The Likelihood of A New Album In 2016

[D-GenerationX]

Did the Revolver interview give you a specific date for a release or promise updates?

Yes or no?

No.

But he sounded excited about it for the first time in forever.

[D-GenerationX]

Yeah that Three hour Meeting is as amusing as the rest of Troll lingo and Troll logic.

But as I said earlier, people that really take that and run with it have long stopped caring anyway.  Worrying about their take seems pointless to me.

Fernando said there would be an update in a few months, I believe him.

Little reason not to at this point. 

At a certain point, we reassess.  Said the same thing about Axl's Revolver interview.

[EmilyGNR]

Yeah that Three hour Meeting is as amusing as the rest of Troll lingo and Troll logic.

But as I said earlier, people that really take that and run with it have long stopped caring anyway.  Worrying about their take seems pointless to me.

Fernando said there would be an update in a few months, I believe him.

Little reason not to at this point. 

At a certain point, we reassess.  Said the same thing about Axl's Revolver interview.

No reason to reassess, there has been no announcement that this is still not the plan.

Oh look, Pitman is around

https://instagram.com/p/9E3DXHhj38/

[EmilyGNR]

Actually Ron quit long before the Revolver interview-but continue on with your assumptions, and wrong conclusions.

Not sure this is really the game changer you think it is, Emily.  It makes zero difference in the grand scheme.

2 guitar players, definitely gone.  A bass player that sure looks like he's gone.  These are not super developments.

Fatal?  Of course not.  Ideal?  Hardly.

But "Um, point of order, Ron actually quit in March...not May or afterwards, so....yeah.  You think on that."  

Who cares?  What's it change?

By all means discount actual facts in favor of your half-baked theories and invented scenarios and continue to paint everything as dire.

I expected nothing else from you.

[HBK]

Yeah that Three hour Meeting is as amusing as the rest of Troll lingo and Troll logic.

But as I said earlier, people that really take that and run with it have long stopped caring anyway.  Worrying about their take seems pointless to me.

Fernando said there would be an update in a few months, I believe him.

Little reason not to at this point. 

At a certain point, we reassess.  Said the same thing about Axl's Revolver interview.

No reason to reassess, there has been no announcement that this is still not the plan.

Oh look, Pitman is around

https://instagram.com/p/9E3DXHhj38/

Axl, Frank, Pitman, Richard & Dizzy

 

[D-GenerationX]

By all means discount actual facts in favor of your half-baked theories and invented scenarios and continue to paint everything as dire.

I expected nothing else from you.

I just want to clarify, here.

I said that Ron left since Axl gave the interview in May.  You say that he actually gave his notice 2 months earlier in South America.

This fundamentally changes the argument, in some way, as you see it? It "paints things as dire"?

[EmilyGNR]

By all means discount actual facts in favor of your half-baked theories and invented scenarios and continue to paint everything as dire.

I expected nothing else from you.

I just want to clarify, here.

I said that Ron left since Axl gave the interview in May.  You say that he actually gave his notice 2 months earlier in South America.

This fundamentally changes the argument, in some way, as you see it? It "paints things as dire"?

No I was obviously speaking of the totality of the content and general direction your posts have.

Extrapolating your post history-I definitely can form a pretty accurate picture, it is no mystery at all what your general tendency is here.

We are obviously on different teams.

[jarmo]

I just want to clarify, here.

I said that Ron left since Axl gave the interview in May.  You say that he actually gave his notice 2 months earlier in South America.

This fundamentally changes the argument, in some way, as you see it? It "paints things as dire"?

If you give an interview, and you know something will happen next month. That could affect the answers you give.
So having that knowledge, could make your answers be different to a situation where that thing wasn't happening next month.

In your simplified world, this doesn't matter. You think everything would be the same.
Yes, sometimes that could be the case. For example when people ignore what they're told and pretend like nothing happened.




/jarmo

[D-GenerationX]

No I was obviously speaking of the totality of the content and general direction your posts have.

Extrapolating your post history-I definitely can form a pretty accurate picture, it is no mystery at all what your general tendency is here.

We are obviously on different teams.

Oh, we're all on the same team, I think.

Sitting in the locker room, asking each other when the front office is going to finally get serious about putting a winning product on the field.

[faldor]

In short, yes, I choose to take Axl's side instead of taking the record company's side. Why does it make sense for you to come to a fan site and always point the fingers at the artist? Like if somebody says "Oh, but there's several parts that are involved in all this", you'll be there to remind everybody that it's mostly about Axl. How come? I find it puzzling to be honest.

Yes, let's say the album's done and has been paid for and all that.
Now, the record company wants to make some money. But what they plan, isn't what the artist wants. Who's to blame? Some of you say, it's Axl. No matter what, it's always Axl. Because other bands release music! And other record companies release music every week, they're the good guys. They just want what's best for us music fans and the artists. Everybody knows that.

Some of you basically want Axl to bend over backwards for the record company, as long as you get that album you can listen to and then disregard to repeat the cycle ASAP.... Sorry if that offends some of you sensitive discussion lovers. Fortunately there are fans who aren't that needy. And they can see the other side of the coin.

/jarmo

Not bend over backwards, but certainly understand it?s a negotiation process and he?s going to have to give on a few points.  That?s life.  

My point is that if Axl?s ?negotiating? position is ?I get everything I want? that?s not realistic.  That?s not a negotiating position at all, and certainly not real life?I don?t care if you?re releasing an album or buying a house.  But it seems you would support such a decision as preserving his artistic integrity.  IMO, such a position indicates he has no real desire to release it at all.  

Also, none of us here "always" point the finger at Axl.  That's a bit too dramatic.  Sometimes we do.  I get that that bothers you, but the man in not infallible.  He has, even by his own admission, made mistakes.

How do you know it's Axl's way or the highway? You're making a lot of suppositions. Maybe he's given in on a number of issues but the record company refuses to budge. I'm not sure why you're adamant that Axl is the problem here. CD wasn't released the way he wanted, and he wasn't happy about it in the end. Maybe he's being more careful this time around. He spent nearly a decade creating the album and it was botched. Should he just accept it and agree to do whatever the label suggests? Because they know what's best for him and have his best interests at heart?

I don't think I said Axl's the problem.  In fact, I believe I said, "I?m saying there?s no real evidence to support either being the hold up.  It?s probably some combination of the two."

Honestly, I don't think he has a sense of urgency to release a new album...and he's completely within his right to feel like that.  If that's the case then just own it.  Instead, we're fed scraps (studio tweets by Pittman) to create the impression that things may be in motion...but it's all done in a way where nobody can be blamed if nothing happens.  If an album comes out, then the message is "well yeah, that studio tweet should've told you something.  That's obvious."  If no album comes out, then it's "why would you rely on a studio tweet?  That's stupid."

It's culpable deniability.  Just own it.  If you want to release it, great.  If you don't want to release it, super.  If you're not sure if you want to release it, good for you.  But pick one.  The story seems to oscillate between these three themes. 

You brought up the scenario that "Axl gets what he wants or nothing gets done". That's the very definition of pinning everything on Axl. Sure that's only one scenario, but it's the one you chose to run with. You could've easily said the label refuses to budge, because we don't know any of the particulars. But you chose to go the other way. I read everything correctly. No need to clarify.

As far as we know, there are plans to release another album. We don't know the details or a timeframe, but the last we were led to believe, new music was in the cards. No promises have been made, but the music supposedly exists. If they figure a way to get it released we'll hear it eventually. That's basically what it boils down to.

[faldor]

I wouldn't mind if they kept giving projected release dates, even if they missed a bunch of them. But lots of people would have a field day with thst kind of a charade and I don't think that'd be good for business.

What have you go to lose though?  I guess that's how I see it.

I agree, there would be some of what you are talking about.  But from anyone that's been fair to him lately?

Obviously, if we are still hanging in, we've made our peace getting nothing.  So if he threw us anything, that's just gravy.  Won't be anything but appreciated by any of us.

But the people that might make light of missed deadlines, are they even in this game anymore?  I don't know those types of people really would give him credit for anything at this point.

When Axl speaks, people listen. Outside of these circles. If he comes out and gives a release date that isn't met, it would most likely lead to negative press. That could be a reason they don't try that tactic. Maybe he's not sure what he wants to do next, how he wants to do it, or when. Maybe he's still trying to figure that out. Maybe they're further along in the process than we're led to believe. I think the next year will be telling, because by all accounts that seems to be the target for some sort of activity. If nothing happens, plans must have changed yet again. I'd love to know why. I'd love to know the inner workings of GNR's operations. But I don't see that happening anytime soon. Speculation will continue to run rampant. All we can really do is wait to see what happens. Hopefully we like the end result.

[D-GenerationX]

I have long thought it might be in their interest to tell us how something went south.

Let's face it, the knee jerk is that Axl was just being difficult.  That's where people go, initially.

But suppose they could tell us some story like, "Well, we wanted to do such and such, but then listen to this bullshit..."

That could actually rally people.  People rallied more to Axl's side when he laid out how shady Merck was at times.  Because until he piped up, we had no idea.

[faldor]

I have long thought it might be in their interest to tell us how something went south.

Let's face it, the knee jerk is that Axl was just being difficult.  That's where people go, initially.

But suppose they could tell us some story like, "Well, we wanted to do such and such, but then listen to this bullshit..."

That could actually rally people.  People rallied more to Axl's side when he laid out how shady Merck was at times.  Because until he piped up, we had no idea.

It could, but not if they're still negotiating or working with people who may have wronged them in their eyes. Usually you only hear the dirt on people after the business relationship is over, and sometimes not even then. You don't want to come off as ungrateful or tough to work with, because there are always two sides to every story.

Axl tends to speak his mind, eventually. I'm not sure it'd be smart to rip people you're dealing with every step of the way. Tommy spoke quite openly about RTB and the making of CD, but that was years after its release, not during the process. So we might hear something someday, but again it'll be on Axl's watch. Not ours.

[Ginger King]

In short, yes, I choose to take Axl's side instead of taking the record company's side. Why does it make sense for you to come to a fan site and always point the fingers at the artist? Like if somebody says "Oh, but there's several parts that are involved in all this", you'll be there to remind everybody that it's mostly about Axl. How come? I find it puzzling to be honest.

Yes, let's say the album's done and has been paid for and all that.
Now, the record company wants to make some money. But what they plan, isn't what the artist wants. Who's to blame? Some of you say, it's Axl. No matter what, it's always Axl. Because other bands release music! And other record companies release music every week, they're the good guys. They just want what's best for us music fans and the artists. Everybody knows that.

Some of you basically want Axl to bend over backwards for the record company, as long as you get that album you can listen to and then disregard to repeat the cycle ASAP.... Sorry if that offends some of you sensitive discussion lovers. Fortunately there are fans who aren't that needy. And they can see the other side of the coin.

/jarmo

Not bend over backwards, but certainly understand it?s a negotiation process and he?s going to have to give on a few points.  That?s life.  

My point is that if Axl?s ?negotiating? position is ?I get everything I want? that?s not realistic.  That?s not a negotiating position at all, and certainly not real life?I don?t care if you?re releasing an album or buying a house.  But it seems you would support such a decision as preserving his artistic integrity.  IMO, such a position indicates he has no real desire to release it at all.  

Also, none of us here "always" point the finger at Axl.  That's a bit too dramatic.  Sometimes we do.  I get that that bothers you, but the man in not infallible.  He has, even by his own admission, made mistakes.

How do you know it's Axl's way or the highway? You're making a lot of suppositions. Maybe he's given in on a number of issues but the record company refuses to budge. I'm not sure why you're adamant that Axl is the problem here. CD wasn't released the way he wanted, and he wasn't happy about it in the end. Maybe he's being more careful this time around. He spent nearly a decade creating the album and it was botched. Should he just accept it and agree to do whatever the label suggests? Because they know what's best for him and have his best interests at heart?

I don't think I said Axl's the problem.  In fact, I believe I said, "I?m saying there?s no real evidence to support either being the hold up.  It?s probably some combination of the two."

Honestly, I don't think he has a sense of urgency to release a new album...and he's completely within his right to feel like that.  If that's the case then just own it.  Instead, we're fed scraps (studio tweets by Pittman) to create the impression that things may be in motion...but it's all done in a way where nobody can be blamed if nothing happens.  If an album comes out, then the message is "well yeah, that studio tweet should've told you something.  That's obvious."  If no album comes out, then it's "why would you rely on a studio tweet?  That's stupid."

It's culpable deniability.  Just own it.  If you want to release it, great.  If you don't want to release it, super.  If you're not sure if you want to release it, good for you.  But pick one.  The story seems to oscillate between these three themes. 

You brought up the scenario that "Axl gets what he wants or nothing gets done". That's the very definition of pinning everything on Axl. Sure that's only one scenario, but it's the one you chose to run with. You could've easily said the label refuses to budge, because we don't know any of the particulars. But you chose to go the other way. I read everything correctly. No need to clarify.

As far as we know, there are plans to release another album. We don't know the details or a timeframe, but the last we were led to believe, new music was in the cards. No promises have been made, but the music supposedly exists. If they figure a way to get it released we'll hear it eventually. That's basically what it boils down to.

No.  The music doesn't "supposedly exist."  It's "already recorded" and "been done for a while."  That's straight from the man himself.  As of a year and half ago, it's there.  It's done.  The issue is if/how/when do we hear it.

[faldor]

In short, yes, I choose to take Axl's side instead of taking the record company's side. Why does it make sense for you to come to a fan site and always point the fingers at the artist? Like if somebody says "Oh, but there's several parts that are involved in all this", you'll be there to remind everybody that it's mostly about Axl. How come? I find it puzzling to be honest.

Yes, let's say the album's done and has been paid for and all that.
Now, the record company wants to make some money. But what they plan, isn't what the artist wants. Who's to blame? Some of you say, it's Axl. No matter what, it's always Axl. Because other bands release music! And other record companies release music every week, they're the good guys. They just want what's best for us music fans and the artists. Everybody knows that.

Some of you basically want Axl to bend over backwards for the record company, as long as you get that album you can listen to and then disregard to repeat the cycle ASAP.... Sorry if that offends some of you sensitive discussion lovers. Fortunately there are fans who aren't that needy. And they can see the other side of the coin.

/jarmo

Not bend over backwards, but certainly understand it?s a negotiation process and he?s going to have to give on a few points.  That?s life.  

My point is that if Axl?s ?negotiating? position is ?I get everything I want? that?s not realistic.  That?s not a negotiating position at all, and certainly not real life?I don?t care if you?re releasing an album or buying a house.  But it seems you would support such a decision as preserving his artistic integrity.  IMO, such a position indicates he has no real desire to release it at all.  

Also, none of us here "always" point the finger at Axl.  That's a bit too dramatic.  Sometimes we do.  I get that that bothers you, but the man in not infallible.  He has, even by his own admission, made mistakes.

How do you know it's Axl's way or the highway? You're making a lot of suppositions. Maybe he's given in on a number of issues but the record company refuses to budge. I'm not sure why you're adamant that Axl is the problem here. CD wasn't released the way he wanted, and he wasn't happy about it in the end. Maybe he's being more careful this time around. He spent nearly a decade creating the album and it was botched. Should he just accept it and agree to do whatever the label suggests? Because they know what's best for him and have his best interests at heart?

I don't think I said Axl's the problem.  In fact, I believe I said, "I?m saying there?s no real evidence to support either being the hold up.  It?s probably some combination of the two."

Honestly, I don't think he has a sense of urgency to release a new album...and he's completely within his right to feel like that.  If that's the case then just own it.  Instead, we're fed scraps (studio tweets by Pittman) to create the impression that things may be in motion...but it's all done in a way where nobody can be blamed if nothing happens.  If an album comes out, then the message is "well yeah, that studio tweet should've told you something.  That's obvious."  If no album comes out, then it's "why would you rely on a studio tweet?  That's stupid."

It's culpable deniability.  Just own it.  If you want to release it, great.  If you don't want to release it, super.  If you're not sure if you want to release it, good for you.  But pick one.  The story seems to oscillate between these three themes. 

You brought up the scenario that "Axl gets what he wants or nothing gets done". That's the very definition of pinning everything on Axl. Sure that's only one scenario, but it's the one you chose to run with. You could've easily said the label refuses to budge, because we don't know any of the particulars. But you chose to go the other way. I read everything correctly. No need to clarify.

As far as we know, there are plans to release another album. We don't know the details or a timeframe, but the last we were led to believe, new music was in the cards. No promises have been made, but the music supposedly exists. If they figure a way to get it released we'll hear it eventually. That's basically what it boils down to.

No.  The music doesn't "supposedly exist."  It's "already recorded" and "been done for a while."  That's straight from the man himself.  As of a year and half ago, it's there.  It's done.  The issue is if/how/when do we hear it.

Semantics. Whatever condition the songs are currently in they aren't released. They could still be worked on, tinkered with, etc. So I wouldn't really consider them "done" until they're handed over to the label and prepped for release.

[jarmo]

Imagine this scenario.

It's done, you want to release it.
Something happens and a release when you wanted it to happen, doesn't seem like a good idea anymore.

How do you use this new "extra time"? Suddenly you could work more on that stuff that was done, or not.... But there's an opportunity to if you wanted to.
Does it mean it can't be worked on because it was done already? Of course not.




/jarmo

[faldor]

Semantics. Whatever condition the songs are currently in they aren't released. They could still be worked on, tinkered with, etc. So I wouldn't really consider them "done" until they're handed over to the label and prepped for release.

Ultimately true, obviously.

But the songs are already written and recorded.  And have been for some time now.

So really, what we're trying to do, is put a good spin on mixing and mastering, or "tinkering" if you prefer...that goes on for years at a time.

Years.

Yeah, but like jarmo said. Maybe they were "finished" and ready to be released. Maybe something happened that pushed the release back, so it's possible they could choose to tweak them a little. Heck, maybe the record company "hinted" that they could use a little work. Happened with CD 10 times over from all accounts.

[D-GenerationX]

Now, to be fair here, I don't actually believe they are fiddling about for years at a time.  My actually belief is that not much goes on or gets worked on.

Its just that time does not stop.  And as more and more of it passes, its only natural to start to ask some hard questions.  I understand that some people think that's totally unacceptable because that's how they define fandom, as unquestioned loyalty.

That's one version of fandom.  I think we see here every single day that it is not one shared by all.  

[D-GenerationX]

Yeah, but like jarmo said. Maybe they were "finished" and ready to be released. Maybe something happened that pushed the release back, so it's possible they could choose to tweak them a little. Heck, maybe the record company "hinted" that they could use a little work. Happened with CD 10 times over from all accounts.

Yeah, could be.  There is precedent there.

But where is the path forward there?  Where's the endgame?

I consistently told that suggesting its never coming out is not fair.  Yet I am the one actually pitching some rationale behind my opinion, even if its not shared.

What the alternative?  Of course its coming out, just sit tight...nevermind that no one has no idea how anyone is ever going to resolve the stalemate you just pitched, which could well be accurate.

Also, I am speaking in broad generalities here.  Not saying these are all your opinions, specifically.  I'm just contrasting the differences between Team EverythingGonnaBeAlright and Team DoesntThisSoundCrazyToAnyoneElse

[GNR4LIFEJD]

Has there been any kind of precedent where a band releases an album in which most of the band members who contributed to it are no longer around? whether the next album of new material is a combination of robin/buckethead or dj/Ron. I would love to know if this has been done before im not including bands were 1 member left and was replaced I really think this is the reason we haven't gotten a new album yet. I think the burning question is for Axl is if he wants to put out an album where none of the guitarists are currently in the band and if he wants to bring in someone new to play whatever parts robin/bucket/dj/ron played.