You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
- monkeychow
- Rep: 661
Re: Guns N' Roses Australian Tour 2013
I've been thinking on this....there's a couple of things at play here:
1. First is the phenomenon that it's more boring when it's not in your own area. You guys see no interest in an Aussie tour because you don't live here. The same way I just spent 3 years snoozing through your "up close and personal" tours then this vegas stint. You can bet when this tour hits the USA again...Alex and I will be moaning that nothing happens....but right now I'm looking forward to seeing Axl...just the way you guys were keen to go to multiple shows in vegas.
2. As for people calling for estranged and so on. I'll give the band that they answered the call. But I think the problem is it's only ever 3rd option of what people really want. People really want:
(a) A reunion of "the real GNR"
or
(b) "Nu" GNR to be an active creative force putting out new works every few years the way bands like Metallica, Megadeth, Slash and most other bands do.
or
(c) If the last 2 were impossible we wanted variety in the set list....including stopping ignoring 1/2 the band's catalogue.
So it's like they gave us (c) but only sort of (When did you last hear yesterdays, or locomotive or double talking jive?) but that was only ever the third choice anyway.
Thus the whole world is pissed off. hahah.
However, in Axl's defence I've been thinking about it - and why do we assume artistically that artists can or should be prolific? Sure some are. But the whole record cycle that I wish GNR would follow (new album every 3 or 4 years at least) was based around profits....I suspect some of the great artists of the past - painters and so on - might have taken stupid lengths of time to do their works...so I guess at the end of the day we may well be asking for something he can't do....maybe he's just not able to write the killer songs he does any faster than he does it now. Who knows how the creative mind really works?
- Mikkamakka
- Rep: 217
Re: Guns N' Roses Australian Tour 2013
I'm so uninterested in this tribute show, that I won't even bitch about the same setlist during the Aussie tour.
- Mikkamakka
- Rep: 217
Re: Guns N' Roses Australian Tour 2013
Promise?
A promise and a guarantee. Not a lie, for sure. 
Re: Guns N' Roses Australian Tour 2013
I've been thinking on this....there's a couple of things at play here:
1. First is the phenomenon that it's more boring when it's not in your own area. You guys see no interest in an Aussie tour because you don't live here.
I would have the same amount of interest if they were playing in Australia or my own backyard. They give no reason to be interested since they've been doing the same thing for 12 years. Adding Estranged into the set is not my definition of forward progress.
Much more interesting than anything going on with the band is how the hardcore fans of the new lineup who years ago always talked about the new era burying the old and all that other crap are the ones most satisfied with the current state of affairs while us so called "haters", "reunionists", "realists", or whatever they're called now are the people that want them to actually do something. The forum fans most sick of the past are now the ones more willing to wallow in it. I rarely post in this section but about a month ago some people said that GNR's current strategy is better than Soundgarden's. Really? SG has done more in 2 years than GNR has in 19 years.
However, in Axl's defence I've been thinking about it - and why do we assume artistically that artists can or should be prolific?
No one but Sebastian Bach will ever accuse him of being prolific. He doesn't have to be prolific(obviously). He seems perfectly satisfied to be a nostalgia act.
Like Mikka, I'm not gonna bother bitching about set lists or anything regarding the upcoming tour because it doesn't matter. It is what it is. A nostalgia act that rotates a member or two every few years playing the same old shit over and over with no album in sight. Some are happy with it, some aren't.
- monkeychow
- Rep: 661
Re: Guns N' Roses Australian Tour 2013
I would have the same amount of interest if they were playing in Australia or my own backyard. They give no reason to be interested since they've been doing the same thing for 12 years.
Oh yeah I get that.
I'd really love a new Album as Axl's probably my favourite songwriter, and shows I enjoy but are secondary to that (due to their inherent temporary nature - even the greatest show ever is like 1 night of your life vs a song you can listen to hundreds or thousands of times on a record.)
But I noticed for me, I just found the last year a tough stint - as there was no new music, it's 3 years since I saw the band live, and there's only so far vicarious enjoyment of a far-away tour can go. Like I'm happy for Buzz, Russ and Axlin and so on when they see a kickass show...but watching boots on youtube when it's essentially the same show gets old. I'd be excited if something unexpected happens - but that's rare these days. Think about it - you could probably predict what will be played at my show in 4 months time with at least 90% accuracy.
if anything i'm calling myself out on my own bullshit, cos like I was pretty disappointed that the vegas shows were essentially their normal show just with a flying piano and strippers. The way it was promoted...I'd hoped maybe we'd get some sort of a real RIR3 type surprise - like a new song - or maybe at least some genuinely surprising set list choices or whatever...so when it was business as usual I got pretty down. But now they're coming to australia again I'm kinda excited to see the guys live again - even if it' the same old same old...at the same time I notice a few people who were quite positive of late are starting to get fed up...which I understand....I'm just saying I think it's a factor....basically the live-only route isn't fulfilling fans as you said cos it's been 12 years of nearly identical stuff...but when they're in your own neibourhood it's at least partially happy-making...but that shine wears off when they jet off to somewhere obscure. Although I take your point that some of us are jaded to the point where it's not any more pleasing.
Adding Estranged into the set is not my definition of forward progress.
Yeah I hear that.
To be honest I'd be more interested to hear a new song IN ANY STYLE than for this band to do stuff like estranged. For preference it wouldn't be an either/or - like the focus would be on new songs and they'd mix up which of the hits they play to keep it a little interesting. Hate to mention Slash given the war - but he has a good system setlist wise I think - you're guaranteed enough of his GNR classics to keep old school and casual fans happy....but there's also a real strong focus on new music and new records every couple of years and lots of new tracks played live.
The closest GNR has come to that approach I think was the 09 Japan tour. I really liked those shows....Axl was still screaming...and there was a nice mix of CD era songs and also the hits. Although I think that was like the 3rd CD tour - it was the first show since RIR3 that really seemed the band had adopted it's new material and was moving on.
Of course some of the problem now is that although CD is only 5 years old - as you said it's more like 12 years we've been listening to CD, Maddy, SOD and others as the "new" tracks....again that's why I liked 09 - the new stuff was like scrapped, If the world...not everyone's cup of tea but not burnt out either!
What would be cool now would be if in 2013 GNR started to work in new tracks - just as they did in 2001 or whatever and the band kinda started the progression into a CD2 era and moved on from CD. But of course I'm not holding my breath.
Much more interesting than anything going on with the band is how the hardcore fans of the new lineup who years ago always talked about the new era burying the old and all that other crap are the ones most satisfied with the current state of affairs while us so called "haters", "reunionists", "realists", or whatever they're called now are the people that want them to actually do something.
That is a great point - and it's one of the problems I have with places like HTGTH. They seem to dislike the old line up - yet the band goes out there and religiously plays the songs of the old line up.
For me I like both. Old GNR was an all time classic band, but the current line up is great too - and i'd welcome them playing some old songs but also launching a new era of GNR with their own tracks - which in fairness seems to be what guys like DJ and bumble would like too....
but I guess it's not that simple. I really think maybe Axl finds it hard to write. No idea that's just a guess. But I'd understand that - I dabble in songwriting as a hobby - and sometimes it's there as something you can tap into - and sometimes it's like your brain is in a whole different space miles away from creativity....and that's how I find it with no expectations and no pressure...so at Axl's level...with all the controversy....must be very inhibiting.
Re: Guns N' Roses Australian Tour 2013
monkeychow wrote:I've been thinking on this....there's a couple of things at play here:
1. First is the phenomenon that it's more boring when it's not in your own area. You guys see no interest in an Aussie tour because you don't live here.
I would have the same amount of interest if they were playing in Australia or my own backyard. They give no reason to be interested since they've been doing the same thing for 12 years. Adding Estranged into the set is not my definition of forward progress.
Much more interesting than anything going on with the band is how the hardcore fans of the new lineup who years ago always talked about the new era burying the old and all that other crap are the ones most satisfied with the current state of affairs while us so called "haters", "reunionists", "realists", or whatever they're called now are the people that want them to actually do something. The forum fans most sick of the past are now the ones more willing to wallow in it. I rarely post in this section but about a month ago some people said that GNR's current strategy is better than Soundgarden's. Really?
However, in Axl's defence I've been thinking about it - and why do we assume artistically that artists can or should be prolific?
No one but Sebastian Bach will ever accuse him of being prolific. He doesn't have to be prolific(obviously). He seems perfectly satisfied to be a nostalgia act.
Like Mikka, I'm not gonna bother bitching about set lists or anything regarding the upcoming tour because it doesn't matter. It is what it is. A nostalgia act that rotates a member or two every few years playing the same old shit over and over with no album in sight. Some are happy with it, some aren't.
I'm not happy with it. 
Re: Guns N' Roses Australian Tour 2013
I've been thinking on this....there's a couple of things at play here:
1. First is the phenomenon that it's more boring when it's not in your own area. You guys see no interest in an Aussie tour because you don't live here. The same way I just spent 3 years snoozing through your "up close and personal" tours then this vegas stint. You can bet when this tour hits the USA again...Alex and I will be moaning that nothing happens....but right now I'm looking forward to seeing Axl...just the way you guys were keen to go to multiple shows in vegas.
2. As for people calling for estranged and so on. I'll give the band that they answered the call. But I think the problem is it's only ever 3rd option of what people really want. People really want:
(a) A reunion of "the real GNR"
or
(b) "Nu" GNR to be an active creative force putting out new works every few years the way bands like Metallica, Megadeth, Slash and most other bands do.
or
(c) If the last 2 were impossible we wanted variety in the set list....including stopping ignoring 1/2 the band's catalogue.
So it's like they gave us (c) but only sort of (When did you last hear yesterdays, or locomotive or double talking jive?) but that was only ever the third choice anyway.
Thus the whole world is pissed off. hahah.
However, in Axl's defence I've been thinking about it - and why do we assume artistically that artists can or should be prolific? Sure some are. But the whole record cycle that I wish GNR would follow (new album every 3 or 4 years at least) was based around profits....I suspect some of the great artists of the past - painters and so on - might have taken stupid lengths of time to do their works...so I guess at the end of the day we may well be asking for something he can't do....maybe he's just not able to write the killer songs he does any faster than he does it now. Who knows how the creative mind really works?
#1 you have something of a point. but at the end of the day i'm gld i passed on them the last time they played here. i put that money to better use. i'd have got p much the same concert experience from them as i had since '06. except w/Estranged.
i don't really see that much for you to look forward to. just the same thing you've had before.
i liked it when bands come round again & they've maybe got a new bassist or a different guy on keys or a new guitarist: it's interesting to see what they'll bring to the songs & performance. but even that doesn't exist this time w/GnR.
#2 yea you're right ot$ there.
your last point is hard to quantify.
firstly & most importantly it's not just quantity of material, it's the quality. he is too far removed to create something as consistently brilliant as his work on AFD & UYI. i mean the guy who wrote WTTJ has been living in a secluded malibu mansion the past 25yrs: he can no longer relate to real life & by default his material is diluted of some of it's power. he has lost that universal language he once had such a grasp on.
now about the time & productivity well this is where it's harder to quantify but i still don't see it as an excuse, especially when you go back to the quality of the material. even if it does take his work a longer gestation than others that doesn't make it any more valuable when the result is actually not all that great. it took michelangelo 4 yrs to do the ceiling of the sistine chapel, who'd have cared how long it took if it had turned out crap?!
maybe he's just not able to write killer songs anymore?
& besides, a LOT of great artists of the past haven't taken long to produce truly great works.
we assume artists have to be prolific because they make their living out of producing art. or are meant to. axl's point is that he was so successful he didn't have to do anything, so didn't. he's paid to create, he didn't need to be paid so he didn't create. & then it dried up. everything.
now they're coming to australia again I'm kinda excited to see the guys live again - even if it' the same old same old...at the same time I notice a few people who were quite positive of late are starting to get fed up...which I understand....I'm just saying I think it's a factor....basically the live-only route isn't fulfilling fans as you said cos it's been 12 years of nearly identical stuff...but when they're in your own neibourhood it's at least partially happy-making... Although I take your point that some of us are jaded to the point where it's not any more pleasing.
To be honest I'd be more interested to hear a new song IN ANY STYLE than for this band to do stuff like estranged. For preference it wouldn't be an either/or - like the focus would be on new songs and they'd mix up which of the hits they play to keep it a little interesting. Hate to mention Slash given the war - but he has a good system setlist wise I think - you're guaranteed enough of his GNR classics to keep old school and casual fans happy....but there's also a real strong focus on new music and new records every couple of years and lots of new tracks played live.
The closest GNR has come to that approach I think was the 09 Japan tour. I really liked those shows....Axl was still screaming...and there was a nice mix of CD era songs and also the hits. Although I think that was like the 3rd CD tour - it was the first show since RIR3 that really seemed the band had adopted it's new material and was moving on.
Of course some of the problem now is that although CD is only 5 years old - as you said it's more like 12 years we've been listening to CD, Maddy, SOD and others as the "new" tracks....again that's why I liked 09 - the new stuff was like scrapped, If the world...not everyone's cup of tea but not burnt out either!
What would be cool now would be if in 2013 GNR started to work in new tracks - just as they did in 2001 or whatever and the band kinda started the progression into a CD2 era and moved on from CD. But of course I'm not holding my breath.
c'mon mate, how many times have we said these things the past 2/3 yrs. i don't wanna rain on your parade, & yea it's always nice when you get to see your favourite bands but at the end of the day you have to question the fundamental ethos of what axl & gnr are presenting. it's something i find either wholly objectionable of just confusing: it's either a nostalgia act or else he genuinely doesn't see it that way & is still chasing the chinese dragon in which case it's baffling he won't move on. whatever it is i can't find anything i can relate to, & it makes me sad cause it's not the GnR i believe in & yet the name is on the ticket.. y'know? (but let's not go anywhere near that argument, that's not my intention).
i find it sad what it's become. (it's like @ least in the barren yrs he had something resembling excuses - or maybe, he does have excuses but is just unwilling to share them & his vision w/the fans either due to his poor communication or his selfishness, do you know what i mean?)
