ARTICLE: My thoughts on the future of Guns N' Roses

[damnthehaters]

I thought it was overall good but a bit of a mixed bag. There are masterpieces on there (TWAT, Better) and turds on there (Scraped, If the World, This I Love). Most of the songs fall between the two extremes . TWAT, Better, IRS, The Blues and Madagascar are my favourites. I also would add Oh My God to that list of Grade A material.

Well 5-6 songs that you like, makes a pretty good album in my opinion.  It's really hard to make an album that is viewed as great from start to finish.  You can't please everyone.  When I read your posts on here, I feel as though you are holding GNR to the Appetite standard?  An album that was almost flawless.  Are you holding out thinking Axl can recapture that?  I think that is highly unlikely for many reasons.  I've said this before to you on here, but maybe your expectations are extremely too high?  I'm not sure you will ever be fully pleased.  Especially with a band that doesn't release music the way you would want.    

[mortismurphy]

I thought it was overall good but a bit of a mixed bag. There are masterpieces on there (TWAT, Better) and turds on there (Scraped, If the World, This I Love). Most of the songs fall between the two extremes . TWAT, Better, IRS, The Blues and Madagascar are my favourites. I also would add Oh My God to that list of Grade A material.

Well 5-6 songs that you like, makes a pretty good album in my opinion.  It's really hard to make an album that is viewed as great from start to finish.  You can't please everyone.  When I read your posts on here, I feel as though you are holding GNR to the Appetite standard?  An album that was almost flawless.  Are you holding out thinking Axl can recapture that?  I think that is highly unlikely for many reasons.  I've said this before to you on here, but maybe your expectations are extremely too high?  I'm not sure you will ever be fully pleased.  Especially with a band that doesn't release music the way you would want.    

An album with 5-6 songs of the calibre of the ones I have mentioned would be extremely welcome. ''Appetite standard''? That ship is gone. It was the right five guys in the right time with hunger in their bellies.

[Bridge]

So a band isn't considered a "band" until they set foot on a stage or put an album out?  

I'd say a band isn't a band until it's at least solid.  The late Ole Beich played exactly ONE show under the GNR name before Duff replaced him.  Tracii and Rob played a few, but Tracii stopped showing up as he obviously became bored and/or scared with things.  Rob Gardner was scared shitless of the Hell Tour and quit.  That lineup didn't write songs together, nor did they record anything together.  They weren't a solid unit by any stretch, nor did they define the name Guns N Roses.

So no, I wouldn't exactly call the "original" lineup of Guns N Roses a "band", in the true sense of the word.  I wouldn't consider the "original" GNR a band any more than I'd consider any fans who could've jumped on the stage and jammed with them to be part of the band.

[damnthehaters]

I thought it was overall good but a bit of a mixed bag. There are masterpieces on there (TWAT, Better) and turds on there (Scraped, If the World, This I Love). Most of the songs fall between the two extremes . TWAT, Better, IRS, The Blues and Madagascar are my favourites. I also would add Oh My God to that list of Grade A material.

Well 5-6 songs that you like, makes a pretty good album in my opinion.  It's really hard to make an album that is viewed as great from start to finish.  You can't please everyone.  When I read your posts on here, I feel as though you are holding GNR to the Appetite standard?  An album that was almost flawless.  Are you holding out thinking Axl can recapture that?  I think that is highly unlikely for many reasons.  I've said this before to you on here, but maybe your expectations are extremely too high?  I'm not sure you will ever be fully pleased.  Especially with a band that doesn't release music the way you would want.    

An album with 5-6 songs of the calibre of the ones I have mentioned would be extremely welcome. ''Appetite standard''? That ship is gone. It was the right five guys in the right time with hunger in their bellies.

I agree. 

[D-GenerationX]

So a band isn't considered a "band" until they set foot on a stage or put an album out?  

I would say you can't judge them as a band until they write, record an release something so we can judge their merits.

Its why I always said the Axl-DJ-Richard-Ron-Tommy-Dizzy-Chris-Frank incarnation were never a real band.  They were just a live band that played songs other people wrote for Axl to sing live.

We never really got an indication what that group of 7 people might do creatively.  All we knew is that they could play a passable 'Nightrain'.

[jarmo]

Not really if they stuck them out as b-sides like Oasis.

If.

They also might have kept them unreleased....


/jarmo

[TheBaconman]

Does that differ from the old albums?




/jarmo

I really really like CD

But

With the old albums there were the hits everyone seemed to like (wttj,paradise,don't cry,estranged,patience).  Then there was the b side tracks that some people dug but some people really didn't like

With CD you have the hits like above (twat, better).  But then there a couple of b-sides that just nobody likes     

I think that is the difference

[mortismurphy]

Not really if they stuck them out as b-sides like Oasis.

If.

They also might have kept them unreleased....


/jarmo

Well we are dealing with hypothetical scenarios and hindsight. Assuming it is a stark choice between the material making the album or being axed, if you were to ask me whether I would take the Illusions as it is today or as a reformed one album, I would choose the former option. It is what it is. But if I was sitting in Mike Clink's seat in 1991 I would have to insist on material like Get In The Ring and Shotgun Blues as b-sides.

It is the exact same argument with The White Album really.

But it is the reason why Illusions - and Democracy also - will never be considered truly great by rock historians in the way that Appetite is. Appetite in actual fact can sit alongside the very best of the rock genre, alongside Sticky Fingers, In Rock, Highway to Hell, Are You Experienced?.

[TheBaconman]

Not really if they stuck them out as b-sides like Oasis.

If.

They also might have kept them unreleased....


/jarmo

Well we are dealing with hypothetical scenarios and hindsight. Assuming it is a stark choice between the material making the album or being axed, if you were to ask me whether I would take the Illusions as it is today or as a reformed one album, I would choose the former option. It is what it is. But if I was sitting in Mike Clink's seat in 1991 I would have to insist on material like Get In The Ring and Shotgun Blues as b-sides.

It is the exact same argument with The White Album really.

But it is the reason why Illusions - and Democracy also - will never be considered truly great by rock historians in the way that Appetite is. Appetite in actual fact can sit alongside the very best of the rock genre, alongside Sticky Fingers, In Rock, Highway to Hell, Are You Experienced?.

I think guns made the right choice when it came to the illusions albums

Damn individually they sold tens of millions

Each album had singles that could push sales individually

Releasing two albums at the same time was a very cool thing

Of coarse anyone could take all the best songs

It's called a greatest hits album!   Doesn't take much skill to release that

[EmilyGNR]

Does that differ from the old albums?




/jarmo

I really really like CD

But

With the old albums there were the hits everyone seemed to like (wttj,paradise,don't cry,estranged,patience).  Then there was the b side tracks that some people dug but some people really didn't like

With CD you have the hits like above (twat, better).  But then there a couple of b-sides that just nobody likes     

I think that is the difference

I wouldn't say nobody likes what you consider the supposed b-sides, it seems to be a very polarizing album and I've found different groups like different songs.

[jarmo]

Well we are dealing with hypothetical scenarios and hindsight. Assuming it is a stark choice between the material making the album or being axed, if you were to ask me whether I would take the Illusions as it is today or as a reformed one album, I would choose the former option. It is what it is. But if I was sitting in Mike Clink's seat in 1991 I would have to insist on material like Get In The Ring and Shotgun Blues as b-sides.

Yet it's ironic that a person who's so concerned about, and whose opinion is so invested in, the amount of music released, would rather have less music than what we got.

If you had 15 songs less released, imagine how annoyed you'd be now!



/jarmo

[Spirit]

Does that differ from the old albums?




/jarmo

I really really like CD

But

With the old albums there were the hits everyone seemed to like (wttj,paradise,don't cry,estranged,patience).  Then there was the b side tracks that some people dug but some people really didn't like

With CD you have the hits like above (twat, better).  But then there a couple of b-sides that just nobody likes     

I think that is the difference

I wouldn't say nobody likes what you consider the supposed b-sides, it seems to be a very polarizing album and I've found different groups like different songs.

I have the same experience.

Chinese Democracy is quite different from most albums as the diversity of opinions about is so vast.

[mortismurphy]

Well we are dealing with hypothetical scenarios and hindsight. Assuming it is a stark choice between the material making the album or being axed, if you were to ask me whether I would take the Illusions as it is today or as a reformed one album, I would choose the former option. It is what it is. But if I was sitting in Mike Clink's seat in 1991 I would have to insist on material like Get In The Ring and Shotgun Blues as b-sides.

Yet it's ironic that a person who's so concerned about, and whose opinion is so invested in, the amount of music released, would rather have less music than what we got.

If you had 15 songs less released, imagine how annoyed you'd be now!



/jarmo

Are you incapable of reading posts?

Well we are dealing with hypothetical scenarios and hindsight. Assuming it is a stark choice between the material making the album or being axed, if you were to ask me whether I would take the Illusions as it is today or as a reformed one album, I would choose the former option. It is what it is. But if I was sitting in Mike Clink's seat in 1991 I would have to insist on material like Get In The Ring and Shotgun Blues as b-sides.

[EmilyGNR]

Does that differ from the old albums?




/jarmo

I really really like CD

But

With the old albums there were the hits everyone seemed to like (wttj,paradise,don't cry,estranged,patience).  Then there was the b side tracks that some people dug but some people really didn't like

With CD you have the hits like above (twat, better).  But then there a couple of b-sides that just nobody likes     

I think that is the difference

I wouldn't say nobody likes what you consider the supposed b-sides, it seems to be a very polarizing album and I've found different groups like different songs.

I have the same experience.

Chinese Democracy is quite different from most albums as the diversity of opinions about is so vast.

Exactly, and the tone is more introspective and refective with some songs, this seems to bother the people that gravitate to mindless, feel- good, party music.

[draguns]

First off, the article was written very poorly! The research was shoddy and the article was not written well enough.

The second point that I would like to make is that CD was good, but not great. It just doesn't hold up to the test of time. There are good standouts like "There was a Time" and "Better", but stuff like "Rhiad" and "Scraped" are TERRIBLE songs. I would even say that the studio version of "This I Love" sounds bad except for the guitar work on that song.

 

[EmilyGNR]

First off, the article was written very poorly! The research was shoddy and the article was not written well enough.

The second point that I would like to make is that CD was good, but not great. It just doesn't hold up to the test of time. There are good standouts like "There was a Time" and "Better", but stuff like "Rhiad" and "Scraped" are TERRIBLE songs. I would even say that the studio version of "This I Love" sounds bad except for the guitar work on that song.

 

I disagree, I happen to like scraped a lot and TIL too. You are free to dislike but it does in no way mean they are terrible.

I think CD is indeed great, and that it will be more appreciated as time goes by.

[rebelhipi]

Not really if they stuck them out as b-sides like Oasis.

If.

They also might have kept them unreleased....


/jarmo

Well we are dealing with hypothetical scenarios and hindsight. Assuming it is a stark choice between the material making the album or being axed, if you were to ask me whether I would take the Illusions as it is today or as a reformed one album, I would choose the former option. It is what it is. But if I was sitting in Mike Clink's seat in 1991 I would have to insist on material like Get In The Ring and Shotgun Blues as b-sides.

It is the exact same argument with The White Album really.

But it is the reason why Illusions - and Democracy also - will never be considered truly great by rock historians in the way that Appetite is. Appetite in actual fact can sit alongside the very best of the rock genre, alongside Sticky Fingers, In Rock, Highway to Hell, Are You Experienced?.

I think guns made the right choice when it came to the illusions albums

Damn individually they sold tens of millions

Each album had singles that could push sales individually

Releasing two albums at the same time was a very cool thing

Of coarse anyone could take all the best songs

It's called a greatest hits album!   Doesn't take much skill to release that

Use Your Illusions is my favorite album from anyone ever.

I couldnt pick which one i like more. I see it more as one album, just you have part1 and part2. Kinda like a football match you have the first half, then you have the second, its still one match.

[TheBaconman]

Does that differ from the old albums?




/jarmo

I really really like CD

But

With the old albums there were the hits everyone seemed to like (wttj,paradise,don't cry,estranged,patience).  Then there was the b side tracks that some people dug but some people really didn't like

With CD you have the hits like above (twat, better).  But then there a couple of b-sides that just nobody likes     

I think that is the difference

I wouldn't say nobody likes what you consider the supposed b-sides, it seems to be a very polarizing album and I've found different groups like different songs.

I have the same experience.

Chinese Democracy is quite different from most albums as the diversity of opinions about is so vast.

Exactly, and the tone is more introspective and refective with some songs, this seems to bother the people that gravitate to mindless, feel- good, party music.

Just my opinion

But compared to all the other guns albums. CD is the one were a majority of people do not like a few songs on the album   Where as with the other albums, even with the most unpopular songs, there are still a lot of people that like the songs

I feel the songs I do like on CD made it a great album though

There are just a couple of terds on it

[raindogs70]

I don't think GNR ever played the Philippines. It's a shame because they probably have a lot of fans there.

[jarmo]

Are you incapable of reading posts?

You're saying you want the albums the way they are but you'd like certain songs as B-sides. I other words, you want to eat the cake and have it too.
I guess this makes sense to you. 

Anyway, glad we managed to sort out the fact that no album is perfect to you. Maybe the next one will be?!! 



/jarmo