Appetite For Democracy Blu-ray/DVD - live in Las Vegas Nov 21 2012

[Ali]

Of all the post 1993 line-ups and tours, I thought he sounded the best on that 2006 tour.  Very solid. 

Axl's AFD era live voice is great.  But I agree with Ali about the rasp being a bit heavy come the UYI tour.  That first leg in summer of 1991 is pretty rough.  And he appears to have blown it out by those last few gigs in L.A.

But 1992 and 1993, I think he sounded awesome.  I think his vocals on those Skin N' Bones shows are tremendous.  And my personal favorite bootlegs were that December 1991 through June 1992 time frame, and I think he sounds great throughout.

I saw Axl and GN'R in 1992 and have the bootleg from that show.  As much as I love his energy and passion, all the cancelled shows during the Metallica tour due to vocal issues seem legitimate to me because of the quality of his vocals.  He sounded to me as though he was just shredding his vocal cords with the way he was singing.  He was not getting enough air support and pushing his chest voice to hit notes it can't or shouldn't be used to hit.

Ali

[Ali]

One of the funniest things I have read on this board in many years is the argument that 'you can't just judge the quality of Axl's voice by being there' due to myriad other factors that affect one's perceptions. Wow. From that point of view, I guess henceforth I cannot judge a restaurant's food by eating it, I cannot judge a movie by seeing it, and I can't judge good sex by having it. All due to extraneous factors. All I can say is that, as a human with a modicum of intelligence and thankfully good sense, and relatively good hearing, I can tell the difference between good vocals and bad vocals by being there. Period. And no one should try to tell me otherwise because you only make yourself look silly.

The essence of the argument is that "you were there, so you don't know." That argument is absurd. It can only be valid in bizzaro world where unreality becomes reality. For the rest of us, here on earth, I know what I hear and will make judgments based upon actual, in-person observation.

Agreed 110%.  Very well said.  That argument is absurd.  I don't drink or do anything at shows that would compromise my memory or ability to listen clearly and intently.  It comes across to me as an attempt to invalidate the positive feedback that those that attend the shows have given in the past.

All these publications that have been sending reporters to shows to review them should save their money and just wait for the YouTube videos to pop up 

Ali

[D-GenerationX]

I assume, like many of us, GNR is not the only band you guys follow.

So I ask, quite simply, do you see this with other bands?  Do other bands fans tell you that you can't trust video or audio evidence?  Do other bands fans tell you things are conspiring against the band behind the scenes?  That they can't get a break? 

You want to talk "unreality becoming reality", read this board.  What criticism is ever legit around here?  There is always an extenuating circumstance.  There is always something we are not privy to that would explain it all, and in Axl's favor.  In a beautiful twist of irony, we are told since we don't know what's going on "behind the scenes" we can't question Axl...oh, but we are pretty sure he's getting a raw deal.  Huh? 

What sense to does any of that make?  Maybe what's going on "behind the scenes" is Axl being impossible.  But no, that can't be.  And I don't know what's going on, so that irresponsible of me to comment.  However, if I wanted to take the same jack squat I know about the inner workings...but suggest Axl is being held down and wronged, that's OK.  That's likely what's going on.

[BangoSkank]

I assume, like many of us, GNR is not the only band you guys follow.

So I ask, quite simply, do you see this with other bands?  Do other bands fans tell you that you can't trust video or audio evidence?  Do other bands fans tell you things are conspiring against the band behind the scenes?  That they can't get a break? 

You want to talk "unreality becoming reality", read this board.  What criticism is ever legit around here?  There is always an extenuating circumstance.  There is always something we are not privy to that would explain it all, and in Axl's favor.  In a beautiful twist of irony, we are told since we don't know what's going on "behind the scenes" we can't question Axl...oh, but we are pretty sure he's getting a raw deal.  Huh? 

What sense to does any of that make?  Maybe what's going on "behind the scenes" is Axl being impossible.  But no, that can't be.  And I don't know what's going on, so that irresponsible of me to comment.  However, if I wanted to take the same jack squat I know about the inner workings...but suggest Axl is being held down and wronged, that's OK.  That's likely what's going on.

I get your point, but conversely, there's so, so much mindless venom spit at the band (and Axl in particular) that I really don't blame him for having the attitude he does sometimes.  It's tough to find thoughtful criticism in a sea of "Axl is bipolar and fat!!"  It just seems like the nature of message boards gives people permission to say some of the meanest shit ever.

[D-GenerationX]

I get your point, but conversely, there's so, so much mindless venom spit at the band (and Axl in particular) that I really don't blame him for having the attitude he does sometimes.  It's tough to find thoughtful criticism in a sea of "Axl is bipolar and fat!!"  It just seems like the nature of message boards gives people permission to say some of the meanest shit ever.

Oh, agreed.  If you are still salty the band broke up...SEVENTEEN YEARS AGO, you need help.  And, odds are, your criticism will be petty and unfair.

But, and I have had this beef with him as long as I can remember, Axl doesn't help himself.  He gets incensed when "lies are spread" or erroneous reports come out.  Does he do anything to correct them quickly?  Nope.  And then he'll get mad when people speculate, but does he ever communicate with us so we are not forced to?  Nope.

I take real issue with this thinking Axl just can't get a break.  Some of this is a two way street.  You either decide to never talk, and then not care who says what...or you do talk and then get legit pissed when others make shit up.  You don't, however, get to say and do nothing, then get mad when the message being put out there is not the one you want.  At some point, you need to step up.  Or, as I said, stop caring who says what. 

[JAEBALL]

I agree... its always somebody elses fault or the spreading of lies yadda yada ya...

I hate that... take accountability for userlf... I have a person in my personal life who is like that and it drives me crazy

If this DVD never sees the light of day... I will really be upset as a fan of this guys music career, at the end of the day it falls on him whetether its fair or not

[Ali]

I assume, like many of us, GNR is not the only band you guys follow.

So I ask, quite simply, do you see this with other bands?  Do other bands fans tell you that you can't trust video or audio evidence?  Do other bands fans tell you things are conspiring against the band behind the scenes?  That they can't get a break? 

You want to talk "unreality becoming reality", read this board.  What criticism is ever legit around here?  There is always an extenuating circumstance.  There is always something we are not privy to that would explain it all, and in Axl's favor.  In a beautiful twist of irony, we are told since we don't know what's going on "behind the scenes" we can't question Axl...oh, but we are pretty sure he's getting a raw deal.  Huh? 

What sense to does any of that make?  Maybe what's going on "behind the scenes" is Axl being impossible.  But no, that can't be.  And I don't know what's going on, so that irresponsible of me to comment.  However, if I wanted to take the same jack squat I know about the inner workings...but suggest Axl is being held down and wronged, that's OK.  That's likely what's going on.

Who exactly told you that you can't trust audio or video evidence?  The only thing I see is a couple of people saying not to assume a video of one is representative of all songs in a show, or that one show is representative of all shows, and to not discount the opinions of those actually in attendance at a show.

Disagreeing with someone's assessment, or how they assess things is not the same thing is your opinion is not legitimate.

Ali

[D-GenerationX]

I agree... its always somebody elses fault or the spreading of lies yadda yada ya...

I hate that... take accountability for userlf... I have a person in my personal life who is like that and it drives me crazy

If this DVD never sees the light of day... I will really be upset as a fan of this guys music career, at the end of the day it falls on him whetether its fair or not

And then we'll hear 4-5 years later that there were "a lot of problems".  That's all we'll get.  Some vague passing of the buck.

Then people around here will claim that we have our answer and its never enough.  We are just impossible.

[D-GenerationX]

Disagreeing with someone's assessment, or how they assess things is not the same thing is your opinion is not legitimate.

I think critical things should be allowed to be expressed without everything being a fight.  Not everything is a declaration of war.  Not everything is a grave insult. 

You should be able to say "wow, he sounds pretty shaky lately" and not be told we are negative people that will never be happy.  You should be able to say that the near complete lack of information flow is a problem, without then being chastised that "we'd probably just complain even if he did talk."

I am not exaggerating for effect when I say I struggle mightily to have something come up around here and have it be deemed a problem.  I had this exact argument with Jarmo last month.    Some things are just not handled well, and that's that.  You say what it is and hope the next time it goes better.  But the ultimate cop out is only having a glass half full opinion on just about everything (whether that opinion is well founded or not), then when asked to name something you thought went wrong, resorting to "it doesn't matter what I think."  That's just a way to avoid saying anything critical, is it not?

[Ali]

Disagreeing with someone's assessment, or how they assess things is not the same thing is your opinion is not legitimate.

I think critical things should be allowed to be expressed without everything being a fight.  Not everything is a declaration of war.  Not everything is a grave insult. 

You should be able to say "wow, he sounds pretty shaky lately" and not be told we are negative people that will never be happy.  You should be able to say that the near complete lack of information flow is a problem, without then being chastised that "we'd probably just complain even if he did talk."

I am not exaggerating for effect when I say I struggle mightily to have something come up around here and have it be deemed a problem.  I had this exact argument with Jarmo last month.    Some things are just not handled well, and that's that.  You say what it is and hope the next time it goes better.  But the ultimate cop out is only having a glass half full opinion on just about everything (whether that opinion is well founded or not), then when asked to name something you thought went wrong, resorting to "it doesn't matter what I think."  That's just a way to avoid saying anything critical, is it not?

Again, I'm not sure what you're talking about.  Disagreeing with your opinion of his vocals is something I've done.  However, telling you or anyone else that because of your opinion of his vocals that you are a "negative person that will never be happy" is not something I've ever done.  With all due respect, I don't think I've read that sentiment expressed at all, at least in so many words.

But, fundamentally, I agree that you should be able to criticize, at least if it is free of name-calling or attacks of any kind.  Putting parameters on how you can express your viewpoint, as in your choice of language, is not the same thing is not allowing the expression of that viewpoint at all.


Ali

[D-GenerationX]

Look at something like Bumble's chat.  Big picture, it was good to hear something from someone for a change.  No doubt.

But can you not also concede that, but lament that, truthfully, its was a GNR chat on a GNR site with a GNR member that could not talk about GNR?  Isn't that valid?  Should we then be told to be happy with what we got?  I'd ask, what exactly it was we got.  Not much.

I said in another thread (or maybe this one, they all run together) I respect the hell out of Ron, DJ, or whoever for doing these things.  They are essentially being sent to battle with no weapons.  I would not blame them at all if they said fuck it I'm not doing that.  Would you?

[Ali]

Look at something like Bumble's chat.  Big picture, it was good to hear something from someone for a change.  No doubt.

But can you not also concede that, but lament that, truthfully, its was a GNR chat on a GNR site with a GNR member that could not talk about GNR?  Isn't that valid?  Should we then be told to be happy with what we got?  I'd ask, what exactly it was we got.  Not much.

I said in another thread (or maybe this one, they all run together) I respect the hell out of Ron, DJ, or whoever for doing these things.  They are essentially being sent to battle with no weapons.  I would not blame them at all if they said fuck it I'm not doing that.  Would you?

No, there was not much GN'R related in BBF's chat.  Truthfully, I wasn't expecting it be.  But, you don't have to feel one way or another about it either.  Indifference is completely understandable and viable reaction.

I don't see it as them being sent to battle with no weapons.  But, then again, I know that if any official GN'R related news is going to come down the pipeline, it will be communicated through GN'R's official channels.  But, I wouldn't blame them for not wanting to do the chats if all it turned out to be were GN'R related questions.

Ali

[Limulus]

Off course, "Ali" goes to Axl shows only to judge Axl's vocals afterwards 

nobody goes to a show blindfolded!!

[JAEBALL]

There is a rumor now that Slash and Duff are holding things up with signing off on some things..

But they were not allowed to play GNR songs on their VR dvd's and Slashs DVD ... I believe

all part of the GNR clusterfuck i guess

[Ali]

There is a rumor now that Slash and Duff are holding things up with signing off on some things..

But they were not allowed to play GNR songs on their VR dvd's and Slashs DVD ... I believe

all part of the GNR clusterfuck i guess

That's not true.  Slash's live album had GN'R songs on it.

Ali

[JAEBALL]

There is a rumor now that Slash and Duff are holding things up with signing off on some things..

But they were not allowed to play GNR songs on their VR dvd's and Slashs DVD ... I believe

all part of the GNR clusterfuck i guess

That's not true.  Slash's live album had GN'R songs on it.

Ali

my bad then

[Princess Leia]

There is a rumor now that Slash and Duff are holding things up with signing off on some things..

But they were not allowed to play GNR songs on their VR dvd's and Slashs DVD ... I believe

all part of the GNR clusterfuck i guess

That's not true.  Slash's live album had GN'R songs on it.

Ali

Of course it?s bullshit. I find the comment by that MSL difamatory to say the least. Anyway it?s easy to check. Both Slash and Duff have twitter and facebook, well ask them.

[snead hearn]

Actually, securing a mechanical license of the songs for use, distribution and sale on an album/record, at least by US Copyright Law, you do NOT need to get the publisher's permission to release. For example, Slash or his label would owns the master recording (in this case a live performance). And those performances would be 'cover versions' (meaning not the original AFD/UYI masters). The label would then secure a mechanical license and pay the compulsory mechanical royalties.

Now, as for the Synchronization rights, synching the compositions (GNR songs in this case) to a fixed visual medium/platform (like a DVD for example), that you DO need to get the publisher's permission directly. This is before you even get to the DVD stage, the mechanical production of the DVD.  And those requests can be approved or denied.

My hunch/opinion: it sounds like either side is/will block the other on things like synch rights for their respective projects, so either side cannot benefit more than the other (like if one side releases something and it sells gazillion$$$, while the other side can release something and it tanks. How does that benefit the losing/tanks side?). But when there's a third party (feature film, commercial spots, Hall of Fame) then both sides can equally benefit from the synch fees.

[Siamese Democracy]

I choose not to speculate as I am not behind the scenes and don't want to paint a negative picture of something I have no idea about.  I will see this DVD when whatever needs to happen happens.  If it never comes out I will just live my life the way I am. 

[volcano62]

lol there is absolutely no news on this release