"Next Album" rumor / speculation thread *UPDATE AUG 22/2023*

[TheBaconman]

Edit... Also if Axl didn't use the name he wouldn't have had to go thru 75 percent of the legal BS and all the other hurdles that went along with it making it easier to get stuff out

But is any label giving 10 years time and $13 million bucks to "untitled Axl Rose project"?

Nope.   Not until he could pore that the Name Axl Rose could sell

[sofine11]

Even though I don't think the band gnr has that much interest from the general public.  I think Axl ROse still generates a lot of interest in himself. 

But would "The Axl Rose Band" headline festivals?  Hardly.  They are on a side stage at 4:30 in the afternoon.

I dunno.  If he pumped out good music fairly regularly post 1996, I think 'Axl Rose' could have been a pretty viable act, albeit not as much as "Guns N' Roses".  I'm thinking along the lines of Ozzy Osbourne.  But the main thing there is releasing good music "regularly" as in every 2-3 years.  That never seemed to be Axl's forte.  Still doesn't.

I definitely think Axl's career without the GN R name could have rivaled Ozzy's.

It worked great for him... I'm sure there wouldn't have been Axlfest, but still. Ozzy made a fortune without Sabbath, and if Axl had put out as much music as Ozzy did, I believe he would have done great with it.


Edit... Also if Axl didn't use the name he wouldn't have had to go thru 75 percent of the legal BS and all the other hurdles that went along with it making it easier to get stuff out

Well yeah, and I understand Axl thinks a 'solo album' would sound completely different than Chinese, but lets imagine for a moment that it was an Axl Rose solo.  The tracks were fucking great, and Axl sounds incredible on it.  Not to mention, Axl wouldn't have been cremated half as much for taking his sweet time putting out solo album(s).  And then another album of equal quality drops 2-3 years later.  I can't see how it wouldnt be successful.  Just my opinion.

[JAEBALL]

Even though I don't think the band gnr has that much interest from the general public.  I think Axl ROse still generates a lot of interest in himself. 

But would "The Axl Rose Band" headline festivals?  Hardly.  They are on a side stage at 4:30 in the afternoon.

I dunno.  If he pumped out good music fairly regularly post 1996, I think 'Axl Rose' could have been a pretty viable act, albeit not as much as "Guns N' Roses".  I'm thinking along the lines of Ozzy Osbourne.  But the main thing there is releasing good music "regularly" as in every 2-3 years.  That never seemed to be Axl's forte.  Still doesn't.

I definitely think Axl's career without the GN R name could have rivaled Ozzy's.

It worked great for him... I'm sure there wouldn't have been Axlfest, but still. Ozzy made a fortune without Sabbath, and if Axl had put out as much music as Ozzy did, I believe he would have done great with it.


Edit... Also if Axl didn't use the name he wouldn't have had to go thru 75 percent of the legal BS and all the other hurdles that went along with it making it easier to get stuff out

Well yeah, and I understand Axl thinks a 'solo album' would sound completely different than Chinese, but lets imagine for a moment that it was an Axl Rose solo.  The tracks were fucking great, and Axl sounds incredible on it.  Not to mention, Axl wouldn't have been cremated half as much for taking his sweet time putting out solo album(s).  And then another album of equal quality drops 2-3 years later.  I can't see how it wouldnt be successful.  Just my opinion.

I agree 100 percent...As fans it would have been better for us... we'd have more of his work available to us... Don't see how he wouldn't.

[jarmo]

I don't know how much a business savant one has to be to realize that you'd rather be the one with the rights to the name than not. 

You don't need to be anything. It's logic. If you came up with a name, it should be yours.

But would "The Axl Rose Band" headline festivals?  Hardly.  They are on a side stage at 4:30 in the afternoon.

You really have little faith in the singer you claim to be a fan of.
Singers from bands who were way less popular than GN'R worldwide have managed to keep headlining.

Rock bands that are business don't have philosophies? 

People WAY overromantacize a lot of this.

Its a rock band that makes songs we all like.  That's it.  Let's not get carried away here with how "Guns N' Roses" is some sort of movement.

It's a rock band.

Did you answer the question? I don't see it.


By the way, yet another turn toawards the "name issue". I guess it's that time of the month again.




/jarmo

[TheBaconman]

I don't know how much a business savant one has to be to realize that you'd rather be the one with the rights to the name than not. 

You don't need to be anything. It's logic. If you came up with a name, it should be yours.

But would "The Axl Rose Band" headline festivals?  Hardly.  They are on a side stage at 4:30 in the afternoon.

You really have little faith in the singer you claim to be a fan of.
Singers from bands who were way less popular than GN'R worldwide have managed to keep headlining.

Rock bands that are business don't have philosophies? 

People WAY overromantacize a lot of this.

Its a rock band that makes songs we all like.  That's it.  Let's not get carried away here with how "Guns N' Roses" is some sort of movement.

It's a rock band.

Did you answer the question? I don't see it.


By the way, yet another turn toawards the "name issue". I guess it's that time of the month again.




/jarmo

Chris Cornell is a good example of a lead singer that does pretty good touring on his own and has never really and a hit on his own

[JAEBALL]

I don't know how much a business savant one has to be to realize that you'd rather be the one with the rights to the name than not. 

You don't need to be anything. It's logic. If you came up with a name, it should be yours.

But would "The Axl Rose Band" headline festivals?  Hardly.  They are on a side stage at 4:30 in the afternoon.

You really have little faith in the singer you claim to be a fan of.
Singers from bands who were way less popular than GN'R worldwide have managed to keep headlining.

Rock bands that are business don't have philosophies? 

People WAY overromantacize a lot of this.

Its a rock band that makes songs we all like.  That's it.  Let's not get carried away here with how "Guns N' Roses" is some sort of movement.

It's a rock band.

Did you answer the question? I don't see it.


By the way, yet another turn toawards the "name issue". I guess it's that time of the month again.




/jarmo

In fairness to DX... he didn't start the conversation... Owl did

And it's going to come up til the end time... it's a big part of the history and very big part of why music has been so scarce...imo.

[jarmo]

Yeah, that part wasn't aimed at him.

That topic seems to come up every month.
For some reason it's often brought up by people who can't seem to let it go... For some weird reason...



/jarmo

[JAEBALL]

Yeah, that part wasn't aimed at him.

That topic seems to come up every month.
For some reason it's often brought up by people who can't seem to let it go... For some weird reason...



/jarmo

Well we are not all as accepting on the name issue. 

No reason to get upset about it. I understand getting tired of talking about it tho.

[sofine11]

Yeah, that part wasn't aimed at him.

That topic seems to come up every month.
For some reason it's often brought up by people who can't seem to let it go... For some weird reason...



/jarmo

I'm fine with Axl using the Guns N' Roses name.  Always have been.  I'm just saying he could have had a very lucrative career on his own releasing music under the Axl Rose banner.  Though he may disagree.  He did say there was quite a bit of pressure from the industry to continue to release music and tour under the GNR name.

[D-GenerationX]

solo Ozzie wrote some huge hits

Solo Ozzie has a pretty steady touring line up that fans could bond too

Would Solo Axl have this?  

Axl in ownership with the band name gnr hasn't been able to perform the above

You want one thing
That's to play the king
But the castle's crumbled
And you're left with just a name

Where's your crown, King Nothing?

[jarmo]

So without dwelling on the name issue, in this thread at least, let's talk about something on topic.


How many would buy the album in multiple formats if it was made available that way? Meaning buy a CD, buying the vinyl and maybe even digital release.
Or do you buy one copy only?

What do you think of deluxe editions? Would you buy one if it was offered? Why, why not?





/jarmo
 

[JAEBALL]

So without dwelling on the name issue, in this thread at least, let's talk about something on topic.


How many would buy the album in multiple formats if it was made available that way? Meaning buy a CD, buying the vinyl and maybe even digital release.
Or do you buy one copy only?

What do you think of deluxe editions? Would you buy one if it was offered? Why, why not?





/jarmo
 

I would buy a CD and a vinyl copy, and probably more than 1 of each.

I'd certainly buy a deluxe issue if it is offered with at least 1 different track... Remixes... I might not go for.

[sofine11]

So without dwelling on the name issue, in this thread at least, let's talk about something on topic.


How many would buy the album in multiple formats if it was made available that way? Meaning buy a CD, buying the vinyl and maybe even digital release.
Or do you buy one copy only?

What do you think of deluxe editions? Would you buy one if it was offered? Why, why not?





/jarmo
 

I would buy a CD and a vinyl copy, and probably more than 1 of each.

I'd certainly buy a deluxe issue if it is offered with at least 1 different track... Remixes... I might not go for.

Agreed, I'd buy CD (for the booklet & for my car) and vinyl for listening at home.   Obviously, I'd do digital if it was made available for download before released in a physical format.

[D-GenerationX]

You really have little faith in the singer you claim to be a fan of.
Singers from bands who were way less popular than GN'R worldwide have managed to keep headlining.

No, I'm living in the same real world promoters live in.

"Guns N' Roses" was still able to get headlining slots despite no material, nor really, any clue who would be on the stage.  They were booked on the name.  

You would not have as easy a time selling "The Axl Rose Band" as a festival headliner, as it would be a theoretical group made up of god knows who with no track record.

By the way, yet another turn toawards the "name issue". I guess it's that time of the month again.

This particular conversation is about the name, detective.

Not super credible to ask me a series of questions about the name, and then wrap it up with "I can't believe we are talking about the name again."

Get real.

[D-GenerationX]

How many would buy the album in multiple formats if it was made available that way? Meaning buy a CD, buying the vinyl and maybe even digital release.
Or do you buy one copy only?

What do you think of deluxe editions? Would you buy one if it was offered? Why, why not?

I would buy the physical CD and then rip it in WAV format for my iPod.

I would buy any deluxe edition if it had new material on it.

[jarmo]

I'd certainly buy a deluxe issue if it is offered with at least 1 different track... Remixes... I might not go for.

I've seen artists offer deluxe editions that have different artwork and/or packaging compared to the regular album. Would that be enough for you to get that?

Agreed, I'd buy CD (for the booklet & for my car) and vinyl for listening at home.   Obviously, I'd do digital if it was made available for download before released in a physical format.

So the way to sell more copies is to offer something exclusive in every single version. Which is why we often see iTunes albums have bonus tracks and so on...

No, I'm living in the same real world promoters live in.

"Guns N' Roses" was still able to get headlining slots despite no material, nor really, any clue who would be on the stage.  They were booked on the name. 

You would not have as easy a time selling "The Axl Rose Band" as a festival headliner, as it would be a theoretical group made up of god knows who with no track record.

Since there would be no other alternative, seeing Axl Rose solo would have been the only option for anybody who wanted to hear the GN'R songs performed by Axl. Nothing would've been different.
People wanna hear him sing the songs. Simple as that.

I think most people know the names Axl Rose and Guns N' Roses. We're not talking about some unknown name here. It's Axl fucking Rose. If you honestly don't think a majority of the people attending shows know who Axl is, I think you're pretty naive and/or in denial....





/jarmo

[D-GenerationX]

I've seen artists offer deluxe editions that have different artwork and/or packaging compared to the regular album. Would that be enough for you to get that?

It would not for me, no.

I think, at that point, you are basically dealing the more hardcore completists.

[D-GenerationX]

Since there would be no other alternative, seeing Axl Rose solo would have been the only option for anybody who wanted to hear the GN'R songs performed by Axl. Nothing would've been different.
People wanna hear him sing the songs. Simple as that.

But you would have no idea what he'd play.  That's the point.  Yeah, you probably hope he'd still give you the basic GNR show.  But do you know?  He would have no track record.

Some artists that go off on their own go the complete other way.  They don't want their solo show to basically be their old band's show under a different name.

But if you book "Guns N' Roses", even if what turns up on stage is just Axl and a bunch of guys named Harry, you know you are still getting all the hits.  That is a headline act.  "The Axl Rose Band" ain't.  Not sight unseen, anyway.

[GeorgeSteele]

So without dwelling on the name issue, in this thread at least, let's talk about something on topic.


How many would buy the album in multiple formats if it was made available that way? Meaning buy a CD, buying the vinyl and maybe even digital release.
Or do you buy one copy only?

What do you think of deluxe editions? Would you buy one if it was offered? Why, why not?





/jarmo
 

I would get the CD and digital releases.  As for deluxe versions, definitely if there's additional music or remixes, but I could be swayed by non-music stuff, not so much artwork or packaging, but I would love a DVD with band interviews talking about the making of the songs on the album or even just a tour diary booklet.

[Ow-So7411501]

Ok...briefly....i did not mean to start a "Name" discussion. Was just pointing out the difference in Jarmo's timeline on the evolution of the band sound.

Secondly, I would buy a vinyl( love the sound of them) and depending on what's included on it, the deluxe edition.