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

[D-GenerationX]

I can def see them playing the AMA's or the VMAs.

What else ya thinking?

I only think an awards show makes sense if the timing is right.  That being that the album comes out around when one of the shows comes around.  If that works, great.

But in terms of a late night show?  Something like that should be done whenever the album comes out.  Fallon would LOVE to have them.  We have already seen him on Kimmel.  I'm looking for anything that garners some attention and could be on Youtube the next day.

[D-GenerationX]

Axl is a better businessman than you think D Gen.

Really?  And you base that on these past 15 years?

I would have to disagree there.  For reasons I'm long on record with.

[pilferk]

I can def see them playing the AMA's or the VMAs.

What else ya thinking?

I only think an awards show makes sense if the timing is right.  That being that the album comes out around when one of the shows comes around.  If that works, great.

But in terms of a late night show?  Something like that should be done whenever the album comes out.  Fallon would LOVE to have them.  We have already seen him on Kimmel.  I'm looking for anything that garners some attention and could be on Youtube the next day.

Yup, I can def see (as I said in a previous post) they doing a late night show.  Probably Fallon or Kimmel, but any would work.  I can see them doing SNL, as well.  And I'd freaking go NUTS to see Axl participate in one of the segments.

And I see all those as possibilities, as we get closer to an album release.

[jarmo]

What, exactly, is modern day GNR doing that is so dangerous or in your face?

Somebody told me they have a reputation of canceling shows!  

Ah, but interestingly enough, somebody actually told me they don't do that anymore.

Ergo, aren't they a safer and less risk taking act these days?

It's true. But the person who told me that doesn't care!

But my question would be the same for any show or general appearance.  Would you want to see it?

Would Kanye West and flying pianos be involved? These things are important to know...  




/jarmo

[D-GenerationX]

Yup, I can def see (as I said in a previous post) they doing a late night show.  Probably Fallon or Kimmel, but any would work.  I can see them doing SNL, as well.  And I'd freaking go NUTS to see Axl participate in one of the segments.

That would be wild.

And if he could poke some fun at himself, that plays.  It always plays.  People like celebs that can let their guard down from time to time.

[D-GenerationX]

It's true. But the person who told me that doesn't care!

Whoever this guy is, you should listen to him.  Sounds like he could teach you a thing or two about a thing or two.

[pilferk]

It's true. But the person who told me that doesn't care!

Whoever this guy is, you should listen to him.  Sounds like he could teach you a thing or two about a thing or two.

Nahhhhhhh....i hear his daddy dont dance and his momma wont rock and roll. :p

[Princess Leia]

Grammys are important because they are to music what Oscars are to movies. So Grammys are the biggest award for artists and record companies. Having said that unfortunately for Grammys they have categories that are a joke. For example Best Electronic Dancing. WTF??? I?d put that into pop category. I?m not even sure if Rap should be a category.

I disagree, slightly.  For the Oscars, the focus is really on the awards, themselves.  For the Grammys, it's not.  It's on the attendees and the performances.  It's like a music festival for the pop music scene.  Many (if not most) of the performances have little, if anything, to do with the awards being presented, or the nominations for that year. 

Now who should be performing? In my opini?n only the nominees in different categories. The irony I see in the AC/DC performance is that the industry don?t give a fuck about rock, not the way they used to. However for the Grammys ceremony we have a legendary rock band. I don?t get it

That's been largely one of my points, too.  The attendees (and the industry) couldn't give too shits about rock, REALLY, unless the name of the person making it ends in "Grohl".

Both the Oscar and Grammys are supposed to celebrations and a festival type of environment. Not everything at the Oscars is all about the awards. The host is important and so it is whaterver dress Julia Roberts is wearing. The good thing about the Oscars is that you have Tarantino or Scorsese nominated. In the Grammys unfortunately most of the nominees are idiotic untalented morons. But that?s the case also with the MTV Music Awards these days.

[D-GenerationX]

It's true. But the person who told me that doesn't care!

Whoever this guy is, you should listen to him.  Sounds like he could teach you a thing or two about a thing or two.

Nahhhhhhh....i hear his daddy dont dance and his momma wont rock and roll. :p

Out of the car, long hair!!

[sky dog]

D Gen....what makes Axl good is that he is bad....unconventional...the things that piss you off about him are also the things that drive people to him. It is a strange alchemy. I would argue that if he wasn't the way he is, he never would have made it to begin with. He has been in the business 30 years and has sold over 100 million records worldwide under the "Gnr" banner.

Look at the big picture. Ax is a crazy bird for sure, but at the end of the day, I wouldn't mind having his bank account. Unlike Sly Stone who went completely crazy and completely bankrupt AND unlike Cobain who simply blew his own head off, Axl has survived....not all those crazy artistic cats do. You should give credit where credit is due sometimes, forget the past and focus on the future. You are a fan, not Axl's management team.  

[D-GenerationX]

D Gen....what makes Axl good is that he is bad....unconventional...the things that piss you off about him are also the things that drive people to him. It is a strange alchemy. I would argue that if he wasn't the way he is, he never would have made it to begin with. He has been in the business 30 years and has sold over 100 million records worldwide under the "Gnr" banner.

I agree in principle, but I think what you are talking about applies more to the old band set-up.

You had all his wackiness, but you also had other guys in Slash and Duff doing a lot of the heavy lifting in terms of press, promotion, etc.  You got the best of both worlds.

You don't have that now.  You have all his wackiness, but no counterbalance to keep the ship on course.  No one picks up that slack.  If he doesn't feel like talking, we just don't hear anything.

Axl is that guy that wanted more shots, and he got them.  But he no longer has anyone left to get him rebounds or play any D.  They aren't a playoff team anymore.

[sky dog]

Axl did a TON of press from 87-94....a ton...just sayin. Duff and Slash could barely talk from 90-94.....much less carry Axl's load.

[D-GenerationX]

Axl did a TON of press from 87-94....a ton...just sayin.

More than lately, no question.

So what happened?

[sky dog]

the band slowly disintegrated and Axl went on a walkabout! I don't know....

[jarmo]

look at AC DC.. they are going to do a MONSTER football stadium tour right after this performance...

That monster tour is interesting. The North American leg that is. 13 shows in total, 7 are in Canada, 6 in the USA.
North Americans are getting about half the amount of shows Europe is getting....




/jarmo

[NaturalLight]

look at AC DC.. they are going to do a MONSTER football stadium tour right after this performance...

That monster tour is interesting. The North American leg that is. 13 shows in total, 7 are in Canada, 6 in the USA.
North Americans are getting about half the amount of shows Europe is getting....




/jarmo

Not sure how big the North American leg will be but I suspect (or at least hope) that they'll add more dates.

[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.

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

It is based on a fallacy. You say that ''GN'R never won anything there''? Neither had any act that has ever been inducted, up until the point when they were actually inducted. These bands Guns lost to? RHCP and Van Halen? These seem like credible and commercially successful acts, Guns lost to. I do not sense some conspiracy, that (quoting you), it was ''based on politics and is out of touch with reality''! Guns lost. That is it. That simple. They lost against worthy opposition. Some bands lose and win later. Axl did not put out another album until 2008, so how was he expected to win (up until that time)?

Did the Oscars have an agenda against Peter O' Toole?

[mortismurphy]

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.

Some 'overlap'? I hasten to bet that you can take the VMA's roster on any given year, compare it to the Grammys (that year), and produce a very similar list of artists!

[JAEBALL]

look at AC DC.. they are going to do a MONSTER football stadium tour right after this performance...

That monster tour is interesting. The North American leg that is. 13 shows in total, 7 are in Canada, 6 in the USA.
North Americans are getting about half the amount of shows Europe is getting....




/jarmo

I meant the capacity of the stadiums they are playing.

[mortismurphy]

But what would be the reason?  What makes it different for them?

I asked you if it was because of the bastardized line-up, which I thought was where you were going.  But you said its not.

So what's the story?  Are you telling us there is measurable difference in saying you like AC/DC, but not Guns N' Roses?  Or pretending to say you do, as you are claiming?

Those bands generally look, sound, act, and conduct themselves in a very specific, "safe" way, now a days (and for awhile). There isn't exactly controversy, intrigue or any sense of "danger" around them.  They are, quite frankly, milquetoast in 2015.  They have been "good citizens" to certain aspects of the industry, up to, and including, the NARAS, as well

Is this the same AC/DC whose drummer was arrested recently for attempting to procure murder and possession of narcotics?