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

[Ginger King]

Jarmo, if you believe there is a political agenda against GN'R, you have to provide some sort of evidence.

I didn't say there's a political or any agenda against GN'R!
Fucking hell.

I said there seems to be politics involved in how they operate. In general!

This just taking something I said out of context and mixing it with whatever nonsense makes sense to you. It's obvious after reading your post about my "philosophy".
Guess what? You're wrong.

/jarmo

You said:  "Possibly the biggest band on the planet at the time didn't win anything at the awards..."

What is being taken out of context?  Seems clear you meant that some other force was at play that prevented GnR from winning a Grammy.  Now you are saying that, in general, politics affects the Grammys but not against GnR? 

Sorry if this is a bit confusing to me.

[jarmo]

Yes, GN'R were the biggest band and yet never won a single award. For whatever reason they don't seem to be "important" enough to win a Grammy. I don't care. It's a fact though.

You guys keep saying that I think or have claimed that there is a anti-GN'R agenda. I never said anything like that. Because I have no idea.
You're assuming. It fits your idea of what I'm like. Which without knowing me, is kinda funny.

The Grammy Awards have made some odd choices over the years. Is there an agenda against everybody who never won? Don't think so. So why do you suddenly claim that I've made claims about a anti-GN'R agenda?
I pointed out the fact that GN'R never won, the point that I think they've made some odd choices over the years (in my opinion) and that it's an industry award that involves politics in the way it operates.


Edited to add: You're taking two things I said and making one thing about it. What I said, I never claimed they were connected. You made the connection and assumptions.
For example, when Van Halen beat GN'R. It's possible whoever was voting prefer Van Halen. These people exist. Or that VH made a better push to win. I don't know. Doesn't mean there's a conspiracy against GN'R.

Since we're on the subject of agendas. Do you think the Grammy Awards would give out a Grammy for an album with a song like One In A Million on it? Yes? How about Back Off Bitch, Double Talkin' Jive and so on? If you think they'd have no issues with songs like that, then you're fine. If you think they wouldn't, then obviously you must think there's an anti-GN'R agenda!



Of course you guys are "defending" the Grammy Awards now. It's the best thing ever. Only because I happen to have another opinion.
I think you guys have an agenda against me. 

I'm still kinda glad we're not talking about the Kids Choice Awards because you guys would be here saying I claim there's an anti-GN'R agenda at the Kids Choice Awards....




/jarmo

[EmilyGNR]

Interesting observation, 2015 Grammys were the "Whitest" awards in 35 years

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/6663640
http://www.vocativ.com/culture/music/pop-music-billboard/

[GNR2014]

Interesting observation, 2015 Grammys were the "Whitest" awards in 35 years

Yet, Axl still lost.

[JAEBALL]

Not to be inflammatory... but didn't VR win the grammy... and that whole album is about the singers excessive love for narcotics....So GNR's not so clean cut image might not be the reason they never won...I just think their opponents were worthy winners, even if we all prefer GNR.

This "discussion" spiraled out of control...

Bottom line... We all would like to see GNR get more exposure.. and if they were asked to play the Grammys.. id be happy to witness it.

If they never get asked...or they don't want to... that's fine also.

[Ginger King]

Not to be inflammatory... but didn't VR win the grammy... and that whole album is about the singers excessive love for narcotics....So GNR's not so clean cut image might not be the reason they never won...I just think their opponents were worthy winners, even if we all prefer GNR.

This "discussion" spiraled out of control...

Bottom line... We all would like to see GNR get more exposure.. and if they were asked to play the Grammys.. id be happy to witness it.

If they never get asked...or they don't want to... that's fine also.

Eminem has won 15 Grammys...pretty sure he's a bit more "dangerous" and has more controversial lyrics than GnR.

[jarmo]

Eminem has won 15 Grammys...pretty sure he's a bit more "dangerous" and has more controversial lyrics than GnR.

But zero in the 1980s/early 1990s.
Different era nowadays...

Are you still gonna push your agenda about me saying there was an anti-GN'R agenda?




/jarmo

[pilferk]

Eminem has won 15 Grammys...pretty sure he's a bit more "dangerous" and has more controversial lyrics than GnR.

Glad to see Marshall's image factory is still alive and well...but that's so far off topic..I'll leave it at that.

[D-GenerationX]

Glad to see Marshall's image factory is still alive and well...but that's so far off topic..I'll leave it at that.

Last album was pretty good.

[pilferk]

Glad to see Marshall's image factory is still alive and well...but that's so far off topic..I'll leave it at that.

Last album was pretty good.

Oh, his MUSIC is great...lots and lots of good stuff, recent and back catalog.  I just want to clarify, that wasn't what I meant. 

[TheBaconman]

Eminem has won 15 Grammys...pretty sure he's a bit more "dangerous" and has more controversial lyrics than GnR.

But zero in the 1980s/early 1990s.
Different era nowadays...

Are you still gonna push your agenda about me saying there was an anti-GN'R agenda?




/jarmo

What do you think guns should of won Grammies for?

I made a post a few pages back.  Where I felt it should of been 6 Grammies.   4 of them were for two song for performace and song writting

[TheBaconman]

I would have thought the VMAs have a similar crowd and vibe as the Grammies and they played the VMAs.

Nope. Different vibe, different atmosphere, different make up of attendees. You'll see SOME of the same faces..lsure...but not all. Not nearly so stuffy and strait laced, doesnt take itself nearly as seriously, and isnt geared to stroke the egos, and bolster the self worth, of the pop music scene, almost entirely.

Very, very different....and a much more eclectic musical bent and influence, historically, too, with the vmas..with a lot more rock influences.

It's actually the anti-grammies, imho.

AND there is gnr history with the vmas, stretching a long way back, that makes it more appealing.

As an aside, the grammy people would be mortified to see you saying they are the equivalent to the vmas. Come to think of it...the vma folks might be equally offended....

Vmas has nothing do do with awarding the actual song writting process or production on a album.  It's all about the performace

[jarmo]

What do you think guns should of won Grammies for?

I made a post a few pages back.  Where I felt it should of been 6 Grammies.   4 of them were for two song for performace and song writting

Since I put so little weight on it, I don't know. They didn't even get nominated for Best New Artist in 1988... But Milli Vanilli won that in 1990. 
Looking at who's been nominated and who's won it, GN'R would've stood out though. Nirvana was never nominated for it either. Considering their impact....




/jarmo

[pilferk]

Vmas has nothing do do with awarding the actual song writting process or production on a album.  It's all about the performace

That, too.

Though I'd argue the Grammy's are quickly leaving most of the recognition behind (as more and more awards, esp those celebrating rock, writing, production, etc get moved off the telecast to be replaced by more and more performances) for those categories, too.

But, in essence, yes: The VMAs are about the musical performances (and I don't think you mean, and I don't mean, the live performances on the show)..that's what the awards are generally for. And they are a more laid back, more "permissive" (as in, they allow and encourage the artists doing LIVE performances to push the enevelope a bit more) environment, in general. Less stuffy and strait laced. Less pretentious. All IMHO (and from what I've seen).

[mortismurphy]

When have I ever defended the Grammys? Please point me in the direction when I praised the Grammys? Please point me in the direction when I even stated that Axl appearing would be a good thing? I have never once commented on them, pro, or against, beyond the fact that I see no reason why, not voting for Guns N' Roses, was not an earnest nomination (when faced with bands of the calibre of, RHCP and VH).

Jarmo, alright, you have never claimed that they possess an anti-gnr agenda. But do you not see how this can be interpreted, so? When you throw out, ''the biggest band in the world never won a Grammy'', there is an implication that they never won a Grammy for some insidious reason such as, a bias, and yes, an agenda. It is not hard to arrive at that conclusion.

[pilferk]

When have I ever defended the Grammys? Please point me in the direction when I praised the Grammys? Please point me in the direction when I even stated that Axl appearing would be a good thing? I have never once commented on them, pro, or against, beyond the fact that I see no reason why, not voting for Guns N' Roses, was not an earnest nomination (when faced with bands of the calibre of, RHCP and VH).

No..because...well..contrarian.

ie: You didn't offer your opinion (until MUCH MUCH later, and then really only in the most curosry fashion)...only objected to others.

It's very typical of the way you post..and it's good to see you acknowledge it.

Jarmo, alright, you have never claimed that they possess an anti-gnr agenda. But do you not see how this can be interpreted, so? When you throw out, ''the biggest band in the world never won a Grammy'', there is an implication that they never won a Grammy for some insidious reason such as, a bias, and yes, an agenda. It is not hard to arrive at that conclusion.

Sure, if he wasn't telling you, over and over and over and over again, in pretty much every response, that that wasn't his intent.

But, since he was......that's not really all that relevant.

[jarmo]

I think that you're thinking that!
You don't need to say it. I know what you're thinking!  

Jarmo, alright, you have never claimed that they possess an anti-gnr agenda. But do you not see how this can be interpreted, so? When you throw out, ''the biggest band in the world never won a Grammy'', there is an implication that they never won a Grammy for some insidious reason such as, a bias, and yes, an agenda. It is not hard to arrive at that conclusion.

No, it just illustrates my opinion that they're somewhat out of touch with reality, there's politics involved and they would rather give awards to "safe" choices such as Milli Vanilli than somebody as politically incorrect (at the time) as GN'R. And that's not GN'R specific at all!

I already pointed out that I don't care that they didn't win. It has no real value for me. I pointed out the fact that they didn't.

As I said, maybe the people voting all think Van Halen contributed more to the industry in 1992 than GN'R did. It's fine. Maybe the VH marketing campaign got more votes their way? I don't know, and if so, that's also fine. Their show. But I can still have the opinion that for whatever reason, GN'R never won and I wouldn't be surprised if there's other award shows that they would rather take part in than this one.

You made the conclusion based on the ideas in your head that fit whatever idea you have of how I think. Doesn't mean it's based on any reality. It's all in your head.




/jarmo

[Princess Leia]

Not to be inflammatory... but didn't VR win the grammy... and that whole album is about the singers excessive love for narcotics....So GNR's not so clean cut image might not be the reason they never won...I just think their opponents were worthy winners, even if we all prefer GNR.

This "discussion" spiraled out of control...

Bottom line... We all would like to see GNR get more exposure.. and if they were asked to play the Grammys.. id be happy to witness it.

If they never get asked...or they don't want to... that's fine also.

Yes VR won Best Rock Song ?f I?m not mistaken. And my theory  is they were given that award to compensate since GN?R never won a Grammy.

[mortismurphy]

When were Guns nominated, again?

I am trying to look at moments they could potentially win. Now, there does not seem to have been a separate rock album category when the old band are active. I do not think anyone can expect them to take the main album category, against records like Graceland and Faith. There was a separate 'metal vocal performance' which Metallica won.

Basically, there is a lot more 'rock' categories now, then there were for 1987-91.

[pilferk]

When were Guns nominated, again?

I am trying to look at moments they could potentially win. Now, there does not seem to have been a separate rock album category when the old band are active. I do not think anyone can expect them to take the main album category, against records like Graceland and Faith. There was a separate 'metal vocal performance' which Metallica won.

Basically, there is a lot more 'rock' categories now, then there were for 1987-91.

'90, '92, and '93, all for Best Hard Rock Performance.