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

[jarmo]

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.

Oooh, I get it. You say something earlier in the discussion but that's then invalid at your choice. Got it.

New music was brought up earlier in the discussion. I brought up the only topic that we know has been off limits in one interview. Where are your facts? Oh right.



Answer my question: 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.

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

This is funnier than your sig.

Yeah, your fantasy world that only you inhabit must be quite the place.

Not everybody can quote the Lego movie you know.... Or something about cards, only to realize it applies to themselves and change it.


Once again, somebody couldn't discuss and had to make it about me. Again.



/jarmo

[D-GenerationX]

Answer my question: 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.

Today?  Nothing.  Today was the more lighthearted frustration at some of your antics.

I'm not shy about telling you when you are out of line.  I don't see any of that today. 

All I see today is your all too often schizophrenic "points" and then fury when I don't answer them.  But shit, I'm used to that.  And most times, I still try and work with it.  Just got a bit too far down the rabbit hole today and whastever point you had got lost.

If you'd like to restate it without any of your pissy bullshit, I'll still give it another go.

[jarmo]

There's no fury. Don't worry. You still think too highly of yourself! The irony of the situation is that you think you have some kind of effect on me and in reality you're always the one who starts these tirades about being treated wrong.....


I just don't get your act. You say something, then don't wanna back it up when asked more about it. Then you start acting like your feelings got hurt.

I just don't get it.  It's very weird to me to say something and get insulted when asked to back up what I just said. I don't get it.
Or get frustrated when asked to take a moment to look at something that discredits what you just said. It's part of a discussion to me.

Conveniently skipping points and not wanting to speculate when it suits you just doesn't paint you as the guy who wants to discuss.


Glad you admitted that there was no instance where you were somehow treated wrong. 



So, to continue:

• Did you read all the interviews Axl has done in recent years? 2008 to present, to be specific.
• If you did, does it give you the impression that there are a lot of rules? And if yes, do you think the media was asked not to ask about new music between 2008 and today?
• What do you think he'll talk about in future interviews that would coincide with the album's release since you don't think the music itself will be discussed?
• Do you know what a publicist is and what they do?
• How do you think an Axl Rose interview materializes? He contacts the magazines himself or what?
• Do you think it's fair to assume that not every interview will be done for the same reason? Meaning, not everybody will ask about the same things because of either the magazine's readership, the show or the timing? Some would be aimed at promoting music, some would be more light hearted fun and some would be to promote a show or shows.
• Would you feel upset if he didn't talk about your preferred topic(s) in all those interviews even though they were done for different reasons?

 

Background and expectations...




/jarmo

[D-GenerationX]

• Did you read all the interviews Axl has done in recent years? 2008 to present, to be specific.
• If you did, does it give you the impression that there are a lot of rules? And if yes, do you think the media was asked not to ask about new music between 2008 and today?

Yes, I did.

The scarcity of them, and the fact that other than the Billboard one were pretty much meandering nonsense, I was left with the impression there are rules set up ahead of time.  The huge offenders here would be the embarrassing display with Del, and the Eddie Trunk show.  Kimmel, that's a comedy show.  Is what it is.

• What do you think he'll talk about in future interviews that would coincide with the album's release since you don't think the music itself will be discussed?

I just hope he does some.

Based on track record, I am not optimistic that his focus will be the current and album and his current band, because none of the other ones since 2008 were.  I guess I hold out hope that it will be different this time, but its hope absent any track record to back it up, and the sort of blind hope I tend to mock.

• Do you know what a publicist is and what they do?
• How do you think an Axl Rose interview materializes? He contacts the magazines himself or what?

Yes, I know what a publicist is.  Whoever Axl has been using should be fired, yesterday.

I think requests are put out for Axl that likely go unanswered.  I also think if he calls up 'Rolling Stone', he's not only interviewed, he's on the cover.  Axl's (or his people) presumably have phones that dial out.  This should be taken advantage of.

• Do you think it's fair to assume that not every interview will be done for the same reason? Meaning, not everybody will ask about the same things because of either the magazine's readership, the show or the timing? Some would be aimed at promoting music, some would be more light hearted fun and some would be to promote a show or shows.
• Would you feel upset if he didn't talk about your preferred topic(s) in all those interviews even though they were done for different reasons?

No.  Some are jokey lighthearted stuff like Kimmel.  They are what they are.

I would see any interviews when the album comes out that don't focus on his current band the album they just put out to be misguided at best, and a total failure at worst.  I'm all set on Slash being a cancer.  Caught up on Irving Azoff being a liar.  All up to speed on how hard of a journey his life is.  Talk about your damn band and put over the hard work they did.  Don't fuck them over like you did in 2008-09.

There you go.  Direct questions, direct answers.


[/list]

[jarmo]

Yes, I did.

The scarcity of them, and the fact that other than the Billboard one were pretty much meandering nonsense, I was left with the impression there are rules set up ahead of time.  The huge offenders here would be the embarrassing display with Del, and the Eddie Trunk show.  Kimmel, that's a comedy show.  Is what it is.

Did you see the Australian one from 2013? Gave me the impression there were questions he wouldn't normally like to talk about (again), but he replied anyway....
I liked the LA Times one from 2011. Even the headline/title "Axl Rose's appetite is for today's Guns N' Roses" is about the current band.

Based on track record, I am not optimistic that his focus will be the current and album and his current band, because none of the other ones since 2008 were..

That doesn't answer the question though: What do you think he'll talk about in future interviews that would coincide with the album's release since you don't think the music itself will be discussed?

I think requests are put out for Axl that likely go unanswered.  I also think if he calls up 'Rolling Stone', he's not only interviewed, he's on the cover.  Axl's (or his people) presumably have phones that dial out.  This should be taken advantage of.

You don't see the other side of it? How it could be seen as desperate to call magazines for interviews? Sounds like something unsigned unknown bands would do.
Also, why Rolling Stone? Maybe there's a reason why he hasn't talked to them.

I would see any interviews when the album comes out that don't focus on his current band the album they just put out to be misguided at best, and a total failure at worst. 

I think you partly misunderstood. I wasn't talking about just interviews at release time.

Imagine you're doing an interview with a newspaper in let's say New York because you have shows coming up there the following week. Wouldn't it be safe to assume that might be the angle of the interview? Especially if it was done way after the album was out. If the press is done on tour, maybe that explains where the focus of the interviews is?

If it's done around release date, then that might be the focus of those interviews?
You can't assume every interview will be about new music..... Or that every interviewer will bring up that question, just because that's what you want.

There you go.  Direct questions, direct answers.

Well you missed one. Or 1.5. 



/jarmo

[mortismurphy]

Yes, he mentioned it and answered questions. The issue of new music has been brought up. Don't worry.
He even talked about it in the fan chats in 2008.

Oh, you did not just say that, did you? Axl also talked about a 'trilogy' in, 2001 or whenever it was!

[draguns]

Speaking of rock journalists...Eddie Trunk kinda takes a shot at GNR here...well maybe hes not a journalist but a public figure with in the community


Radio host Eddie Trunk says he's given up on any semblance of respect for the uneven way the Hall has honored certain bands and ignored others with longer track records of success.

"How can you have a Hall of Fame where it takes Kiss, Rush and Alice Cooper twenty years to get in," he says, "but Green Day and Guns n' Roses go in on first ballot and Deep Purple doesn't get in."

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/music/rock-roll-hall-fame-snubs-heavy-metal-article-1.2047726

Maybe he's just saying that non metal bands go in immediately and metal bands get the shaft, but still.

As far as an Axl interview goes... we would all love to see a guy or gal grill him on the spot about his entire career with no pre determined questions or requirements, but that's never going to happen, and not exclusive to Axl Rose.

Just one thing about Eddie Trunk. He is a HUGE KISS fan so I'm not surprised he said that about Guns and Green Day.

[norway]

my two kroner:

Speaking of rock journalists...Eddie Trunk kinda takes a shot at GNR here...well maybe hes not a journalist but a public figure with in the community


Radio host Eddie Trunk says he's given up on any semblance of respect for the uneven way the Hall has honored certain bands and ignored others with longer track records of success.

"How can you have a Hall of Fame where it takes Kiss, Rush and Alice Cooper twenty years to get in," he says, "but Green Day and Guns n' Roses go in on first ballot and Deep Purple doesn't get in."

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/music/rock-roll-hall-fame-snubs-heavy-metal-article-1.2047726

Maybe he's just saying that non metal bands go in immediately and metal bands get the shaft, but still.

As far as an Axl interview goes... we would all love to see a guy or gal grill him on the spot about his entire career with no pre determined questions or requirements, but that's never going to happen, and not exclusive to Axl Rose.

Just one thing about Eddie Trunk. He is a HUGE KISS fan so I'm not surprised he said that about Guns and Green Day.

GNR in this aspect is a bit weird. Cause you have the band 1987-90's. Then what?

Glad Axl declined that invitation btw. Indict Slash? Yes. Indict Axl? Yes. Indict the roadkill that was old-gnr? no

[TheBaconman]

There is a lot of talk over Axl places "gag" orders on reporters or interviewers or certian questions are "banned".  I do think there is a certian truth to this, be rescritions put on by guns managment(which really is the voice of Axl), or whatever...  I dont have a problem with this at all actually, as many big stars in many big industies have certain "no ask" questions, but on interviews...   Whatever...

My problem comes from the lack of promotion/interviews/chats from current band members, strickly about Guns N Roses and what seems like what are certian limitations on what current band memebers can talk about, in regards to the band.  I have no facts to this, just this is what it looks/seems like to me.

That currtent band members have very strict limitations on to what they can talk about in interviews..

I think this is such a shame and a missed oportunity to promote the band.  Axl, doest give many interviews.  He never has, never will.  Big deal.  Use the rest of the band members for this.  Let them talk in interviews about everything guns n roses. 

It seems in what little interviews current band members give.  It is usually in regards to there side projects.  With any questions about Guns, being a after thought or a very small sample size of the actual interview.

I remeber when Duff cam back to play a few shows in Brazil last year.  He had a radio interview booked and it was cancelled last min.  Did we ever find out why this was?

[mortismurphy]

(Axl's) GN'R advocate, censorship. What else can explain Axl's outburst at Rio 3 or numerous videos that have been pulled down from youtube? They do not like people saying, inconvenient truths. They are a strange set-up really. somewhat hateful of their fanbase (whereas other bands embrace their fans).

[jarmo]

Yes, he mentioned it and answered questions. The issue of new music has been brought up. Don't worry.
He even talked about it in the fan chats in 2008.

Oh, you did not just say that, did you? Axl also talked about a 'trilogy' in, 2001 or whenever it was!

So in your logic, there must be a rule against that since Axl spoke about it.

(Axl's) GN'R advocate, censorship. What else can explain Axl's outburst at Rio 3 or numerous videos that have been pulled down from youtube? They do not like people saying, inconvenient truths. They are a strange set-up really. somewhat hateful of their fanbase (whereas other bands embrace their fans).

What videos are these? Anything copyrighted?

No, not hateful. Did you ever listen to that song Get In The Ring? It kinda explains what they don't seem to like. Unfortunately, because of the Internet, some fans have taken that role now.
The so called truth you speak of, how can you claim they are truths when you don't know the full story? Just because somebody writes something in a newspaper, doesn't mean that's what exactly went on. It's just their version or guess. Not saying all the media lies, so don't try that one. Everybody knows negativity sells and some people chose to believe it as the truth.

Regarding other bands' fans, maybe they're actually supportive of the bands they love instead of spending all their time online spreading their negativity in the name of so called objectivity?
People like to post all kinds of shit and if anybody in the band, or working for them, says something about it, there these people are butt hurt about it. 

My problem comes from the lack of promotion/interviews/chats from current band members, strickly about Guns N Roses and what seems like what are certian limitations on what current band memebers can talk about, in regards to the band.  I have no facts to this, just this is what it looks/seems like to me.

Or, they just don't wanna talk too much about things because they don't know or don't wanna be the ones making announcements. Anything they say is always dissected, twisted and taking out of context. Check out the latest videos of Richard at that guitar clinic in Australia last month. He seemed to talk freely about GN'R.




/jarmo

[D-GenerationX]

Did you see the Australian one from 2013? Gave me the impression there were questions he wouldn't normally like to talk about (again), but he replied anyway....
I liked the LA Times one from 2011. Even the headline/title "Axl Rose's appetite is for today's Guns N' Roses" is about the current band.

Did not see the Australian one.  Did read the LA Times one.

That doesn't answer the question though: What do you think he'll talk about in future interviews that would coincide with the album's release since you don't think the music itself will be discussed?

Best guess?  Vague generalities.

When asked about making the album, he is likely to start talking about the long and tortured process, which leads to sidebars about how everyone is screwing him.

You don't see the other side of it? How it could be seen as desperate to call magazines for interviews? Sounds like something unsigned unknown bands would do.
Also, why Rolling Stone? Maybe there's a reason why he hasn't talked to them.

I guess I'm thinking back to all these supposed offenses Slash has committed.

The narrative is that Slash spread all these awful lies that went unchallenged.  Well, who never challenged them?  Axl.  If he was seriously that upset by this stuff, he corrects the record.  The flipside is to sit and do nothing and then complain down the line how you were done wrong.  If you wanted to set it straight right there, you make a phone call.  You don't hide in the mansion.

But this is not a Slash specific premise.  Due to the scarcity of his availability, Axl has made himself something of a get.  Throuhg over exposure, that exclusivity would wear off.  But while you have it, why not use it?  Do you seriously think if he said he wanted to give someone an interview, they turn it down because he called them?  I sure don't.

I think you partly misunderstood. I wasn't talking about just interviews at release time.

Imagine you're doing an interview with a newspaper in let's say New York because you have shows coming up there the following week. Wouldn't it be safe to assume that might be the angle of the interview? Especially if it was done way after the album was out. If the press is done on tour, maybe that explains where the focus of the interviews is?

If it's done around release date, then that might be the focus of those interviews?
You can't assume every interview will be about new music..... Or that every interviewer will bring up that question, just because that's what you want.

I agree with all this.

But the time for the sort of interview I am talking about is at the time of release.  And I reject the notion you can avoid that almost entirely.  Then, do some interview three years later, and claim its not the time to talk up the new album.  You're right, its not.  That time was three years prior when you didn't do it.  When the guys that stuck with your for 10 years and worked real hard for you saw no payoff because you could not be bothered.  That's a shitty thing to do to people that stuck by you.

[JAEBALL]

There is a lot of talk over Axl places "gag" orders on reporters or interviewers or certian questions are "banned".  I do think there is a certian truth to this, be rescritions put on by guns managment(which really is the voice of Axl), or whatever...  I dont have a problem with this at all actually, as many big stars in many big industies have certain "no ask" questions, but on interviews...   Whatever...

My problem comes from the lack of promotion/interviews/chats from current band members, strickly about Guns N Roses and what seems like what are certian limitations on what current band memebers can talk about, in regards to the band.  I have no facts to this, just this is what it looks/seems like to me.

That currtent band members have very strict limitations on to what they can talk about in interviews..

I think this is such a shame and a missed oportunity to promote the band.  Axl, doest give many interviews.  He never has, never will.  Big deal.  Use the rest of the band members for this.  Let them talk in interviews about everything guns n roses. 

It seems in what little interviews current band members give.  It is usually in regards to there side projects.  With any questions about Guns, being a after thought or a very small sample size of the actual interview.

I remeber when Duff cam back to play a few shows in Brazil last year.  He had a radio interview booked and it was cancelled last min.  Did we ever find out why this was?

Duff who is a great writer ,a great interview and very big with social media really hasn't commented on his time with GNR last year other than saying "it was fun".

I am quite sure that is intentional to suppress reunion discussions, whether it was a mandate or not... who knows.

As far as other members being mum on GNR plans.. It's just simple.. they don't know. Axl has never liked divulging too much info and back in the day Slash and Duff would do a lot of the promotional work.

[D-GenerationX]

As far as other members being mum on GNR plans.. It's just simple.. they don't know. Axl has never liked divulging too much info and back in the day Slash and Duff would do a lot of the promotional work.

I don't get the impression they are intentionally holding out.  I get the impression they truly have no earthly idea what is going on in the "band" they are in.

[TheBaconman]

There is a lot of talk over Axl places "gag" orders on reporters or interviewers or certian questions are "banned".  I do think there is a certian truth to this, be rescritions put on by guns managment(which really is the voice of Axl), or whatever...  I dont have a problem with this at all actually, as many big stars in many big industies have certain "no ask" questions, but on interviews...   Whatever...

My problem comes from the lack of promotion/interviews/chats from current band members, strickly about Guns N Roses and what seems like what are certian limitations on what current band memebers can talk about, in regards to the band.  I have no facts to this, just this is what it looks/seems like to me.

That currtent band members have very strict limitations on to what they can talk about in interviews..

I think this is such a shame and a missed oportunity to promote the band.  Axl, doest give many interviews.  He never has, never will.  Big deal.  Use the rest of the band members for this.  Let them talk in interviews about everything guns n roses. 

It seems in what little interviews current band members give.  It is usually in regards to there side projects.  With any questions about Guns, being a after thought or a very small sample size of the actual interview.

I remeber when Duff cam back to play a few shows in Brazil last year.  He had a radio interview booked and it was cancelled last min.  Did we ever find out why this was?

Duff who is a great writer ,a great interview and very big with social media really hasn't commented on his time with GNR last year other than saying "it was fun".

I am quite sure that is intentional to suppress reunion discussions, whether it was a mandate or not... who knows.

As far as other members being mum on GNR plans.. It's just simple.. they don't know. Axl has never liked divulging too much info and back in the day Slash and Duff would do a lot of the promotional work.

Other members of the band, just don't have to talk about GNR plans.....   There are many other GNR related topics they can talk about.  I get it, they don't know certain things.  As sad as that is, that members of a band, don't know what is going on in the band, I get it...  But band members can talk about what they do know, which is.   Telling stories of recording CD..   Touring the world...   What playing guns songs live means to them...   There own future hopes and plans with the band..

And honestly I don't like the whole, the band doesn't know a lot argument...   How long a head of time would a world tour have to be booked?  Band members should know this.   If a band member was involved with writing on the album....  You think they would know about the writing process...

Its such a waste when it comes to promoting the band and gaining more interest in the band!! 

There has to be some kind of lock down Axl/management has on current/former members of the band, in regards to what they say to the media...  And I think that is wrong

[D-GenerationX]

Richard did give some of that on that guitar clinic thing.

But one wonders if he was suddenly so chatty because that was supposed to be a closed door deal.  That video from it doesn't seem like it was recorded on the up and up.

[TheBaconman]

Richard did give some of that on that guitar clinic thing.

But one wonders if he was suddenly so chatty because that was supposed to be a closed door deal.  That video from it doesn't seem like it was recorded on the up and up.

I will check out this guitar clinic interview thing out later today....

[mortismurphy]

Regarding other bands' fans, maybe they're actually supportive of the bands they love instead of spending all their time online spreading their negativity in the name of so called objectivity?
People like to post all kinds of shit and if anybody in the band, or working for them, says something about it, there these people are butt hurt about it. 

Are you actually saying that Guns N' Roses fans, with their 'negativity' (god, you love that word, don't you?) are set apart, completely different, from the millions upon millions of fans who support other bands (some of which, are bigger than Guns)?

[JAEBALL]

Richard did give some of that on that guitar clinic thing.

But one wonders if he was suddenly so chatty because that was supposed to be a closed door deal.  That video from it doesn't seem like it was recorded on the up and up.

It seemed strange to me that he would say some songs are from Slash

I would think thats a no no, because of course every headline from the interview was "new GNR material will feature Slash!"

But it was refreshing to hear anybody from the band talk about certain things.

[D-GenerationX]

Richard did give some of that on that guitar clinic thing.

But one wonders if he was suddenly so chatty because that was supposed to be a closed door deal.  That video from it doesn't seem like it was recorded on the up and up.

I will check out this guitar clinic interview thing out later today....

Oh yeah, definitely.  He talks about the sorts of things you are talking about.

Its a good watch.