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

[pilferk]

And are you serious? Let's say the new album is out and Axl does an interview with a music magazine to coincide with its release. What do you think he'll talk about?

/jarmo

The work on the next (meaning the one AFTER they just released) album?

Sorry...I couldn't resist.

One thing: I don't know how TMS works, but most TV talk shows do a pre-interview process with a lower level staff member (or, occasionally, the host).  They get a feel for what will, and will not, make interesting topics for the live show/taping.

It might not be that people were asked not to ask about certain things.  It might very well be that the answers, in the pre-interview, were so boring or repetitious of stuff previously said, that the hosts (and their "people") decided to go in a more interesting direction, with other questions. In other words, if Axl repeated for the umpteenth time "We have a bunch of other material recorded that we're going to put out at some point...no idea when...no plans right now".....I'm not sure that's the question you want to pursue during your allotted time with him during the taping.

Before anyone decides to argue the point, I'm not saying that's what DID happen...I have no earthly way of knowing because I wasn't in the room, on set, or part of the "pre-appearance" conversations.  I'm saying it's a perfectly plausible alternative theory. And, you know, when these interviews were being conducted (esp the 2011 interview with Trunk) there were other things going on that they might have decided to fill the segment with.

[jarmo]

First it was bad because he didn't do interviews when he wasn't comfortable talking about the issues going on.
Then when he did talk, it was bad because he didn't talk about new music enough, talked to the "wrong" people or talked too much of the only thing one interviewer was asked not to bring up.
And now, when he's not talking, it's not good that if he talks in the future he talks about things two posters don't want him to talk about.

 

When you're looking for something to be wrong with things that haven't even happened yet, then you must be having a great fucking day!




/jarmo

[D-GenerationX]

One thing: I don't know how TMS works, but most TV talk shows do a pre-interview process with a lower level staff member (or, occasionally, the host).  They get a feel for what will, and will not, make interesting topics for the live show/taping.

It might not be that people were asked not to ask about certain things.  It might very well be that the answers, in the pre-interview, were so boring or repetitious of stuff previously said, that the hosts (and their "people") decided to go in a more interesting direction, with other questions. In other words, if Axl repeated for the umpteenth time "We have a bunch of other material recorded that we're going to put out at some point...no idea when...no plans right now".....I'm not sure that's the question you want to pursue during your allotted time with him during the taping.

Before anyone decides to argue the point, I'm not saying that's what DID happen...I have no earthly way of knowing because I wasn't in the room, on set, or part of the "pre-appearance" conversations.  I'm saying it's a perfectly plausible alternative theory. And, you know, when these interviews were being conducted (esp the 2011 interview with Trunk) there were other things going on that they might have decided to fill the segment with.

All true and good points.

Its just that, and I can only speak for myself here, I would find this whole thing easier to accept if there were other harder hitting interviews to compliment it.

Yes, I agree that a Jimmy Kimmel interview is not going to be '60 Minutes'.  But...where is that '60 Minutes' type interview?  That's more my point.  And I think a 'Rolling Stone' type interview is where that happens.  Its long form, likely several pages, and can get into both areas.  The stupid fluff about his hats, but also his current band and what they are up to.

[D-GenerationX]

First it was bad because he didn't do interviews when he wasn't comfortable talking about the issues going on.
Then when he did talk, it was bad because he didn't talk about new music enough, talked to the "wrong" people or talked too much of the only thing one interviewer was asked not to bring up.
And now, when he's not talking, it's not good that if he talks in the future he talks about things two posters don't want him to talk about.

 

When you're looking for something to be wrong with things that haven't even happened yet, then you must be having a great fucking day!

Axl is once again in the right and "those two posters" are wrong, about everything, as usual.

We cool?  Can we move on now?

[jarmo]

That's what you want. Move on.

Still waiting for answers..... At least you managed to admit that Jimmy Kimmel isn't gonna be the kind of show where Axl would talk about new music just before upcoming shows in Las Vegas.

Maybe you can also go back and address all the questions you ignored.
You don't want to speculate all of a sudden? Wow. How convenient.

For a guy attacking Axl for allegedly setting interviews rules and not wanting to talk about certain topics, it's ironic that you ignore so many questions yourself and want to move on.




/jarmo

[JAEBALL]

The two of you both ignore the others points that are either positive or you don't have an answer to...so I laugh when you both accuse the other of doing it lol

[D-GenerationX]

Jarmo, your questions all over the fucking joint, as usual.

Frankly, you don't deserve the consideration I give taking the time to answer your twisted version of what I said, and never take offense you can't just stick to my own words.

You got what you got already.  Be thankful.  in the future, just stick to my stuff.  Make it easier on both of us.

[D-GenerationX]

The two of you both ignore the others points that are either positive or you don't have an answer to...so I laugh when you both accuse the other of doing it lol

To a point, I'd agree.

But on balance, I feel I am far more respectful and deferential to him than he has ever been to me.  Its a testament to my patience, frankly.

[pilferk]

Yes, I agree that a Jimmy Kimmel interview is not going to be '60 Minutes'.  But...where is that '60 Minutes' type interview?  That's more my point.  And I think a 'Rolling Stone' type interview is where that happens.  Its long form, likely several pages, and can get into both areas.  The stupid fluff about his hats, but also his current band and what they are up to.

Yeah, my perception is there isn't a publication that really wants to put in that kind of time,effort, and column space, at this point, to get it.  Maybe there is, and that's just my cynicism. And I'm sure there are some that will argue that any "big" publication would fall all over themselves to get THAT interview.  I'm just not so sure, so that's where we're going to disconnect.  Not in 2014, not in the state that music "journalism" is in (and I'm going to refrain from my rant about Rolling Stone), and not with the effort it would take to get done vs the eyes it might pull to the magazine.  That's not meant as a pesseemistic take on GnR, either.  It's much more a pessemistic take on music journalism's state, and it's need to push sensationalistic, controversial (and I'm not sure this would qualify), or mass appeal (think: big pop acts) stories over anything really substantial.

Combine that with the fact that...right now...I'm not sure Axl would gain anything from doing it, either.  It's gotta be quid pro quo.  I don't think there's any way to put it.  I mean..the Trunk and Kimmel interviews show it....both really were done, in the bands mind, to promote tours/shows.

Edit: And, to be clear, that's not all that different than most bands/artists....they really do press when they've got something to promote.  There ARE exceptions, yes.

Now, get that next album out and have it get some critical acclaim and rack up sales? Sure.  And maybe back when CD came out, too....but, well....color me skeptical for "here and now".

[D-GenerationX]

Yes, I agree that a Jimmy Kimmel interview is not going to be '60 Minutes'.  But...where is that '60 Minutes' type interview?  That's more my point.  And I think a 'Rolling Stone' type interview is where that happens.  Its long form, likely several pages, and can get into both areas.  The stupid fluff about his hats, but also his current band and what they are up to.

Yeah, my perception is there isn't a publication that really wants to put in that kind of time,effort, and column space, at this point, to get it.  Maybe there is, and that's just my cynicism. And I'm sure there are some that will argue that any "big" publication would fall all over themselves to get THAT interview.  I'm just not so sure, so that's where we're going to disconnect.  Not in 2014, not in the state that music "journalism" is in (and I'm going to refrain from my rant about Rolling Stone), and not with the effort it would take to get done vs the eyes it might pull to the magazine.  That's not meant as a pesseemistic take on GnR, either.  It's much more a pessemistic take on music journalism's state, and it's need to push sensationalistic, controversial (and I'm not sure this would qualify), or mass appeal (think: big pop acts) stories over anything really substantial.

On the heels of the University Of Virginia thing, I imagine they want to talk about ANYTHING else right now.

[JAEBALL]

The two of you both ignore the others points that are either positive or you don't have an answer to...so I laugh when you both accuse the other of doing it lol

To a point, I'd agree.

But on balance, I feel I am far more respectful and deferential to him than he has ever been to me.  Its a testament to my patience, frankly.

yeah I'd agree probably...but I would be testy too if people were critical of friends of mine

which is why I try not to debate directly with SIR Jarmo

[D-GenerationX]

The two of you both ignore the others points that are either positive or you don't have an answer to...so I laugh when you both accuse the other of doing it lol

To a point, I'd agree.

But on balance, I feel I am far more respectful and deferential to him than he has ever been to me.  Its a testament to my patience, frankly.

yeah I'd agree probably...but I would be testy too if people were critical of friends of mine

which is why I try not to debate directly with SIR Jarmo

True.

The sickest thing about all this is that I actually defend him on other boards.  Even though he wouldn't piss on me if I was on fucking fire.

[pilferk]

The sickest thing about all this is that I actually defend him on other boards.  Even though he wouldn't piss on me if I was on fucking fire.

I wouldn't either.....I'd use a fire extinguisher. Or water.

Now...if you were stung by a jellyfish.....

[D-GenerationX]

The sickest thing about all this is that I actually defend him on other boards.  Even though he wouldn't piss on me if I was on fucking fire.

I wouldn't either.....I'd use a fire extinguisher. Or water.

Now...if you were stung by a jellyfish.....

Sure, that's just science.

[jarmo]

Jarmo, your questions all over the fucking joint, as usual.

Frankly, you don't deserve the consideration I give taking the time to answer your twisted version of what I said, and never take offense you can't just stick to my own words.

You got what you got already.  Be thankful.  in the future, just stick to my stuff.  Make it easier on both of us.

It's very simple. Discussion.
You say something, I say something. You respond to what I said, and vice versa.

You just wanna say stuff and when asked to clarify or ask you to consider another possibility, you just ignore it and go on like nothing was ever said.
Then, when asked, you do what you just did. Get defensive and play the victim.

If you're not interested in discussion, why are you on a discussion forum? I'm not trying to be rude, just don't get your problem(s).


You don't want to speculate about what Axl would talk about in an interview in a music magazine that would coincide with the new album's release? How noble! Your whole discussion about your assumption that Axl has a lot of rules for his interviews are based on one thing: Speculation.

And suddenly, you don't wanna speculate. Wonder why? Maybe because nobody in their right mind would assume he'd be talking about Formula 1 in a music magazine when the album just came out, or is about to come out. It takes a special kind of negative to assume what you don't wanna say out loud.

You skip so many questions that it's funny. Interested in discussion and don't want to speculate. Bollocks.
And when somebody points out something you said not making sense, you make a joke and move on.

But on balance, I feel I am far more respectful and deferential to him than he has ever been to me.  Its a testament to my patience, frankly.

Are you serious?

What did I do today that was so bad? I asked too many questions?
Please tell me!
I promise to look at it and learn. I don't think I did anything disrespectful. Never called you any names. Nothing. I asked questions you don't wanna answer.


Seems like you can't handle a normal discussion without running to JAEBALL for support.
No offense JAEBALL, it's just a joke.  


He always ends his discussion with: But you're mean!
Convenient when you can't answer questions to back up your speculation. Even though apparently he's not into speculation all of a sudden.

which is why I try not to debate directly with SIR Jarmo

There's no Sir, and what are you afraid of?



/jarmo

[D-GenerationX]

Jarmo, all I did was agree with a point that Axl puts restrictions on his interviews.

The rest of you was taking the ball and running with it.

And if you say you don't twist what I say, I said three times I'm not even talkinga bout Kimmel, yet you continue to come back to me with it.

[D-GenerationX]

Actually, having just re-read the past few pages, it looks like I took the heat for mortismurphy. 

Most of your beefs seem to be with what he said, not me.  Go bother him.

[jarmo]

Jarmo, all I did was agree with a point that Axl puts restrictions on his interviews.

The rest of you was taking the ball and running with it.

And if you say you don't twist what I say, I said three times I'm not even talkinga bout Kimmel, yet you continue to come back to me with it.

And I showed you WHY I think you are wrong. Did any of that register?
You always do the same thing. You start by talking about this, and then suddenly it's about that.

Now, what did I do that was so horrible that you had this latest outburst of "Poor me"? Because once again, I have to ask again because you ignored it.

Actually, having just re-read the past few pages, it looks like I took the heat for mortismurphy. 

Most of your beefs seem to be with what he said, not me.  Go bother him.

You posted, I replied. I don't look at the names.





/jarmo

[D-GenerationX]

And just to restate what I said earlier, I assumed the Kimmel thing would be fluff.  Its a comedy show.  I was a bit disappointed in the TMS interview, where nothing terribly relevant was discussed.  Why not?

Where am I saying anything about new music here?  I'm saying the interview was pointless fluff.

[D-GenerationX]

You posted, I replied. I don't look at the names.

This is funnier than your sig.