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

[D-GenerationX]

As far as the AC/DC connection  to playing at the Grammy's and Metallica for that matter, both of those bands were invited to ply because they were past Grammy winners, ...why would the Grammy's invite GNR, its not like your publicist or anything is gonna get you the gig, you have to be invited by the Grammy's themselves, and all that do perform at one time or another were winners, or at least nominees.

Oh, is that a hard and fast rule?  If it is, that wraps this up.

Shame you weren't here yesterday.

[Ginger King]

As far as the AC/DC connection  to playing at the Grammy's and Metallica for that matter, both of those bands were invited to ply because they were past Grammy winners, ...why would the Grammy's invite GNR, its not like your publicist or anything is gonna get you the gig, you have to be invited by the Grammy's themselves, and all that do perform at one time or another were winners, or at least nominees.

Oh, is that a hard and fast rule?  If it is, that wraps this up.

Shame you weren't here yesterday.

Well, they were nominees, right?

[D-GenerationX]

As far as the AC/DC connection  to playing at the Grammy's and Metallica for that matter, both of those bands were invited to ply because they were past Grammy winners, ...why would the Grammy's invite GNR, its not like your publicist or anything is gonna get you the gig, you have to be invited by the Grammy's themselves, and all that do perform at one time or another were winners, or at least nominees.

Oh, is that a hard and fast rule?  If it is, that wraps this up.

Shame you weren't here yesterday.

Well, they were nominees, right?

I looked yesterday.  Nope.

American Music Awards, yes.  Slash's infamous speech.  They played 'Patience' the year prior, and they also sent the taped version of 'Yesterdays' in 1992.

[jarmo]

Dubious in what way?

Dubious in the sense that the reason to not play an awards show is because "they never exactly promoted GNR".  I don't think that's a factor.

I find it far more likely he just would not want to do it.  He doesn't want to do a lot of things.  I'm unclear why we can't just leave it there.

For the record, I don't think there is a hope in hell of him doing this.  I simply threw it out there as something else to talk about. 

That you saw the need to turn it into yet another fight, well, I can't control that.  You seem want to go to the mattresses over every god damn thing lately.

Come on!
Of course you want to leave it at "he doesn't want to do it". It fits your idea perfectly.

I thought you were interested in discussion and here you are trying to kill it.
Why are you so afraid of talking about REASONS and background?

It's not interesting to find out that you really don't pay that much attention to the (GN'R) world around you and your knowledge is very limited?

Axl didn't go to the RNRHOF and he explained that. He mentioned in the 2009 Billboard interview why he was talking to them. All these little hints are there for you to find if you're interested and have an open mind. But instead you want to go with "he doesn't wanna do it".

So yeah, if GN'R plays the Grammys, great. If they don't, I have my personal opinion on why that might be the case and unlike you, it's not based on the "he doesn't wanna do it" fantasy...




/jarmo

[Ginger King]

Which part of this is not true? The Grammy Awards never really acknowledged GN'R during the band's existence and is out of touch regarding the genre GN'R usually gets labeled in.

/jarmo

I guess I'm unclear what you mean by "never really acknowledged."  They have been nominated multiple times.  Do you mean to be acknowledged you have to win one?  

The consensus here seems to be that the Grammys is an out of touch, pompous and affluent organization that caters to the pop crowd...yet you're upset that GnR hasn't been rightfully recognized by them.

[D-GenerationX]

Come on!
Of course you want to leave it at "he doesn't want to do it". It fits your idea perfectly.

Looks like they couldn't play even if they wanted to.

Had you been on the ball on that yesterday, we could have avoided all this.

[D-GenerationX]

I guess I'm unclear what you mean by "never really acknowledged."  They have been nominated multiple times.  Do you mean to be acknowledged you have to win one?  

As I said though, a quick glance at Grammy nominations on Wikipedia, it does not seem so.

None of the albums or singles.

[Ginger King]

I guess I'm unclear what you mean by "never really acknowledged."  They have been nominated multiple times.  Do you mean to be acknowledged you have to win one?  

As I said though, a quick glance at Grammy nominations on Wikipedia, it does not seem so.

None of the albums or singles.

This link here notes that they were nominated 3 times, in 1990, '92, and '93.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_awards_and_nominations_received_by_Guns_N%27_Roses

[D-GenerationX]

I guess I'm unclear what you mean by "never really acknowledged."  They have been nominated multiple times.  Do you mean to be acknowledged you have to win one?  

As I said though, a quick glance at Grammy nominations on Wikipedia, it does not seem so.

None of the albums or singles.

This link here notes that they were nominated 3 times, in 1990, '92, and '93.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_awards_and_nominations_received_by_Guns_N%27_Roses

Alright!  We're back in the game.

Looks like they could play if they were so moved.

[jarmo]

I guess I'm unclear what you mean by "never really acknowledged."  They have been nominated multiple times.  Do you mean to be acknowledged you have to win one?  

They were nominated three times. GN'R Lies, UYI1 and Live And Let Die for Best Hard Rock Performance. Lost to Living Color, Van Halen and RHCP.....
Possibly the biggest band on the planet at the time didn't win anything at the awards...

I know, it's not about quality or anything like that. All politics.
There's now way they'll give an award to GN'R Lies with offensive lyrics.

The Grammy awards are like the RNRHOF.

Looks like they couldn't play even if they wanted to.

Had you been on the ball on that yesterday, we could have avoided all this.

Yes, disregard what was said and sweep it under the rug. Nobody saw anything... This is how your business as usual works.




/jarmo
 

[Ginger King]

I guess I'm unclear what you mean by "never really acknowledged."  They have been nominated multiple times.  Do you mean to be acknowledged you have to win one?  

They were nominated three times. GN'R Lies, UYI1 and Live And Let Die for Best Hard Rock Performance. Lost to Living Color, Van Halen and RHCP.....
Possibly the biggest band on the planet at the time didn't win anything at the awards...

I know, it's not about quality or anything like that. All politics.
There's now way they'll give an award to GN'R Lies with offensive lyrics.

The Grammy awards are like the RNRHOF.

Looks like they couldn't play even if they wanted to.

Had you been on the ball on that yesterday, we could have avoided all this.

Yes, disregard what was said and sweep it under the rug. Nobody saw anything... This is how your business as usual works.

/jarmo
 

And while we're at it, fuck the Brit Awards too.

[mortismurphy]

I honestly do not buy into this concept of the Grammys holding some sort of, anti-GN'R agenda. Now, they wouldn't play because they would not be invited as they do not release albums. Most of the acts who played have new albums out.

[D-GenerationX]

I honestly do not buy into this concept of the Grammys holding some sort of, anti-GN'R agenda. Now, they wouldn't play because they would not be invited as they do not release albums. Most of the acts who played have new albums out.

Yep.  You play when it makes sense for you, business wise.

With nothing to promote and no new release in over half a decade, that time would obviously not be now.

But if an album is out by next (or whatever) year?  It would fit the premise at that point.

[jarmo]

I honestly do not buy into this concept of the Grammys holding some sort of, anti-GN'R agenda. Now, they wouldn't play because they would not be invited as they do not release albums. Most of the acts who played have new albums out.

Generalizations and silly exaggerations to prove your point.

Nobody said there was a anti-GN'R agenda. I pointed out that GN'R never won anything there and that the whole thing is based on politics and is out of touch with reality. None of you have managed to prove any of that as being false, instead the best comeback is "you said there's a anti-GN'R agenda!" or something similar.

Don't be silly.

Could it still happen? Yes.
Never say never.

But based on what we know, I personally would guess that some other award show would be more likely. Now, all of you are free to call that dubious, silly, sad and whatever. But at least my opinion is based on more than "Axl doesn't do award shows because it's how I think he is".




/jarmo

[D-GenerationX]

Never having been a fan of award shows in general, it does seem hard to believe he'd want to play one.

But, hopefully, that would not shut the door on performing somewhere else to get the band some exposure.

Who knows?  If even a handful of people see them on some sort of program, and they are impressed enough to then buy a ticket they otherwise were not planning to...isn't that a good thing?

[JAEBALL]

If it happened...it would just be a nice stepping stone... look at AC DC.. they are going to do a MONSTER football stadium tour right after this performance...

Would be nice...

[pilferk]

I don't agree - at least in terms of this argument here, that Axl playing the VMAs is unrelated to him playing the Grammys. The 2014 VMAs featured Beyonce, Miley Cyrus and Jay Z. The 2015 Grammys featured all those three. Same celebs, same people, same - oddball - collaborations, same wishy washy ''I would like to thank gawwd'' acceptance speeches.

Yup, in VASTLY different performances (and...I didn't see Miley perform at the 2015 grammies...did I miss something?).

You can disagree...you're entitled to your opinion.  But both the Grammy organizers and the VMA organizers would pretty much disagree with you....so..there you go.

They are similar because they are both music awards shows.  There's going to be overlap...I said as much.  But they're not the same, IMHO. And those differences matter.

[jarmo]

Never having been a fan of award shows in general, it does seem hard to believe he'd want to play one.

VMAs 1988, 1991 (recorded in London though), 1992, 2002 and 2006 appearance. American Music Awards 1989. Revolver Golden Gods 2014.



/jarmo

[Ginger King]

I honestly do not buy into this concept of the Grammys holding some sort of, anti-GN'R agenda. Now, they wouldn't play because they would not be invited as they do not release albums. Most of the acts who played have new albums out.

Generalizations and silly exaggerations to prove your point.

Nobody said there was a anti-GN'R agenda. I pointed out that GN'R never won anything there and that the whole thing is based on politics and is out of touch with reality. None of you have managed to prove any of that as being false, instead the best comeback is "you said there's a anti-GN'R agenda!" or something similar.

Don't be silly.

Could it still happen? Yes.
Never say never.

But based on what we know, I personally would guess that some other award show would be more likely. Now, all of you are free to call that dubious, silly, sad and whatever. But at least my opinion is based on more than "Axl doesn't do award shows because it's how I think he is".

/jarmo

But you did say this:  "Possibly the biggest band on the planet at the time didn't win anything at the awards..."

That kind of eludes that you think there is some sort of bias (or politics at play) that prevented GnR from winning an award that they otherwise were entitled to.

Regardless, any performance at any show would necessarily involve promoting a new album.  Let's work on that first.

[pilferk]

Hahahaha

It's a near full time job coming up with reasons they cannot do any of these things.

It half funny, but half sad, that the reflexive answer to any of this stuff is to dismiss it.  Then come up with, not only reasons they should not...but also how those reasons are the height of nobility.

If they don't want to do something, fine.  Just say that.  Do we always have to go with how he's fighting the good an righteous fight?  Can't we just be honest and say he doesn't want to do it?  Must we always church it up?

I don't think it has anything to do with nobility, to be clear. Not sure if that was aimed at me or not.

I think it has to do with what he/they want to do, why, and what he/they think is best for the band.

I think they could/should do some live TV performances....I like the SNL or late night show suggestions a lot.

I just don't think the Grammies "fit", for either party, all that well.