When Chinese Democracy will out what review you prefer to read?

[dENIS]

I mean music magazine. I`m for Rolling Stone. I like their reviews. Don`t tell me you will not be care...

[Lady Livin]

From this site, and this message board's opinion. I couldn't give two shits less about what some magazine thinks, especially Rolling Stone, which is something I've burnt in effigy before.

[younggunner]

ill read any review that just judges and gives its opinion on the music for what it is and where it stands in todays world and how it compares to the old lineup in terms of the actual music.

If it has to do with mentioning all the delays, axls braids, jerseys, robin's freakiness etc,? this that and the other garbage I dont want it.

Also the interview has to pass certain posters "tests and checklists" for it to be taken seriously and have any credibility. So background checks are required too!

[Evil Ash]

I'm gonna by the cd, listen to it, make up my own opinion and laugh at reviews i don't agree with, BUT read em all! 

[blasphemer]

The last review Id ever read is Rolling Stone. That mag is the biggest shit mag ever.

[jameslofton29]

The first review i will read will be Time magazine. Although not a music magazine, they seem to give unbiased reviews on movies,music,books,etc. Entertainment Weekly is also a great magazine. I believe they gave 'Illusions' an A.

[Naupis]

ill read any review that just judges and gives its opinion on the music for what it is and where it stands in todays world and how it compares to the old lineup in terms of the actual music.

That is not really relevant though in terms of whats in vogue today. Every reviewer will judge it against old guns stuff because it has to grade out better to have justified breaking up the old band and keeping the name. He invited in that comparrison in keeping the name and releasing an album under the GNR name and not just making his own band and calling it something else. In that case no one would give 2 hoots what he called that album and wouldn't judge him solely against his past.

When Van Halen has bounced singers around their albums have always been put up against the diamond dave stuff for the most part as most people argue that was their best material. For people to ever accept Sammy or gray cherone, they had to put out a better album than they ever did with Diamond dave to justify having continued on with the name. They don't judge the album against other contemporary releases, because in that case it is relevant.

Why would anyone ever want to accept a band that couldn't release an album that was as good as the guys in that same band before they were all either forced out or fired? CD can be as good or better than any contemporary cd out there in today's market place, but if it isn't viewed as being as good as Appetite or the Illusions by all the critics is will be universally panned by them and dubbed a failure, as it should be. The reasoning is that if you have one set of guys calling themselves GNR produce something considered gold, and another group produce something that only equated to silver, even though silver might be better than anything out there, why would you consider that silver quality album a success when you had a factory that made gold but chose to tear it down?

It just down't make sense to do. Which is why he will, and should be judged against Appetite and the Illusions, as it has been established there are 5 guys in this world who at one point called themselves GNR and were able to make that gold. Why do you think the general public or music critics would want to embrace a band that also calls themselves GNR, yet only managed to produce silver? They wouldn't, as that gold is certainly more valuable than the silver, regardless of what the rest of the market sounds like.

Again, it is all hypothetical as no one knows what the album will sound like. But I can say for damn certain the first thing every critic will do is decide it is either better than Appetite and the Illusions or worse......and if its worse(regardless of what else is going on in the music market), it will be open season on Axl...in which case he will deserve it as by keeping the name he invited that criticism.

It is just irrational to think that any journalist in their right mind (given the big issue hanging in the balance as to whether he should have kept the name or not) will not judge the album against old Guns to see if he was justified in keeping the name or not, and if it is deemed not as good, not slag him bad for it given he has proved that he was capable of making a better album given what he had showed in the past, regardless of what music in the year 2005 sounds like.

Even if the music is better than most other music in 2005, what does it really matter if he doesn't put out the best album ever released under his own band name? If you can't see why he will be ripped for that then you are being awful naive, regardless of how you try and justify it.


The equivalent would be like Paul McCartney today deciding he was going to go hire 3 new guys, call themselves the Beattles, and release an album. Aside from the fact no one would ever accept it, if he didn't release an album better than Sgt. Peppers people would turn their backs on him completely as the common view would be that you had 4 guys who created possibly the greatest album ever, yet you soil their name and legacy by releasing an album under that brand name that is inferior to their best work. People would tear him a new one under that scenario, and his music career would essentially be over.

As with my hypothetical situation with McCartney, Axl will run into this same problem. As deservedly so. When he decided to keep the name, it became open season. If he didn't keep the name, he has none of these problems. You can't always have you cake and eat it to. If you want to call yourself GNR, you better release the best GNR album ever, or accept your going to be flamed and ridiculed for not doing so.

[saint seiya]

when you listen to this album your heart will tell you it is not the GUNS N' ROSES that you knew and loved from the old days but eventually you will come to love it and understand why the band could no longer stick together

[*Izzy*]

I won't read any, I can figure out whether or not music is good without having to waste my money to read what someone else thinks? ?

  Izzy?

[Drew]

From this site, and this message board's opinion. I couldn't give two shits less about what some magazine thinks, especially Rolling Stone, which is something I've burnt in effigy before.

Well said! 

[Naupis]

From this site, and this message board's opinion. I couldn't give two shits less about what some magazine thinks, especially Rolling Stone, which is something I've burnt in effigy before.

That's fine and dandy, but unfortunately there are alot of people who read those reviews, and we need them to be good to get people on the fence to buy the album.

As has been stated, lack of commercial success means no more GNR records most likely. If CD does not do well that's it, we won't see another album. So all of you can talk about how the reviews don't mean anything, but this project has to be successful comericially, not artistically, for us to see another album. You can take that to the bank.

[younggunner]

Every reviewer will judge it against old guns stuff because it has to grade out better to have justified breaking up the old band and keeping the name

what part of how it compares to the old lineup in terms of the actual music.

did you not understand

He invited in that comparrison in keeping the name and releasing an album under the GNR name and not just making his own band and calling it something else.

not gonna drag this thread through the mud again...

In that case no one would give 2 hoots what he called that album and wouldn't judge him solely against

I disagree but?

As has been stated, lack of commercial success means no more GNR records most likely. If CD does not do well that's it, we won't see another album. So all of you can talk about how the reviews don't mean anything, but this project has to be successful comericially, not artistically, for us to see another album. You can take that to the bank.

Wrong. The company has given GNr a lot of money to produce music. Supposedly they have 3 albums worth of material. Lets say Cd "fails commercially" the company and the band will still atleast put out another album. The company wants to recoup their investment. The only way to do that is to sell records or Axl give them the money instead of music.

Its safe to say that no matter what, we will be getting 2 new gnr albums...you can take that to the bank...

and as long as they are artistically great ill be one happy camper...ill let you handle the numbers

[*Izzy*]

From this site, and this message board's opinion. I couldn't give two shits less about what some magazine thinks, especially Rolling Stone, which is something I've burnt in effigy before.

That's fine and dandy, but unfortunately there are alot of people who read those reviews, and we need them to be good to get people on the fence to buy the album.

As has been stated, lack of commercial success means no more GNR records most likely. If CD does not do well that's it, we won't see another album. So all of you can talk about how the reviews don't mean anything, but this project has to be successful comericially, not artistically, for us to see another album. You can take that to the bank.

Axl has enough money to make more albums whether or not CD is a succsess and even if CD is a sucsess Gn'R might be out of ideas for songs, never mind albums, you make a good point though ?

  Izzy ?

[jameslofton29]

You got that right. If CD isnt huge and sell at least 10 or 20 million you will never hear from Axl again.

[younggunner]

whats the magic number for album sales that all you experts will deem a commercial success? im just curious

[*Izzy*]

whats the magic number for album sales that all you experts will deem a commercial success? im just curious

More than one?

  Izzy?

[Falcon]

I'll read 'em all.

 None of which will effect my opinion but I'll read them nonetheless.

[jgfnsr]

I wouldn't be surprised in the least if some magazines already have their reviews of Chinese Democracy ready and waiting for the day it comes out.

And I'm sure they're all just itching to tear it to shreads no matter what.

[jameslofton29]

I believe the magic number for album sales is 10 million. I believe it will sell more than that. But if it sells less than GNR Lies(which I believe was 6 million), GNR is officially DEAD.

[younggunner]

I believe the magic number for album sales is 10 million. I believe it will sell more than that. But if it sells less than GNR Lies(which I believe was 6 million), GNR is officially DEAD.

Look at total album sales for the rock genre. Does anyone even come close to that number?{im not sure}.? Vr? have sold what about a million to 1.5 albums thus far? You cant compare old gnr album sales to cd. We are in a completely different music world.