Would "reunion" end GnR's Chinese Democracy era?

[Annie]

I really don't get all the hate for Chinese Democracy. It is a great album that could have achieved more commercial success with proper promotion. Whenever GNR tours again I hope to hear songs from CD in the setlist along with awesome new music.

I don't see much of any hate on this board for it... at all. Some people don't like every song, that's normal with most records by any band... I think.

As for why the outside world might not love it... is it really hard to understand why? We don't need to re has the bands history for that do we .

I guess I just don't understand people starting topics with somewhat sarcastic or snide comments like would reunion "end" Chinese democracy era. Like it 's a bad thing.

[JAEBALL]

I think when Axl sent out those signed plagues to it seemed everyone except me, that it signified the end of the CD era

It definitely did feel that way.

[D-GenerationX]

would be buried and never come out.

And is that a hell of a lot different than where it stands now?  And has been?

Why are we pretending they are hard at work on this?

We are essentially asking if they will shelve something that's already been long shelved.

[Ginger King]

would be buried and never come out.

And is that a hell of a lot different than where it stands now?  And has been?

Why are we pretending they are hard at work on this?

We are essentially asking if they will shelve something that's already been long shelved.

Ha!  Can?t argue with you there.  I am still in the camp that these two things (reunion and CDII) are not mutually exclusive.  Maybe it?s because I?m a sucker, but with all the buzz and hype surrounding a reunion, why wouldn?t Axl (and the label) want to capitalize on that with the release of CDII?  Now, maybe how it gets released would change (e.g. they don?t tour behind it) but I don?t see how or why it would get shelved completely.

[//JK75]

I guess Axl might want to re-work unrelease material with the help of the old boys.
Anyway.. I hope those songs see the light of day.

[D-GenerationX]

Ha!  Can?t argue with you there.  I am still in the camp that these two things (reunion and CDII) are not mutually exclusive.  Maybe it?s because I?m a sucker, but with all the buzz and hype surrounding a reunion, why wouldn?t Axl (and the label) want to capitalize on that with the release of CDII?  Now, maybe how it gets released would change (e.g. they don?t tour behind it) but I don?t see how or why it would get shelved completely.

Why would Slash and Duff be looking to help though?  That's the part I can't see.

Sure, we'd love to do a reunion tour.  And hey, if that helps you move up the release of an album by a bastardized version of our own band that does not include us, by all means, let us help you on that.  After all, you've been so good to us over the years, Axl.  Especially Slash.

Come on.

Agreeing to share a stage with him again is one thing.  Agreeing to help on the other?  That's something else.

[Jay Tea]

I'm pretty sure the reunion is on there's too much smoke this time without a fire. The fact so many industry people are commenting is a good sign. Could the Chinese Democracy II stuff be released in conjunction with this tour?? Would be a bit weird.

Remember the "Stay of Execution" theory? Even though that is now defunct my guess is there was a plan to release material under that banner.

Anyway we've been told there is a "plan". I also keep thinking about Richard saying a reunion would have to be about more than money...

This is going to sound kinda dumb..

Maybe Axl will use the name Guns N Roses for a reunited band that plays nothing written after 91 and between arena tours with that band he releases music and tours theaters/clubs with Stay Of Execution featuring Chinese Democracy era members.

The thing that made me think of this is how the name Black Sabbath came to only mean a band featuring Ozzy after the 1997 reunion and the band with Dio singing became known as Heaven & Hell to avoid confusion.

[D-GenerationX]

This is going to sound kinda dumb..

Maybe Axl will use the name Guns N Roses for a reunited band that plays nothing written after 91 and between arena tours with that band he releases music and tours theaters/clubs with Stay Of Execution featuring Chinese Democracy era members.

The thing that made me think of this is how the name Black Sabbath came to only mean a band featuring Ozzy after the 1997 reunion and the band with Dio singing became known as Heaven & Hell to avoid confusion.

Its not totally out there.

But in terms of Heaven & Hell, did they still play Ozzy era tunes in the setlists?  A band playing only post 2000 GNR songs and nothing but is not going to be in high demand.

[Jay Tea]

They only played Dio era stuff and they released a new album.

A band featuring Axl Rose playing whatever material they play will always sell out at least clubs forever.

All the attention of the reunion could actualy make any side project stronger. (We're off in hypothetical land.. I don't consider latter day GNR a "side project".. I'm talking about that band shifting into being Axl's band "Stay Of Execution")

[Ginger King]

Ha!  Can?t argue with you there.  I am still in the camp that these two things (reunion and CDII) are not mutually exclusive.  Maybe it?s because I?m a sucker, but with all the buzz and hype surrounding a reunion, why wouldn?t Axl (and the label) want to capitalize on that with the release of CDII?  Now, maybe how it gets released would change (e.g. they don?t tour behind it) but I don?t see how or why it would get shelved completely.

Why would Slash and Duff be looking to help though?  That's the part I can't see.

Sure, we'd love to do a reunion tour.  And hey, if that helps you move up the release of an album by a bastardized version of our own band that does not include us, by all means, let us help you on that.  After all, you've been so good to us over the years, Axl.  Especially Slash.

Come on.

Agreeing to share a stage with him again is one thing.  Agreeing to help on the other?  That's something else.

Who said anything about them helping to promote CDII?  A reunion will help any sale of any Guns product in its own right?Slash and Duff don?t have to sing the praises of Silkworms.  Also, not sure I agree with your characterization of how they feel about CD music in general.  Duff played CD songs on tour last year, so presumably he?s down with them.  There are a handful of CD songs Slash could easily play. 

IMO, there can?t just be a partial thawing of the ice.  In other words, Axl?s not going to agree to a reunion if it means the death of CDII.  And rightly so?and I would think Slash and Duff and anyone else on the reunion train would realize this.  Thus, I think any reunion naturally involves a discussion of how to handle CDII.  Especially if this is going to be Axl?s last hurrah of touring. 

[D-GenerationX]

Who said anything about them helping to promote CDII?  A reunion will help any sale of any Guns product in its own right?Slash and Duff don?t have to sing the praises of Silkworms.  Also, not sure I agree with your characterization of how they feel about CD music in general.  Duff played CD songs on tour last year, so presumably he?s down with them.  There are a handful of CD songs Slash could easily play. 

IMO, there can?t just be a partial thawing of the ice.  In other words, Axl?s not going to agree to a reunion if it means the death of CDII.  And rightly so?and I would think Slash and Duff and anyone else on the reunion train would realize this.  Thus, I think any reunion naturally involves a discussion of how to handle CDII.  Especially if this is going to be Axl?s last hurrah of touring. 

Yeah, we just disagree.

I think any sort of reunion tour is only to celebrate their time in the band.  I don't think there are going to be CD songs in any setlist.

I see them coming back as mutually exclusive.  A reunion tour to celebrate the good old days, or Axl continues with his "vision" at his own snail's pace without them.

I also don't share your opinion that the others would be real down with helping promote "Axl's vision".  You are not the first one to use the example of Duff playing a few shows to explain how things must be all good in the hood, but I'm not sure I agree.

I think when these guys are asked about "Axl's Guns N' Roses" the reaction is somewhere between an eye roll and the jerking off motion.  I don't think they respect it or think its worthy of carrying their name.  As a result, I think they would be loathe to appear to be giving it their stamp of approval like this.

I could be way off base.  Who knows. 

I'm sure Fernando's big announcement will fill in all these blanks.

[jarmo]

So the argument now is that a person (Slash) who has recorded with acts such as Motorhead, Insane Clown Posse and Chris Daughtry, would automatically be against recording something on a record Axl has worked on with other people? Out of spite?

Many assumptions here. First you'd have to assume there's a relationship that would make this even possible. Then you'd have to assume Axl wanted him or them on the track(s). So, assuming both of those happened and he did ask, you'd think they would automatically say no?



/jarmo

[Bridge]

I think any sort of reunion tour is only to celebrate their time in the band.  I don't think there are going to be CD songs in any setlist.

I wouldn't imagine that there would be either.  Some people can suggest that the newer lineups are the same Guns N Roses all they want, but they're not.  They're different lineups from different eras.  Slash and Duff aren't going to rejoin for a more "official" or "classic" version of the band to play songs that weren't theirs, nor will reunion fans want to hear a Chinese Democracy song in place of what could've been a performance of an older song.

you are not the first one to use the example of Duff playing a few shows to explain how things must be all good in the hood, but I'm not sure I agree.

I don't agree either.  Duff joining Axl onstage was not a Guns N Roses reunion.  Duff was filling in for Tommy Stinson when needed.  That's it.  Afterwards, Duff and Axl went their separate ways once more with no ostensible future plans.

So the argument now is that a person (Slash) who has recorded with acts such as Motorhead, Insane Clown Posse and Chris Daughtry, would automatically be against recording something on a record Axl has worked on with other people? Out of spite?

Not out of spite, out of recognition that all those other acts are not Guns N Roses.  Slash is more likely to take recording and/or performing under the Guns N Roses banner a lot more personally and wouldn't easily agree to Axl's whims.  It's not the same as performing with some other band that isn't his.

[D-GenerationX]

I wouldn't imagine that there would be either.  Some people can suggest that the newer lineups are the same Guns N Roses all they want, but they're not.  They're different lineups from different eras.  Slash and Duff aren't going to rejoin for a more "official" or "classic" version of the band to play songs that weren't theirs, nor will reunion fans want to hear a Chinese Democracy song in place of what could've been a performance of an older song.

I agree.

If this comes off, I'm going to have about 20 people I know of that are going to want to go.

Number of people in that 20 that will want to hear 'Shackler's Revenge' = zero.

Hell, number of people in that 20 that will know 'Shackler's Revenge' is even a thing = one (me)

All these articles stoking the fires for this...are we really thinking they are telling people "Great news, you haven't missed your last chance to hear 'Chinese Democracy' songs played live"?

[14 Yrs Of Silence]

Personally, I'd rather have a new album than a reunion tour.  Actually, I want both.  But if the reunion comes at the expense of ever hearing that material, I'll be very dissappointed.

[Virolec]

I could buy the "Heaven and Hell" scenario - but there's an important difference.  Black Sabbath with Dio was basically the classic lineup with a different singer (albeit Vinny Apice replaced Bill Ward after the Heaven and Hell album) - a singer who was a well-established, household name who had already had major success with Rainbow.  Two of the three albums he had already made with Sabbath (before H&H was used as the band name) are classics - and the third was a reasonable success as well.  Heaven and Hell, basically, were surely a much better touring proposition than Axl And Dudes, especially if something resembling the original* Guns N' Roses is available as an option.


*with apologies to Emily.

[D-GenerationX]

Personally, I'd rather have a new album than a reunion tour.  Actually, I want both.  But if the reunion comes at the expense of ever hearing that material, I'll be very dissappointed.

I get that.  And I'd very much like to hear it as well.

But doesn't this become a "bird in the hand" situation?

How long has Axl allegedly been working on getting this follow up album out?  And how is that coming along?

I understand your point, but would be remiss to not point out there is likely more than a good chance that album might never come out, reunion tour or no.

[JAEBALL]

Personally, I'd rather have a new album than a reunion tour.  Actually, I want both.  But if the reunion comes at the expense of ever hearing that material, I'll be very dissappointed.

I get that.  And I'd very much like to hear it as well.

But doesn't this become a "bird in the hand" situation?

How long has Axl allegedly been working on getting this follow up album out?  And how is that coming along?

I understand your point, but would be remiss to not point out there is likely more than a good chance that album might never come out, reunion tour or no.

I don't know if it's likely to never come out... but there certainly isn't a time frame for one to expect it.

So a tour with Slash and Duff doesn't equate to it being delayed.

[D-GenerationX]

I don't know of it's likely to never come out... but there certainly isn't a time frame for one to expect it.

So a tour with Slash and Duff doesn't equate to it being delayed.

Agree with your second point.

As to your first point, I think each year that passes without a release diminishes the chances it ever comes out. 

I certainly see no counterargument that the passage of time is somehow *increasing* the chances.  At best, maybe you can argue, even as time passes, things never move off "whenever Axl feels like it", which is where we've been since forever.

But even there, I'd say the passage of time decreases his chances of "feeling like it".

[jarmo]

Not out of spite, out of recognition that all those other acts are not Guns N Roses.  Slash is more likely to take recording and/or performing under the Guns N Roses banner a lot more personally and wouldn't easily agree to Axl's whims.  It's not the same as performing with some other band that isn't his.

In this hypothetical scenario where Axl asked Slash to record a part on a already written song, you think the answer would be no because "it's not GN'R"?
In other words, Axl giving him the chance to put his mark on something that was gonna be released anyway, he'd turn it down just because of that?

I don't know. I mean, if (a big if) it ever got to that point, wouldn't it be a great way of showing evidence of a better relationship? You know, "I know you weren't in the band when we write this song, but I'd love to hear what you could come up with for it!".

But it's all hypothetical. I'm just not convinced that if it ever got to that point, acting like it's 2005 (or something) again, might not be the answer....  




/jarmo