Pitman interview

[One.In.A.Million]

I dont know why the word ''tour'' is present in this discussion. The big dissapointment here is knowing we will not have new music in the medium/long term. Touring has nothing to do with this. I think a lot of fans would ''tolerate'' (I dont know what is the right word to use, sorry) a big gap of time without shows if they know new music is underway. ''Playing songs the people know'' sounds like ''lets make all the money we can as long as we can with the hits from 25 years ago'' to me (because everybody knows WTTJ-ISE-MB-LALD are gonna be there in the setlist, and in that exact order, for ever and ever, but you never know with the newest music from CD)

Yeah, I know: this aint a Burger King. I think GNR's new aim is the new generation of fans who may still be interested in attending a ''greatest hits show'' from a neverending Greatest Hits Tour. I think it's pretty safe to say that the long time fans want new music, and would relegate live shows for that. Again: I know we CANT demand anything...

Can't disagree with anything here, well said estebanf. I personally think the change in GN'Rs and Axl's direction in both attitude and vibe to creating something "new" is shocking. It's hard to imagine back in the early 2000's Axl being content in playing the hits, and seemingly not being as bothered as he used to seem, about creating new music and a new direction for the group.

[LongGoneDay]

Generally, I agree. No need for clear start and stop dates, but colossal difference between the boss and GN'R.
Bruce maybe on an "endless" tour by his standards(Wrecking Ball came out March 2012), but he's got 17 albums under his belt. He continues to be a prolific songwriter, whereas GN'R's tour is another whole ballgame of endless. Axl has put out one album since '91. Bruce has put out 9. He's put out 6 albums in the time Axl has been touring with post classic lineups. That equals Axl's lifetime discography, if we generously include SI, and Lies as an LP.

Relevant bands continue to release new music, whether it lines their pockets or not.

I think you're missing the point.  It wasn't about a comparison between Springsteen and GN'R.  Springsteen was just an example.  There are others.  Metallica, for one, has not released in album in nearly 5 years as well.

Ali

Still, Metallica has managed 4 albums since classic GN'R disbanded. 5 if you include LuLu, and we know they are in the process of writing for another with Rubin. Their track record and open communication affords them the luxury of a 5 year gap w/little to no criticism.

GN'R could change the way they go about doing things if they truly care about the ridicule, which it doesn't seem they do, and that's their right and understandable.

Maybe Guns is secretly recording, but all signs point to them resting on their creative laurels and keeping the seemingly endless Chinese Democracy tour rolling. For a band that never technically disbanded, you'd think their creative output since 1993 would be greater than 1 album.
That's 1 more album than my band (I don't have a band).

[jarmo]

P2P has nothing to do with creation of new music. P2P clearly affects the sales of physical albums (compact discs, digital video discs, vinyls, etc), but with nowadays technologies you have other ways to distribute your music and still have profit. Or do you think we are experiencing ''the end of music''? Come on, normal artists still write music, and new music will pop up for ever. Just to give a familiar example: Buckethead releases 4 or 5 albums per year...

Comparing artists is always a bit difficult.

Let's say you're an independent artist recording stuff at home on your laptop. Your budget and the break even point are way different to somebody on a major label.

Even comparing artists that are on major labels is difficult. One artist might have a fan base who isn't as into computers as another one. So one has more fans who download stuff for free, while the other has more fans who go to Walmart to buy the cd. For example.

It's no secret that a lot of people have no problems paying more for a cup of coffee in the morning than they are prepared to spend on entertainment such as music.



There's a reason why many artists put out those special deluxe super editions of their albums. They know their hardcore fans will happily spend hundreds of dollars on a nice package while the majority illegally downloads the music for free....


/jarmo

[Ali]

I think people are still used to the old cycle of album - tour - break - album - tour.




/jarmo

Yes, I agree.  The thing is that was the model for so long that people are accustomed to it.  However, it seems like since the rise of P2P file sharing and digital music downloads (legal and otherwise), record sales have plummeted.  As such, less and less of artist's income comes from record sales.  The lost income has to come from some other source, so more touring, or more legs of a tour between albums is what seems to be more of the norm these days.

Ali

P2P has nothing to do with creation of new music. P2P clearly affects the sales of physical albums (compact discs, digital video discs, vinyls, etc), but with nowadays technologies you have other ways to distribute your music and still have profit. Or do you think we are experiencing ''the end of music''? Come on, normal artists still write music, and new music will pop up for ever. Just to give a familiar example: Buckethead releases 4 or 5 albums per year...

Who said P2P has anything to do with creation of music?

Who said GN'R were like normal artists?

The ability to make money from music sales has decreased since the dawn of P2P. While there may be other ways to make money from music, such as licensing, but I've yet to see anything to say those alternatives other than touring make up lost income from sales effectively.

Ali

[dont_damn_me]

I think Chris is talking in general terms. Artists with a big catalog of popular songs can often tour without any new material out.

They don't necessarily need to put out a new album in order to have a new tour. There's bands who do tours because they put out a compilation of their hits (I saw Depeche Mode on the Singles86-98 tour), there's bands who do tours based on old albums/tours (Iron Maiden for example just did it, The Cult are out there playing their old album in full) and there's bands who do anniversary tours.

All of the above can be done without putting out a new studio album.





/jarmo

Jarmo whats your point here ?

Of course GNR can tour at anytime, its GNR for fuck sakes.  Sounds like they'v become a nostalgia act now though, which is fine, but I'd prefer a new album and legacy, but if Axl doesn't want to do that and live off the old hits, all good, its his life, kind of a real shame though. 

There are tons of bands (most bands) that still put out good albums on a fairly regular basis, just because the music business has changed is no excuse for not putting out new music for your fans to hear. 

[dont_damn_me]

I dont know why the word ''tour'' is present in this discussion. The big dissapointment here is knowing we will not have new music in the medium/long term. Touring has nothing to do with this. I think a lot of fans would ''tolerate'' (I dont know what is the right word to use, sorry) a big gap of time without shows if they know new music is underway. ''Playing songs the people know'' sounds like ''lets make all the money we can as long as we can with the hits from 25 years ago'' to me (because everybody knows WTTJ-ISE-MB-LALD are gonna be there in the setlist, and in that exact order, for ever and ever, but you never know with the newest music from CD)

Yeah, I know: this aint a Burger King. I think GNR's new aim is the new generation of fans who may still be interested in attending a ''greatest hits show'' from a neverending Greatest Hits Tour. I think it's pretty safe to say that the long time fans want new music, and would relegate live shows for that. Again: I know we CANT demand anything...

Can't disagree with anything here, well said estebanf. I personally think the change in GN'Rs and Axl's direction in both attitude and vibe to creating something "new" is shocking. It's hard to imagine back in the early 2000's Axl being content in playing the hits, and seemingly not being as bothered as he used to seem, about creating new music and a new direction for the group.

Two very good posts...damn. I didn't even read the interview, but I get the gist of if from the comments, hopefully its just a curve ball for us fans.

[Ali]

Generally, I agree. No need for clear start and stop dates, but colossal difference between the boss and GN'R.
Bruce maybe on an "endless" tour by his standards(Wrecking Ball came out March 2012), but he's got 17 albums under his belt. He continues to be a prolific songwriter, whereas GN'R's tour is another whole ballgame of endless. Axl has put out one album since '91. Bruce has put out 9. He's put out 6 albums in the time Axl has been touring with post classic lineups. That equals Axl's lifetime discography, if we generously include SI, and Lies as an LP.

Relevant bands continue to release new music, whether it lines their pockets or not.

I think you're missing the point.  It wasn't about a comparison between Springsteen and GN'R.  Springsteen was just an example.  There are others.  Metallica, for one, has not released in album in nearly 5 years as well.

Ali

Still, Metallica has managed 4 albums since classic GN'R disbanded. 5 if you include LuLu, and we know they are in the process of writing for another with Rubin. Their track record and open communication affords them the luxury of a 5 year gap w/little to no criticism.

GN'R could change the way they go about doing things if they truly care about the ridicule, which it doesn't seem they do, and that's their right and understandable.

Maybe Guns is secretly recording, but all signs point to them resting on their creative laurels and keeping the seemingly endless Chinese Democracy tour rolling. For a band that never technically disbanded, you'd think their creative output since 1993 would be greater than 1 album.
That's 1 more album than my band (I don't have a band).

Little to no criticism?  That's funny because a few weeks ago when there was the announcement of the soundtrack album to the Through The Never movie, that was exactly one of the criticisms I saw on RS.com. 

LuLu was not a Metallica album.

GN'R has not been "secretly" recording, either.

http://www.glidemagazine.com/20543/richard-fortus-of-guns-n-roses/

You?ve been out a long time with GNR, haven?t you?

Yeah and I was out with Thin Lizzy last summer. Then I came back and did three months with them in Europe, came straight back and I?ve been out with Guns since then. We went straight in to rehearsals and recording and down to South America for six weeks and then started in the US and we?ve been gone the whole time. So I just got home.

Ali

[LongGoneDay]

Generally, I agree. No need for clear start and stop dates, but colossal difference between the boss and GN'R.
Bruce maybe on an "endless" tour by his standards(Wrecking Ball came out March 2012), but he's got 17 albums under his belt. He continues to be a prolific songwriter, whereas GN'R's tour is another whole ballgame of endless. Axl has put out one album since '91. Bruce has put out 9. He's put out 6 albums in the time Axl has been touring with post classic lineups. That equals Axl's lifetime discography, if we generously include SI, and Lies as an LP.

Relevant bands continue to release new music, whether it lines their pockets or not.

I think you're missing the point.  It wasn't about a comparison between Springsteen and GN'R.  Springsteen was just an example.  There are others.  Metallica, for one, has not released in album in nearly 5 years as well.

Ali

Still, Metallica has managed 4 albums since classic GN'R disbanded. 5 if you include LuLu, and we know they are in the process of writing for another with Rubin. Their track record and open communication affords them the luxury of a 5 year gap w/little to no criticism.

GN'R could change the way they go about doing things if they truly care about the ridicule, which it doesn't seem they do, and that's their right and understandable.

Maybe Guns is secretly recording, but all signs point to them resting on their creative laurels and keeping the seemingly endless Chinese Democracy tour rolling. For a band that never technically disbanded, you'd think their creative output since 1993 would be greater than 1 album.
That's 1 more album than my band (I don't have a band).

Little to no criticism?  That's funny because a few weeks ago when there was the announcement of the soundtrack album to the Through The Never movie, that was exactly one of the criticisms I saw on RS.com. 

LuLu was not a Metallica album.

GN'R has not been "secretly" recording, either.

http://www.glidemagazine.com/20543/richard-fortus-of-guns-n-roses/

You?ve been out a long time with GNR, haven?t you?

Yeah and I was out with Thin Lizzy last summer. Then I came back and did three months with them in Europe, came straight back and I?ve been out with Guns since then. We went straight in to rehearsals and recording and down to South America for six weeks and then started in the US and we?ve been gone the whole time. So I just got home.

Ali

Well to be honest I really don't follow Metallica much these days. Amazing band, but lost interest after Justice.
As we all know, the majority of comments on the internet are criticism based. Granted I'm assuming, but would think their leash is a bit longer than GN'R since they have been far more productive over the course of their careers.

Point of bringing up Lulu was that the band was actively producing, under the name Metallica or not.

We hear a lot of contradictory info from various members of present GN'R members, and personally I don't put much stock into what any members sans Axl says, because at the end of the day, he holds the keys, and he's really the only member I'm a fan of.

If Fortus says they're recording, fantastic. Hopefully it translates into something.

[Princess Leia]

Generally, I agree. No need for clear start and stop dates, but colossal difference between the boss and GN'R.
Bruce maybe on an "endless" tour by his standards(Wrecking Ball came out March 2012), but he's got 17 albums under his belt. He continues to be a prolific songwriter, whereas GN'R's tour is another whole ballgame of endless. Axl has put out one album since '91. Bruce has put out 9. He's put out 6 albums in the time Axl has been touring with post classic lineups. That equals Axl's lifetime discography, if we generously include SI, and Lies as an LP.

Relevant bands continue to release new music, whether it lines their pockets or not.

I think you're missing the point.  It wasn't about a comparison between Springsteen and GN'R.  Springsteen was just an example.  There are others.  Metallica, for one, has not released in album in nearly 5 years as well.

Ali

Still, Metallica has managed 4 albums since classic GN'R disbanded. 5 if you include LuLu, and we know they are in the process of writing for another with Rubin. Their track record and open communication affords them the luxury of a 5 year gap w/little to no criticism.

GN'R could change the way they go about doing things if they truly care about the ridicule, which it doesn't seem they do, and that's their right and understandable.

Maybe Guns is secretly recording, but all signs point to them resting on their creative laurels and keeping the seemingly endless Chinese Democracy tour rolling. For a band that never technically disbanded, you'd think their creative output since 1993 would be greater than 1 album.
That's 1 more album than my band (I don't have a band).

Little to no criticism?  That's funny because a few weeks ago when there was the announcement of the soundtrack album to the Through The Never movie, that was exactly one of the criticisms I saw on RS.com. 

LuLu was not a Metallica album.

GN'R has not been "secretly" recording, either.

http://www.glidemagazine.com/20543/richard-fortus-of-guns-n-roses/

You?ve been out a long time with GNR, haven?t you?

Yeah and I was out with Thin Lizzy last summer. Then I came back and did three months with them in Europe, came straight back and I?ve been out with Guns since then. We went straight in to rehearsals and recording and down to South America for six weeks and then started in the US and we?ve been gone the whole time. So I just got home.

Ali

Well to be honest I really don't follow Metallica much these days. Amazing band, but lost interest after Justice.
As we all know, the majority of comments on the internet are criticism based. Granted I'm assuming, but would think their leash is a bit longer than GN'R since they have been far more productive over the course of their careers.

Point of bringing up Lulu was that the band was actively producing, under the name Metallica or not.

We hear a lot of contradictory info from various members of present GN'R members, and personally I don't put much stock into what any members sans Axl says, because at the end of the day, he holds the keys, and he's really the only member I'm a fan of.

If Fortus says they're recording, fantastic. Hopefully it translates into something.

I agree we have contradictory info. Pitman made it very clear that they are not in a hurry to make an album because according to him nobody buys albums anymore.

Anyway we don?t have a tour either. All we have is a possible show in Brasil. It may or may not happened.

Then there is people who says that Axl want an neverending tour to make money. Well if that was the case he would do a reunion tour because it would be the fast an easy way to make tons of money. He is not doing that.

I do believe that the industry right now is more interested in Lady Gaga and BS like that than in GN?R or Metallica. And that?s not helping our cause

[Limulus]

in the end the huge GN'R b(r)and name might just be too heavy being on one man's shoulders....

[metallex78]

LuLu was not a Metallica album.

Maybe not, but Metallica sure as hell played on it, and it was still a new release of new music, which is exactly the point being made.

It's just disheartening that a band we all love is so complacent these days.

If you're a true artist, you don't make new music for money as your goal, you do it because you're creative.

So many other artists are releasing new music without financial motives, it's sad to see GN'R making every excuse under the sun as to why they can't.

[Mattgnr]

Once there was this rock n' roll band. Rollin' on the streets. Time went by and it
became a joke

[The Hinge]

All in all its a massive waste of talent.

[One.In.A.Million]

I tend to agree with the sentiments in this thread. It's a huge waste of time, songs, enjoyment, energy, legacy and it's a shame. GN'R don't owe me anything, but we are here because we support them and LOVE them. Seeing time go by is a sad thing, when so many things should have or could have been done. I just know we are all going to look back in the future and think how much time was wasted, and think "why?".

[Ali]

LuLu was not a Metallica album.

Maybe not, but Metallica sure as hell played on it, and it was still a new release of new music, which is exactly the point being made.

It's just disheartening that a band we all love is so complacent these days.

If you're a true artist, you don't make new music for money as your goal, you do it because you're creative.

So many other artists are releasing new music without financial motives, it's sad to see GN'R making every excuse under the sun as to why they can't.

No, actually, that was not the point being made. Metallica was referenced as a band that no longer has clear start and stop dates for tours in an article on Brice Springsteen.

Ali

[raindogs70]

Generally, I agree. No need for clear start and stop dates, but colossal difference between the boss and GN'R.
Bruce maybe on an "endless" tour by his standards(Wrecking Ball came out March 2012), but he's got 17 albums under his belt. He continues to be a prolific songwriter, whereas GN'R's tour is another whole ballgame of endless. Axl has put out one album since '91. Bruce has put out 9. He's put out 6 albums in the time Axl has been touring with post classic lineups. That equals Axl's lifetime discography, if we generously include SI, and Lies as an LP.

Relevant bands continue to release new music, whether it lines their pockets or not.

I think you're missing the point.  It wasn't about a comparison between Springsteen and GN'R.  Springsteen was just an example.  There are others.  Metallica, for one, has not released in album in nearly 5 years as well.

Ali

Still, Metallica has managed 4 albums since classic GN'R disbanded. 5 if you include LuLu, and we know they are in the process of writing for another with Rubin. Their track record and open communication affords them the luxury of a 5 year gap w/little to no criticism.

GN'R could change the way they go about doing things if they truly care about the ridicule, which it doesn't seem they do, and that's their right and understandable.

Maybe Guns is secretly recording, but all signs point to them resting on their creative laurels and keeping the seemingly endless Chinese Democracy tour rolling. For a band that never technically disbanded, you'd think their creative output since 1993 would be greater than 1 album.
That's 1 more album than my band (I don't have a band).

Little to no criticism?  That's funny because a few weeks ago when there was the announcement of the soundtrack album to the Through The Never movie, that was exactly one of the criticisms I saw on RS.com. 

LuLu was not a Metallica album.

GN'R has not been "secretly" recording, either.

http://www.glidemagazine.com/20543/richard-fortus-of-guns-n-roses/

You?ve been out a long time with GNR, haven?t you?

Yeah and I was out with Thin Lizzy last summer. Then I came back and did three months with them in Europe, came straight back and I?ve been out with Guns since then. We went straight in to rehearsals and recording and down to South America for six weeks and then started in the US and we?ve been gone the whole time. So I just got home.

Ali

Well to be honest I really don't follow Metallica much these days. Amazing band, but lost interest after Justice.
As we all know, the majority of comments on the internet are criticism based. Granted I'm assuming, but would think their leash is a bit longer than GN'R since they have been far more productive over the course of their careers.

Point of bringing up Lulu was that the band was actively producing, under the name Metallica or not.

We hear a lot of contradictory info from various members of present GN'R members, and personally I don't put much stock into what any members sans Axl says, because at the end of the day, he holds the keys, and he's really the only member I'm a fan of.

If Fortus says they're recording, fantastic. Hopefully it translates into something.

I agree we have contradictory info. Pitman made it very clear that they are not in a hurry to make an album because according to him nobody buys albums anymore.

Anyway we don?t have a tour either. All we have is a possible show in Brasil. It may or may not happened.

Then there is people who says that Axl want an neverending tour to make money. Well if that was the case he would do a reunion tour because it would be the fast an easy way to make tons of money. He is not doing that.

I do believe that the industry right now is more interested in Lady Gaga and BS like that than in GN?R or Metallica. And that?s not helping our cause

Even Lady Gaga's been saying she's not sure if the record company is going to be supportive of this new album as they had been of the previous two, she wants to be around for the long term and not just a memory of the over the top outfits.

The recording industry seems to be focusing back on supporting artists and not chasing soccer moms whose kids downloaded hit songs on file share sites. If anything, there's more discouragement to go to file share sites now and buy a song for a dollar, or free if there's a promotion going on.

[audjon]

They don?t rush to make an album because people don?t buy albums anymore. There aren?t record store to buy an album. Why? Because of the internet. And because people want music for free. Well it?s clearly an answer

 

Tell that to Adele!

[allwaystired]

That interview is so depressing.

I buy records, everyone I know that loves music buys music, everyone I know that loves music wants new music. To hear musicians say things like in this interview really gets to me.

I agree with all the comments in this thread- it seems like that's it in terms of getting any new music in the near or medium future.

Sad times, but I think now I can officially stop thinking I'll be hearing anything new from my favourite band. A massive waste.

[MuddyGNR]

It seems like gnr is more a business then a band now a days, the music is looked at as a product rather then art. It's a shame , axl rose isn't getting any younger and we aren't either, if it was me I would want to know I left a mark on Rock n roll and left a great legacy, if I was already financially stable I wouldn't let record sales deter me from releasing music. The real fans (what's left of them) are going to turn on him for running the name into the ground.

[jarmo]

Ugh.

GN'R is this, GN'R is that. Always the same complaining.

I suspect there's real GN'R fans who are aware of the fact that GN'R is GN'R. Always been that way!
They're not some other band, so they don't compare them to other bands.
They know art doesn't have a schedule. They know GN'R does things on their terms, not on the terms of Internet keyboard warriors who spent their free time judging and guessing about shit they know very little, or nothing, about.


If you know anything about GN'R or Axl, you should know that he does things on his terms. How this seems like a mystery or news to some is beyond me.
And yet people get upset when there's an update saying there's no news at the moment. You have people starting shit and the band sets the record straight and people get upset? Really? What happened to the "there's no communication" complaints?




/jarmo