2 new songs rumor

[Gavgnr]

To answer the concern that releasing 'old, new' songs would be a bad idea, maybe getting Slash and Duff on these tracks is the ideal solution.

For all we know that's exactly what's been going on for the last few months.

I am SO excited and pumped for the reunion, but I think a release immediately before would be a dream scenario. Striking while the iron is hot applies well here imo.

[D-GenerationX]

Well said, agree with all of that.

People aren't going to pay $275 to hear stuff that didn't make the cut for the last album.  Be serious, folks.

It may not be that "It didn't make the cut" it may be that it was saved for the next album.

A little positivity goes a long way.

But the majority of people going to see this tour don't give a damn about any of that stuff. 

Its why GNR has been playing clubs, but now they are talking stadiums.  Its not because all sorts of people are suddenly into the NuGNR experience.

Reunion tours are about nostalgia and going with what you know.  Especially at those prices.

[raindog]

It would be absolutely wonderful if Axl goes on the show and pulls the trigger on a new album there and then. Loathe as I am to make the comparison, something like Miley Virus did recently. Boom. It's here. But I have a hard time believing something wouldn't have leaked out if that was going on. Besides we have enough hopes up as it is!

I'm just looking forward to seeing Axl and hope he's got some great news for us, whatever it is. At least I'm trying to keep my expectations to that.

[D]

Its pretty customary to tour behind SOMETHING. So why not double dip and sell a more authorized best of, with a couple brand new songs as the selling point? Plus gives 2 new songs to play live also and extend the setlist if they don't want to revisit every AFD song or some of the UYI stuff.

Yeah, but when you have the biggest reunion in years happening, do you really need that?
Obviously the record company probably wouldn't mind repackaging another compilation.

I still think it'd be cool if they instead released the second half of Chinese.... And no, it wouldn't bother me if the band on tour isn't the same as the one that recorded those tracks.  



/jarmo

But would it be released as is, or have Duff and Slash re-record and put their own parts down?

[jarmo]

But would it be released as is, or have Duff and Slash re-record and put their own parts down?

No idea.
The only reason it makes sense to me is that it's done and it would make sense to "strike while the iron is hot".

And for all those using the "it's not the same band touring that recorded it". You said that in 2009. 




/jarmo

[D]

As much as I've wanted a reunion i want to hear the rest of those recordings badly. Hopeful somehow both can happen.

[Nytunz]

For all we know it could be a hybrid with Songs written by Slash/Duff Axl AND Fortus/Chris /Ferrer. That would be amazing. Abit of everything

[kyrie]

Well said, agree with all of that.

People aren't going to pay $275 to hear stuff that didn't make the cut for the last album.  Be serious, folks.

It may not be that "It didn't make the cut" it may be that it was saved for the next album.

A little positivity goes a long way.

But the majority of people going to see this tour don't give a damn about any of that stuff. 

Its why GNR has been playing clubs, but now they are talking stadiums.  Its not because all sorts of people are suddenly into the NuGNR experience.

Reunion tours are about nostalgia and going with what you know.  Especially at those prices.

The majority of people going to Coachella, or any shows announced for a tour beyond that, will be buying tickets without any idea what the setlist will be anyway. They're being sold on a reunion and nostalgia factor, yes, but it doesn't mean new material should be out of the question. A couple of new songs aren't going to make or break anything.

[D-GenerationX]

The majority of people going to Coachella, or any shows announced for a tour beyond that, will be buying tickets without any idea what the setlist will be anyway. They're being sold on a reunion and nostalgia factor, yes, but it doesn't mean new material should be out of the question. A couple of new songs aren't going to make or break anything.

If I am in a stadium with 40,000 other people that sprung for triple digit tickets, I'm not sure how many of them would swap out a classic GNR tune for some tune Axl, Robin Finck, and Paul Huge wrote in 2004.

Honestly, I'm not all that sure they would be all that excited for a new song from Axl, Slash, and Duff.  Been to many a Rolling Stones concert where the new songs play to crickets.  But 'Sympathy For the Devil' and 'Tumblin Dice' have people dancing in the aisles.

[jarmo]

If I am in a stadium with 40,000 other people that sprung for triple digit tickets, I'm not sure how many of them would swap out a classic GNR tune for some tune Axl, Robin Finck, and Paul Huge wrote in 2004.

Honestly, I'm not all that sure they would be all that excited for a new song from Axl, Slash, and Duff. 

Anything unfamiliar is always met with that reaction.
Doesn't matter who wrote the song.


/jarmo

[kyrie]

The majority of people going to Coachella, or any shows announced for a tour beyond that, will be buying tickets without any idea what the setlist will be anyway. They're being sold on a reunion and nostalgia factor, yes, but it doesn't mean new material should be out of the question. A couple of new songs aren't going to make or break anything.

If I am in a stadium with 40,000 other people that sprung for triple digit tickets, I'm not sure how many of them would swap out a classic GNR tune for some tune Axl, Robin Finck, and Paul Huge wrote in 2004.

Honestly, I'm not all that sure they would be all that excited for a new song from Axl, Slash, and Duff.  Been to many a Rolling Stones concert where the new songs play to crickets.  But 'Sympathy For the Devil' and 'Tumblin Dice' have people dancing in the aisles.

That doesn't stop the Stones from playing one or two new songs. It doesn't (and shouldn't) stop any band. You have to cater to ALL your fans, not just the casual ones. Guns often play three hour shows, including covers. There's plenty of room in the setlist for a couple new tracks. And yes, some people will use it to hit the beer lines, and so be it. If they're playing 20 songs, you're still getting 18 hits.

[faldor]

If I am in a stadium with 40,000 other people that sprung for triple digit tickets, I'm not sure how many of them would swap out a classic GNR tune for some tune Axl, Robin Finck, and Paul Huge wrote in 2004.

Honestly, I'm not all that sure they would be all that excited for a new song from Axl, Slash, and Duff. 

Anything unfamiliar is always met with that reaction.
Doesn't matter who wrote the song.


/jarmo

So should a band stop creating new music then? Seems like we were having quite the opposite argument not too long ago.

If they've worked on new songs and want to share a few of them, that's what they'll do. People can use that time to head for a beer or to run to the bathroom. Happens all the time.

[D-GenerationX]

That doesn't stop the Stones from playing one or two new songs. It doesn't (and shouldn't) stop any band. You have to cater to ALL your fans, not just the casual ones. Guns often play three hour shows, including covers. There's plenty of room in the setlist for a couple new tracks. And yes, some people will use it to hit the beer lines, and so be it. If they're playing 20 songs, you're still getting 18 hits.

Whenever the Stones do a new song, I always try to remain standing and see who joins me.  Or who else knows the words.

Funniest example had to be the 'Voodoo Lounge' tour.  After Keith's songs, they do 'Love Is Strong', the lead single from that album.  LOVE that song.  No reaction.

The next song?  'Monkey Man', a deep album cut from 1969's 'Let It Bleed'.  People stood back up.

Funny and depressing at the same time, I found.

[jarmo]

So should a band stop creating new music then? Seems like we were having quite the opposite argument not too long ago.

If they've worked on new songs and want to share a few of them, that's what they'll do. People can use that time to head for a beer or to run to the bathroom. Happens all the time.

No, that's not what I meant.
My reply was in reference to the idea that people wouldn't like something written/recorded by some other people than the ones on stage. Or just released and unknown to the majority of the audience.

It's always been the case that anything not familiar, is met with something like "I wish they had played (something I know) instead"...




/jarmo

[D-GenerationX]

So should a band stop creating new music then? Seems like we were having quite the opposite argument not too long ago.

Depends who we are talking about.

Circa 2014, people still got VERY upset if you said they weren't a viable band and just a touring one.  All that bought you was reposted quotes from Axl's internet chats...in 2008, mind you...that was supposed to dispel any doubt about where things stood, 6 years later.  With no sign of progress.

This though, this probably is just a touring configuration, at least right now.  I don't think any of us really expect new tunes from this line-up, a line-up we don't even fully know yet.

[sandman]

That doesn't stop the Stones from playing one or two new songs. It doesn't (and shouldn't) stop any band. You have to cater to ALL your fans, not just the casual ones. Guns often play three hour shows, including covers. There's plenty of room in the setlist for a couple new tracks. And yes, some people will use it to hit the beer lines, and so be it. If they're playing 20 songs, you're still getting 18 hits.

Whenever the Stones do a new song, I always try to remain standing and see who joins me.  Or who else knows the words.

Funniest example had to be the 'Voodoo Lounge' tour.  After Keith's songs, they do 'Love Is Strong', the lead single from that album.  LOVE that song.  No reaction.

The next song?  'Monkey Man', a deep album cut from 1969's 'Let It Bleed'.  People stood back up.

Funny and depressing at the same time, I found.

if the stones play new music, than I think it's a good idea.

the problem is probably that the stones haven't written a great song in over 30 years. GnR doesn't have that problem. a new song from Axl/slash/duff would kick major ass - they're the greatest writers of hard rock music in history.

[faldor]

So should a band stop creating new music then? Seems like we were having quite the opposite argument not too long ago.

If they've worked on new songs and want to share a few of them, that's what they'll do. People can use that time to head for a beer or to run to the bathroom. Happens all the time.

No, that's not what I meant.
My reply was in reference to the idea that people wouldn't like something written/recorded by some other people than the ones on stage. Or just released and unknown to the majority of the audience.

It's always been the case that anything not familiar, is met with something like "I wish they had played (something I know) instead"...




/jarmo

That question wasn't directed at you jarmo. It was to DX, who did reply. Sorry for the confusion.

[faldor]

So should a band stop creating new music then? Seems like we were having quite the opposite argument not too long ago.

Depends who we are talking about.

Circa 2014, people still got VERY upset if you said they weren't a viable band and just a touring one.  All that bought you was reposted quotes from Axl's internet chats...in 2008, mind you...that was supposed to dispel any doubt about where things stood, 6 years later.  With no sign of progress.

This though, this probably is just a touring configuration, at least right now.  I don't think any of us really expect new tunes from this line-up, a line-up we don't even fully know yet.

Color me gullible, but I would expect new music if some of the newer members are still involved. I'd have less hope for new music if this was strictly a reunion, if that makes any sense. Why keep Frank, Richard, and Pitman around if they aren't focused on the future? Again, I could be totally off base thinking that, but that's my viewpoint right now.

[D-GenerationX]

Color me gullible, but I would expect new music if some of the newer members are still involved. I'd have less hope for new music if this was strictly a reunion, if that makes any sense. Why keep Frank, Richard, and Pitman around if they aren't focused on the future? Again, I could be totally off base thinking that, but that's my viewpoint right now.

But do you think Richard or Frank is back if Izzy were interested or Steven was at all reliable?

I tend to think they are there out of necessity more than anything, no?

[C0ma]

So should a band stop creating new music then? Seems like we were having quite the opposite argument not too long ago.

Depends who we are talking about.

Circa 2014, people still got VERY upset if you said they weren't a viable band and just a touring one.  All that bought you was reposted quotes from Axl's internet chats...in 2008, mind you...that was supposed to dispel any doubt about where things stood, 6 years later.  With no sign of progress.

This though, this probably is just a touring configuration, at least right now.  I don't think any of us really expect new tunes from this line-up, a line-up we don't even fully know yet.

Color me gullible, but I would expect new music if some of the newer members are still involved. I'd have less hope for new music if this was strictly a reunion, if that makes any sense. Why keep Frank, Richard, and Pitman around if they aren't focused on the future? Again, I could be totally off base thinking that, but that's my viewpoint right now.

I would certainly hope that's the goal... at the same time I can't fault Axl for keeping the three of them around even if this is a purely touring band. They are hugely talented, fit in very well with the classic members from a playing style perspective, and are reliable (more so than Izzy and or Steven, and with Izzy I just mean his desire to tour the world).