having a tough time dealing with... His record company!

Did you know Def Leppard re-recorded their old hits to put them out on iTunes to make more money, since their record company (Universal Music) won't pay them what they think they deserve?


Amazing how artists have disagreements and/or tough times dealing with their record companies. I thought it was only GN'R!

I heard promotion for Chinese Democracy. It's no secret that the album is out. Never was.

Don't dance around the question, answer it.

Did you hear/see the record company promote the shows and/or Chinese Democracy in 2010, 2011, 2012 or 2013?

Once again, saying you heard radio spots for the album in November 2008 isn't the answer! 




/jarmo

[Ali]

In no scenario does it make sense for a record label to keep one of it's artist from releasing new material.
No sense in creating excuses for the man. We all know he could release new music if he pleased.

Axl's lack of creative output (1 album in 22 years) since the classic lineup disbanded is on him, and him alone.

It's a shame, but clearly the inspiration to create is and has been gone.
The good news is that inspiration can return.

Really?  It makes no sense?  So, a record label has never rejected an album?

Ali

I'm sure they have. But in the case of Axl and GN'R, I believe they may relent over the course of 22 years.

Do I believe that Axl's lack out creative output is due to the label rejecting his albums?
No, I'm not buying that. 

It would be unprecedented for a musician of his caliber.

More signs point to the lack of drive and material.
Axl has stated himself that for a time he was uninspired, motivated etc.

Countless interviews with ex and current members stating that music was there, waiting on vocals..
I'm sure they have some finished songs in the can, but nothing about the way this band has been operating since '93 would suggest to me that it's the band that has it's shit together, and someone else's fault that new music isn't out in stores. As popular a theory as that may be around here..

The label may relent or they may not relent depending on how commercially accessible the music recorded is, or a host of other factors.  It isn't nearly as unprecedented as you think for a label to reject an artist's album.  It happened to Amy Winehouse and Iggy Pop, among others.

Anyway, my point wasn't that the label may have rejected the album so much as it was that based off Axl's comments to Billboard, in particular, as well as the LA Times, the relationship between GN'R and the label may be contentious and there are issues that need to be addressed before a release can happen - be it the material itself, or marketing plans and promotional budgets, etc.  But, the relationship may have been so fractured that things are moving slowly, if at all, towards a resolution.  Who knows what issues there may be from the label's side, such as guaranteeing a more active promotional role from Axl, etc.

In other words, there are possible issues besides just the material itself.  We may never know until after a resolution occurs (hopefully), if at all.

Ali

[Ali]

It's a fact that 1 album has been released in 22 years.

And in your world that equals all his creative output?

No it doesn't.

He's obviously used his creativity to compose material which hasn't been released as of this moment. You know, all those song titles people have been speculating about in this very thread!

It's not a fact that more are to follow. That's just speculation, which happens to be the title of this thread.

It's a fact that he's written more songs than what's currently available on iTunes.

If you want to subscribe to the theory that the record label is the reason Axl is averaging 0.045 albums per year since 1993, go right ahead.
Speculation on your part.

Did you ever heard of the concept of negotiation? It takes at least two parts to negotiate a deal which satisfies both parties involved.

Guns N' Roses is a pretty big name in relation to Duff McKagan. Pretty sure the record label might be willing to take a chance on those guys if the material were there.

So you didn't even try to dispute what I said....


Here's a recent example of the record company being difficult to deal with:
www.guardian.co.uk/music/2013/jun/18/mia-fourth-album-interscope

Even if the evil record company holding all of Axl's masterpieces ransom scenario were true, my guess is they'd probably be willing negotiate a way out of the contract if they thought they had no use for them financially. In owning the name, Axl probably has some cash lying around which could help facilitate an exit.

Sometimes this happens, sometimes it doesn't.

Remember when Prince used to write the word Slave on his cheek and changed his name? Do you remember who he was having a tough time dealing with... His record company!

Did you know Def Leppard re-recorded their old hits to put them out on iTunes to make more money, since their record company (Universal Music) won't pay them what they think they deserve?


Amazing how artists have disagreements and/or tough times dealing with their record companies. I thought it was only GN'R!

I heard promotion for Chinese Democracy. It's no secret that the album is out. Never was.

Don't dance around the question, answer it.

Did you hear/see the record company promote the shows and/or Chinese Democracy in 2010, 2011, 2012 or 2013?

Once again, saying you heard radio spots for the album in November 2008 isn't the answer! 




/jarmo

MIA is not some small time, no-name artist.  And she had her album rejected by the same label, Interscope.  Is it really then that unprecedented that Interscope could do the same to GN'R, or have other issues going on with the band that are delaying a release?

Ali

[LunsJail]

But surely no one expects the label to promote the album or especially shows in 2010 and beyond. In these times, albums get some promotion leading up to and right around the release date and that's it.

Labels are basically banks that finance the production of the album and then you hope to hell you make enough to get out of the hole with them. I agree, the label didn't do much with CD promotion but neither did anyone else. I think expectations of the label need to get more realistic, especially about promoting it years after its release.

[LongGoneDay]

Axl's creative career essentially fell off a cliff after 1993, and he unfortunately took the GN'R name with him.

I have a hard time believing that the record label would be the catalyst behind this plunge.

Never doubted that there are tense relationships between artists and labels.
Yes, you've brought up a few examples, but I'm pretty sure that Prince and Def Leopard have still managed to persevere and continue to produce. Can't say for sure, as I'm not a fan, and too lazy to research it. Never heard of MIA.

It's a shame and probably an interesting story, if we ever get to hear it.
I don't pretend to know for sure what the reasons are, but feel I have an idea.

I don't doubt that in Axl's mind, the label is holding him back.
I'd love to be proven wrong about all this.
Nothing would make me happier than some unexpected great GN'R albums I never believed existed coming to light.

I just don't see it, so until then, let's agree to disagree on this one.

[ITARocker]

Here's my 2 cents

The Label's only aim is to sell albums. There's no money making in sellin 1 album in 20 years (and there's no money making selling it at 1,99$ ...). The fact is that the label give a lot of money to axl in order to make an album thinkin' that the gnr moniker could still sell a lot. But time has changed and their high expectation lead to disappointement... And right now there's a lot of material who sound too much like CD and maybe is not even complete and ready to be released (!).
So, touring is ok in order to make some good money but making an album (either "old" or new songs), considering all the circumstances and knowledge gained from past experience (money, time, Axl etc...), it's another animal. Money loss is always around the corner.

[14 Yrs Of Silence]

If the record company refuses to release your material, wouldn't you have some recourse to get out of the contract?

[Gavgnr]

Wow, just read that stuff about MIA. Really interesting. I had no idea that the labels were so involved with the actual album, in terms of them actually determining the albums content to maximise sales.

Bearing that in mind it would be quite easy to see how the label could potentially block a guns release if they felt that maximum dollar return wasn't essentially guaranteed.

Let's hope that the hard core fan option release is something that comes to fruition. After all, a proper special edition of Chinese with correct artwork and (I hope!) additional tracks would be freakin amazing.

Also, and very importantly, Axl gets to see the masterpiece released as it should have been.

I just hope that there would be more than just a couple of additional tracks added. For me, I would love for any special edition to include The General and Atlas Shrugged. No doubt there are countless other tracks that could and should be heard ASAP!!

[Axlspants]

I think there are many reasons why CD didn't do as well as us hardcore fans would have liked. The main one is that it took too long to come out, people moved on. Who's to blame for that I don't know but I do know that CD is one of my all time favourite albums and I can't wait for the follow up. I've been into every lineup of Guns and for me the current one is the best, I'd love to hear an album from them.

[Limulus]

still they do give much more than the "overall audience". throwing them some bones here and there is a nice thing and easy to do!
f.e. i bet the moderator of this forum liked that, too, back in 2005/2006, and still does.

The hardcore fans don't pay any more for a show than everyone else, though.  This isn't the Grateful Dead we're talking about either.  I think what you're saying would make more sense if it was a band with a following that including a larger percentage of people that follow the band around for multiple shows.  And, I don't know what you mean by "throwing them some bones" anyway.

Ali

i wouldnt only look at the number of paying show attenders. i'm saying that a special goup of people ("hardcore fans") might deserve some more respect for giving the artists one of the greatest things ever: their lifetime!
"throwing bones to them" = pleasing them. hell, i went nuts when i saw "SOYL" official being released on LALD B-side back then, ya know?

[Limulus]

f.e. i bet the moderator of this forum liked that, too, back in 2005/2006, and still does.

[...]

They do more for their hardcore fans these days than you'd like to admit. 

[...]

make a serious list please!