Slash on possibility of new GN'R music: ' 'I Think Everybody Wants To Do It'

[pilferk]

I cannot imagine Slash ever going back and rehashing old ideas that didn't make the cut in the first place. Just look at his work ethic; he can pump out new ideas like nobody's business.

1) Um.....bad example.  GnR have, since the very beginning, revisited old material that didn't make the cut.  You can see that in the AFD era demos.  November Rain? Don't Dry? You Could Be Mine? Now, we obviously don't know what the impetus was behind revising that material....maybe it wasn't, largely, Slash.  But you can't really argue with the results of revisiting the old material.  Those songs got MUCH stronger with time and ended up being pretty big hits for the band.

2) I have to admit.....I feel like Slash has, in the past, favored quantity over quality.  I'm not a big fan of most of what he's done, with some VR exceptions, outside of GnR.  I'm just not.  I've said it before: A lot of the material feels sort of "meh" to me. It's a lot of "good enough" material. He's incredibly talented, don't get me wrong.  But I think he does best when he has a "strong editing" presence behind him.  He had more of that with VR (especially the first VR album) and a lot less on his solo album and with MK.  So while it's true he's been more prolific...if they can kickstart the GNR creative fires, I think that material would be much more to my liking, at least, than his other creative output.

3) My worry in all this is that...we haven't really seen this incarnation of GnR's output without Izzy.  I've always felt he was sort of the unsung hero in the songwriting process.  It'll be interesting to see, if we ever see, what new GnR music sounds like without his participation.

[Vezara]

I think most gnr great songs were songs that sat down for a while until their best details were found/thought of. I'd hate it if November rain came out as the acoustic piano version, not that i don't like it, but the album version is so much more... I don't know how long it took to make estranged and coma (my favorite pre CD songs), but they've got so much wonderful details.
I must say, even though I wanted another album right after CD, I'm glad it had the luxury of being the only new GNR album in the last 10 years... It is a magnificent album that deserved the whole CD tour, and the time for everyone interested to absorb it and acknowledge it as a legit GnR album
The song I am eagerly awaiting for is Going Down by Thommy Stinson with Axl in the background vocals. Will that song ever be released and why not?

[russkwtx]

To me, the issue is the definition of "new" music. It could mean unreleased stuff from decades ago as people have discussed. I assume that not only GNR but Slash and Duff have songs that are in various stages of completion that could be included (or not) to cobble something together and call it "new music" a la Shadow of my love. To me, that would be a disappointment, although it may do well in sales.

The  obverse of old-new music is new-new music whereby they start from scratch and write entirely new songs. That's probably what we are hoping for but IMO the least likely to happen for various reasons.

I cannot imagine Slash ever going back and rehashing old ideas that didn't make the cut in the first place. Just look at his work ethic; he can pump out new ideas like nobody's business.

You mean like November Rain, You Could Be Mine and Don't Cry and so on?

Those weren't included on Appetite.....



Doesn't matter when a song was written, a great song is a great song.....



/jarmo

Fair enough....but who is to say that the songs in the vault are "great"? I don't think, for example, that Ain't Goin Down is a great song. It's ok, but not close to the standards on AFD or UYI.

[russkwtx]

I cannot imagine Slash ever going back and rehashing old ideas that didn't make the cut in the first place. Just look at his work ethic; he can pump out new ideas like nobody's business.

2) I have to admit.....I feel like Slash has, in the past, favored quantity over quality.  I'm not a big fan of most of what he's done, with some VR exceptions, outside of GnR.  I'm just not.  I've said it before: A lot of the material feels sort of "meh" to me. It's a lot of "good enough" material. He's incredibly talented, don't get me wrong.  But I think he does best when he has a "strong editing" presence behind him.  He had more of that with VR (especially the first VR album) and a lot less on his solo album and with MK.  So while it's true he's been more prolific...if they can kickstart the GNR creative fires, I think that material would be much more to my liking, at least, than his other creative output.

I tend to agree. At the same time, after I saw him a bunch of times I really began to appreciate the music, which initially does not grab you on record. But after seeing the songs live, they absolutely rock and then you go back to the album and really dig the music. At least for me.

The last album, World on Fire, had 18 songs which are too many. I culled it down to 12 and made a "Faves" CD with those 12 and that is one of my best CDs of all time. So I agree with the quantity over quality; you need to a do a bit of editing to get what you like.

[D-GenerationX]

No one could realistically expect them to churn anything out these past 3 years they have been on the road.

What could be realistically expected, is discussion of such.  And if come, say, late 2020 things are still in the "if it happens, it happens" type mindset, you can likely assume it's not going to happen.  This is not hard.  It's all about want to.  You either want to do it, or you don't.  Simple as that.

So as for right now, I think it's fair to still lean on the "we'll see" side of things.  But after a few years, anyone that is seriously trotting out "just because you haven't heard it doesn't mean it's not done", that's just a coping strategy.  Call it what it is.  No one is saying that unless they are terrified of appearing to show even a hint of doubt or disloyalty.

[pilferk]

I tend to agree. At the same time, after I saw him a bunch of times I really began to appreciate the music, which initially does not grab you on record. But after seeing the songs live, they absolutely rock and then you go back to the album and really dig the music. At least for me.

The last album, World on Fire, had 18 songs which are too many. I culled it down to 12 and made a "Faves" CD with those 12 and that is one of my best CDs of all time. So I agree with the quantity over quality; you need to a do a bit of editing to get what you like.

See, that's the thing: I think Slash works on the stuff he plays live, and then makes it better!  Sometimes the live version sticks to the melody, but ranges pretty far in the details...and it's great.  And you saw with the CD era stuff he played on tour (Better especially). He took a song that I REALLY liked and pushed it to that next level.  He's uber talented, and he can do that kind of stuff when he puts the extra time and effort in.

For World on Fire....for me, there were 6 "meh" songs, 6 good songs, and 6 better than good but not quite great songs.  I thought every song on that album (and the whole album, itself) would have benefitted from some tightening up and a good editorial review from some peers.  You got that with the VR material, because you had 5 or 6 rock royalty type peers (depending on Izzy's level of involvement) giving you USEFUL and HONEST feedback.  I think Slash's WRITING work benefits from that (I think anyone's would, honestly) and keeps him in lane, and a little more focused.  But when he's working solo, or with MKC (who, I suspect, just doesn't have anyone with enough gravitas to weigh in), things get a little all over the place. There's a little more fiddling and diddling and not as much refinement (or so it sounds to me)  Stuff doesn't feel fleshed out and tightened up.  And hey, that's fine....he's not churning out shit.  But neither have I heard anything from that pool of material that really knocks my socks off.

I have with both VR (especially the first album) and his GnR work.

[jarmo]

Fair enough....but who is to say that the songs in the vault are "great"? I don't think, for example, that Ain't Goin Down is a great song. It's ok, but not close to the standards on AFD or UYI.

That's an interesting point.

I think because certain songs are on certain albums, we associate them with said albums. Like if you put You Could Be Mine on Appetite, it doesn't seem to fit. We think of it as an Use Your Illusion track... If that makes sense.

I think if Ain't Goin' Down No More (as it's titled on the AFD box) was on either album, we might view the song differently nowadays.





/jarmo

[D-GenerationX]

I like 'Ain't Goin' Down'.  Good lyrics.

[allwaystired]

Fair enough....but who is to say that the songs in the vault are "great"? I don't think, for example, that Ain't Goin Down is a great song. It's ok, but not close to the standards on AFD or UYI.

That's an interesting point.

I think because certain songs are on certain albums, we associate them with said albums. Like if you put You Could Be Mine on Appetite, it doesn't seem to fit. We think of it as an Use Your Illusion track... If that makes sense.

I think if Ain't Goin' Down No More (as it's titled on the AFD box) was on either album, we might view the song differently nowadays.





/jarmo

Expectations play a large part in things too.

I'm a big fan of 'unreleased material' - I love it when bands do bonus discs of rarities, early versions, all that stuff. When I listen to that sort of stuff I definitely go into it with a different mindset though; I don't expect it to be as good as the 'A list' material, but still usually enjoy it anyway if it's one of my favourite acts.

A lot of the expectations are actually subconscious though - it's sort of natural that your expectations are different without even thinking or acknowledging it. Problems usually arise when a band push something as a big new single and it's not good enough. The same song would be viewed very differently, and maybe even loved, if it had been released in a different manner.

[russkwtx]

I tend to agree. At the same time, after I saw him a bunch of times I really began to appreciate the music, which initially does not grab you on record. But after seeing the songs live, they absolutely rock and then you go back to the album and really dig the music. At least for me.

The last album, World on Fire, had 18 songs which are too many. I culled it down to 12 and made a "Faves" CD with those 12 and that is one of my best CDs of all time. So I agree with the quantity over quality; you need to a do a bit of editing to get what you like.

See, that's the thing: I think Slash works on the stuff he plays live, and then makes it better!  Sometimes the live version sticks to the melody, but ranges pretty far in the details...and it's great.  And you saw with the CD era stuff he played on tour (Better especially). He took a song that I REALLY liked and pushed it to that next level.  He's uber talented, and he can do that kind of stuff when he puts the extra time and effort in.

For World on Fire....for me, there were 6 "meh" songs, 6 good songs, and 6 better than good but not quite great songs.  I thought every song on that album (and the whole album, itself) would have benefitted from some tightening up and a good editorial review from some peers.  You got that with the VR material, because you had 5 or 6 rock royalty type peers (depending on Izzy's level of involvement) giving you USEFUL and HONEST feedback.  I think Slash's WRITING work benefits from that (I think anyone's would, honestly) and keeps him in lane, and a little more focused.  But when he's working solo, or with MKC (who, I suspect, just doesn't have anyone with enough gravitas to weigh in), things get a little all over the place. There's a little more fiddling and diddling and not as much refinement (or so it sounds to me)  Stuff doesn't feel fleshed out and tightened up.  And hey, that's fine....he's not churning out shit.  But neither have I heard anything from that pool of material that really knocks my socks off.

I have with both VR (especially the first album) and his GnR work.

I would agree with that distribution (6/6/6) for World on Fire. Still, considering that today albums often one or two hits and the rest is filler, it's a pretty good album. Not great, but not bad either.

In the creative arts, some people get to a point in the process and say "it's good enough, let's get it out." Then, they work on it later to improve it a bit, and that is natural I think. Creativity seldom has an endpoint, it's a process. There are other people who are perfectionists who work and work on something in search of the elusive perfection. Of course, there is no such thing, but the point is there are two different approaches to creativity.

[russkwtx]

One more thing, I think the "quantity versus quality" tradeoff is more of a contemporary problem. Go back to the 1960s-1970s and bands were doing both quantity and quality. The Beatles, how many albums did they release 1964-1970, 12 or 13? The Stones in a four year period put out their greatest albums arguably that made them who they are: Beggars Banquet (1969), Sticky Fingers (1970), Exile on Main Street (1971) and Goats Head Soup (1972). I might be off by one year on those albums, but the point is that 'there was a time' when artists did not make the quantity versus quality trade off that is argued today.

[pilferk]

I would agree with that distribution (6/6/6) for World on Fire. Still, considering that today albums often one or two hits and the rest is filler, it's a pretty good album. Not great, but not bad either.

In the creative arts, some people get to a point in the process and say "it's good enough, let's get it out." Then, they work on it later to improve it a bit, and that is natural I think. Creativity seldom has an endpoint, it's a process. There are other people who are perfectionists who work and work on something in search of the elusive perfection. Of course, there is no such thing, but the point is there are two different approaches to creativity.

I think that last bit is exactly it.

Slash, in his solo work and MK+C gets to "it's good enough" a little more quickly than maybe he should.  He does go back to work on it, if it makes the live cut, but the albums feel a little less tight and polished.

Axl, in his work, takes maybe a little longer than he should.  He works and works and works on every note and sonic setting, looking for the absolutely perfect track.  And he takes awhile (too long?) to get there (if there is actually any way to get there).

I think they (along with Duff and, at the time, Izzy) all balance each other out in exactly the right way.  Or they did...hopefully we'll get new music, eventually, to judge if that's still the case. I think it is, based on some of what they did with the live material.

I think that balance was also there for a LOT of the early VR material.  Less of the later VR material, and I think there's some pretty obvious reasons why that might be.

[pilferk]

One more thing, I think the "quantity versus quality" tradeoff is more of a contemporary problem. Go back to the 1960s-1970s and bands were doing both quantity and quality. The Beatles, how many albums did they release 1964-1970, 12 or 13? The Stones in a four year period put out their greatest albums arguably that made them who they are: Beggars Banquet (1969), Sticky Fingers (1970), Exile on Main Street (1971) and Goats Head Soup (1972). I might be off by one year on those albums, but the point is that 'there was a time' when artists did not make the quantity versus quality trade off that is argued today.

I agree.

I'd argue, though, that its a vastly different musical landscape, today: Commercially, technologically, and socially.  There are a LOT of factors (not least of which is the label) that would prevent any artist from being that prolific today.

I'd also say that...it's a LITTLE unfair to compare most bands to the Stones and the Beatles.    But the point is valid, since other bands (Cream, Led Zep, Pink Floyd) did similar things.

I'd love to see a return to those days of rock, but they were gone by the late 70's (some would say the mid 70's).

I also don't think it's a coincidence that the most prolific of those bands had 2 or 3 or 4 strong song writers in their midst AND they were all peers who were not adverse to constructive criticism (OK, that's what broke up the beatles, but....for everyone else).

I just don't think you see that much in today's music scene.

[allwaystired]

One more thing, I think the "quantity versus quality" tradeoff is more of a contemporary problem. Go back to the 1960s-1970s and bands were doing both quantity and quality. The Beatles, how many albums did they release 1964-1970, 12 or 13? The Stones in a four year period put out their greatest albums arguably that made them who they are: Beggars Banquet (1969), Sticky Fingers (1970), Exile on Main Street (1971) and Goats Head Soup (1972). I might be off by one year on those albums, but the point is that 'there was a time' when artists did not make the quantity versus quality trade off that is argued today.

I agree.

I'd argue, though, that its a vastly different musical landscape, today: Commercially, technologically, and socially.  There are a LOT of factors (not least of which is the label) that would prevent any artist from being that prolific today.

I'd also say that...it's a LITTLE unfair to compare most bands to the Stones and the Beatles.    But the point is valid, since other bands (Cream, Led Zep, Pink Floyd) did similar things.

I'd love to see a return to those days of rock, but they were gone by the late 70's (some would say the mid 70's).

I also don't think it's a coincidence that the most prolific of those bands had 2 or 3 or 4 strong song writers in their midst AND they were all peers who were not adverse to constructive criticism (OK, that's what broke up the beatles, but....for everyone else).

I just don't think you see that much in today's music scene.

There is definitely a "what is the point" argument to being prolific today. Spend large amounts of time/effort/money recording something no one will buy, or even really wants, versus touring old material to people who will lap up the nostalgia. The pull to tour is massive - not just from the band, but from those surrounding it. An awful lot of people are making money off a tour - a lot less are making money off an album.

It's also got to be quite dispiriting - you spend time and effort making an album, you play a song from it, and all anyone wants is you to play one you released 40 years ago. That's got to take a toll on you over time.

Going back to GNR - the NITL crowds I stood in, in the majority, couldn't care less about anything that wasn't one of the 'big songs'. I think we're kidding ourselves that these people want new material in reality. I know many people who when attending concerts will say "it was rubbish, they played new stuff"- that's the way the music scene is now. There is little desire for new, and massive desire for old. A look at the album charts tell you that. It's sad, and I find it depressing, but that is the way music has gone. Everyone wants to live in the past - even people who don't remember that past.

For established acts, releasing new material has become a luxury, something they do because they're bored, rather than any sort of necessity or thing of importance. Provided of course their back catalogue is big enough.

[Conan]

Enjoy it when it comes out. Instead of spending time feeling frustrated because it didn't come out according to your personal preferences.

 

/jarmo

And there we have the attitude again that as a fan I should not feel entitled to even look forward to my favourite artist producing the art they are known for...

An amazing point of view. I wonder if there is another single artist on the entire planet that demand their fans (if they have any) have zero expectations on anything and then castigate them if they do?

We aren’t even allowed to hope anymore...

It's common sense to me.

Don't let something you have zero control over "ruin" your day(s) and feel upset over it.


Having an interest in something is good. Letting that turn you into someone bitter and hateful isn't.

/jarmo

In what sense has anything I’ve said been bitter or hateful? That isn’t me.

Being a realist is though. GNR have released 15 brand new songs over the last 28 years. On that record alone I see little hope of any brand new material arriving ‘soon.’

Sorry if that seems ‘bitter or hateful’ to you, but I am not the one who has created that situation. It simply is the case...

I’d like to see more, I’m just not sanguine on that prospect given their history and complete lack of action on that front over decades...

[D-GenerationX]

Going back to GNR - the NITL crowds I stood in, in the majority, couldn't care less about anything that wasn't one of the 'big songs'. I think we're kidding ourselves that these people want new material in reality. I know many people who when attending concerts will say "it was rubbish, they played new stuff"- that's the way the music scene is now. There is little desire for new, and massive desire for old. A look at the album charts tell you that. It's sad, and I find it depressing, but that is the way music has gone. Everyone wants to live in the past - even people who don't remember that past.

Pretty much. 

I made it a point at both of my NITL shows to scan the crowd during the CD songs.  You could immediately pick out who endured that whole misadventure of an odyssey versus the people that hadn't really listened to GNR outside a radio in 20 years.

But part of that was the crowd too.  50,000 people at my show.  That's a lot of casuals.  And at least 45,000 looking at each other once 'Sorry' started up saying "what the fuck is this"?

Personally, I think the only reason for GNR to do anything new is if that is the only way to keep Slash in the fold.  He seemed to have fun on this tour.  But there was also that "first time back" aspect of all this for him.  How excited is he going to be to play 'Double Talkin' Jive' again in 4 years?  Will it have that came appeal?  Maybe he will need at least some pass at something new and different in the form of a few new tunes in the set.

[sofine11]

New Slash quote on new GNR music in Classic Rock....

“I think we’re going to go well on into the future. I mean, Axl’s got a ton of shit that he recorded already, so we’re just going to get in there and just start getting into that thing, and then if we do a record and then do a tour, I could see that cycle going on endlessly.”


Finally, something positive.  Bodes well for new music being the caveat for him continuing with Guns.

[jarmo]

In what sense has anything I’ve said been bitter or hateful? That isn’t me.

Being a realist is though. GNR have released 15 brand new songs over the last 28 years. On that record alone I see little hope of any brand new material arriving ‘soon.’

Sorry if that seems ‘bitter or hateful’ to you, but I am not the one who has created that situation. It simply is the case...

I’d like to see more, I’m just not sanguine on that prospect given their history and complete lack of action on that front over decades...

Sorry, I was speaking generally. There's always those people who claim to want something so bad that it actually makes them bitter....

Enjoy what you have instead of worrying about what you don't..... So right now, enjoy that we got an active band touring.

I know, maybe they're not touring in your part of the world, or it doesn't interest you. But there are others who didn't get to see the show yet and who will.

Again, generally speaking.




/jarmo

[jarmo]

New Slash quote on new GNR music in Classic Rock....

“I think we’re going to go well on into the future. I mean, Axl’s got a ton of shit that he recorded already, so we’re just going to get in there and just start getting into that thing, and then if we do a record and then do a tour, I could see that cycle going on endlessly.”


Finally, something positive.  Bodes well for new music being the caveat for him continuing with Guns.

Great!
This is what Axl talked about in 2016 as well.... 




/jarmo

[D-GenerationX]

New Slash quote on new GNR music in Classic Rock....

“I think we’re going to go well on into the future. I mean, Axl’s got a ton of shit that he recorded already, so we’re just going to get in there and just start getting into that thing, and then if we do a record and then do a tour, I could see that cycle going on endlessly.”


Finally, something positive.  Bodes well for new music being the caveat for him continuing with Guns.

Yeah, that's awesome.  Pretty much exactly what you want to hear.

Slash does his thing with Myles and the gang.  Axl gets 12-18 months to recharge.  Then we see what's what.

That's pretty much the ideal scenario.  Great news, indeed.