Chinese Democracy a BRILLIANT dark album.

[Carlos Gunner]

Hi !!

That is how I feel about CD, it is brilliant and somehow dark, leaning to obscure devilish.

What is your opinion of this album?

Sorry if this is for the DEAD HORSE section.

[Gavgnr]

I personally love the record. It’s got a bit of everything and there are so many depths to the tracks I’m still hearing new things to this very day. It’s a truly amazing album with some of the best songs Axl has ever written. Highlights for me include There Was A Time, Shacklers, Better, Madagascar and Prostitute.

Sublime music.

[ITARocker]

basically good songs which sound bad because they are overproduced, too much cut and paste, abuse of pro tools, too many people who come and go from musicians to producers. Something I've said many times.

If u listen to hard school and even absurd (if you can get rid of all the effects) u can feel how the songs are more tight even if they are a rework of a couple of old songs. Because people need to play togheter and go straight to the point.

It's a little too pompous (as example the neverending outros) but it's Axl Rose work so u are ready for it.

[DeN]

I don't know why but it feels a bit of a depressing album now,
I just listen to some of the songs (Better, Twat, Shackler, This I love & Prostitute)

as a record producer I would have kept these tracks and use others to complete it
(Hard Skool, Absurd, Eye On You, State of Grace...)

[PermissionToLand]

basically good songs which sound bad because they are overproduced, too much cut and paste, abuse of pro tools, too many people who come and go from musicians to producers. Something I've said many times.

If u listen to hard school and even absurd (if you can get rid of all the effects) u can feel how the songs are more tight even if they are a rework of a couple of old songs. Because people need to play togheter and go straight to the point.

It's a little too pompous (as example the neverending outros) but it's Axl Rose work so u are ready for it.

I see this said a lot, but I never see any specifics. Where do you hear a cut and paste? What exactly makes it "overproduced"? What's wrong with pro tools and how is that audible on the record?

Producers came and went in the early stages, but the final product was Axl & Caram's work, and has a consistent sonic footprint throughout.

It was also one of the rare albums that broke with the trend of brickwalling (AKA the loudness wars), and has a high dynamic range as a result. To criticize the production is strange, it's very well done. IDK why "overproduction" has become a catchall term for "includes instruments that I dislike".

[dsaddler78]

I can't speak for the above poster but I believe he is referring to the song "scraped" when saying it is cut and paste vocals. With that said, I also love the album. I wouldn't say over produced, maybe just tinkered with to much? Just my opinion though

[D-GenerationX]

I can't speak for the above poster but I believe he is referring to the song "scraped" when saying it is cut and paste vocals. With that said, I also love the album. I wouldn't say over produced, maybe just tinkered with to much? Just my opinion though

Oh, it's overproduced.  Might be the best example of the concept of "too many cooks".  Doesn't disqualify it though.

Look at that original demo of the title track.  If anyone has not heard the demo, it's basically the same version we hear at RIR III.  Tight, 3 minute rocker.   I think it's excellent.  The RIR III version is the one I put on playlists.

Now compare it to the version on the album.  Long melodramatic intro.  Double tracked vocals.  Which, while hardly a first for Axl, really takes away some of the power of the song here.  Does the added guitar work really add to the song?  Or just make it longer?

The versions of 'Chinese Democracy', 'Madagascar', and 'Street Of Dreams' we hear at RIR III in 2001 give you great hope.

Do you honestly think any of them *improved* by the time we got their studio versions in 2008?

[Carlos Gunner]

I don't know why but it feels a bit of a depressing album now,
I just listen to some of the songs (Better, Twat, Shackler, This I love & Prostitute)

as a record producer I would have kept these tracks and use others to complete it
(Hard Skool, Absurd, Eye On You, State of Grace...)

I do like the album but I think those days were dark for Axl.

[Carlos Gunner]

I can't speak for the above poster but I believe he is referring to the song "scraped" when saying it is cut and paste vocals. With that said, I also love the album. I wouldn't say over produced, maybe just tinkered with to much? Just my opinion though

Oh, it's overproduced.  Might be the best example of the concept of "too many cooks".  Doesn't disqualify it though.

Look at that original demo of the title track.  If anyone has not heard the demo, it's basically the same version we hear at RIR III.  Tight, 3 minute rocker.   I think it's excellent.  The RIR III version is the one I put on playlists.

Now compare it to the version on the album.  Long melodramatic intro.  Double tracked vocals.  Which, while hardly a first for Axl, really takes away some of the power of the song here.  Does the added guitar work really add to the song?  Or just make it longer?

The versions of 'Chinese Democracy', 'Madagascar', and 'Street Of Dreams' we hear at RIR III in 2001 give you great hope.

Do you honestly think any of them *improved* by the time we got their studio versions in 2008?

I prefer Madagascar's RIR3 version.

[PermissionToLand]

Look at that original demo of the title track.  If anyone has not heard the demo, it's basically the same version we hear at RIR III.  Tight, 3 minute rocker.   I think it's excellent.  The RIR III version is the one I put on playlists.

Now compare it to the version on the album.  Long melodramatic intro.  Double tracked vocals.  Which, while hardly a first for Axl, really takes away some of the power of the song here.  Does the added guitar work really add to the song?  Or just make it longer?

Double tracked vocals are "overproduction"? Somebody alert Freddie Mercury! Hell, somebody tell Axl on UYI and AFD.

The only added guitar work that makes the song longer is the 2nd solo. How is that a bad thing? Nobody complains about Slash doing 2 solos on Estranged.

The only other changes are some riffs in the verses that fill it out from the empty sound at RIR and outro solos.

The versions of 'Chinese Democracy', 'Madagascar', and 'Street Of Dreams' we hear at RIR III in 2001 give you great hope.

The changes are so minimal, it amazes me that the common refrain is that they were "ruined" instead of "what did he spend all that time doing when they're 99% the same?"

I bet y'all would be saying the same thing if you heard an unfinished live version of Paradise City without the synths before AFD released. Rock fans can be so predictable sometimes.

But I guess Madagascar is okay to have a "long melodramatic intro" because it was already part of it in 2001.

Do you honestly think any of them *improved* by the time we got their studio versions in 2008?

In terms of actual production, not just artistic choices you dislike? Unquestionably.

[D-GenerationX]

I prefer Madagascar's RIR3 version.

Me too.

But, if I am being honest, I also played the absolute shit out of that concert when I got it.  And I got it soon after the show.  So I had literal YEARS where they were the only versions of the new songs I had.  It's what I got used to.

Does that cloud my take on the finished product.  Probably does with 'Madagascar' as RIR III and CD aren't all that different.  But the album's title track and 'The Blues' (as we all thought it was called for years) are, in my opinion, almost different versions of the songs.

[D-GenerationX]

The changes are so minimal, it amazes me that the common refrain is that they were "ruined" instead of "what did he spend all that time doing when they're 99% the same?"

Let me give you another example, which I think bolsters your argument.

The vocal track on 'I.R.S.' is literally from 1999.  All that tweaking, he never touched that.  Now, it's one of my favorite tracks on the album.  I also think it's a strong vocal, and didn't need any retouches.

But there is an example of the tinkering helping, I think.  I think the added guitar parts on that song finished product enhance it greatly.

[rebelhipi]

I can't speak for the above poster but I believe he is referring to the song "scraped" when saying it is cut and paste vocals. With that said, I also love the album. I wouldn't say over produced, maybe just tinkered with to much? Just my opinion though

Oh, it's overproduced.  Might be the best example of the concept of "too many cooks".  Doesn't disqualify it though.

Look at that original demo of the title track.  If anyone has not heard the demo, it's basically the same version we hear at RIR III.  Tight, 3 minute rocker.   I think it's excellent.  The RIR III version is the one I put on playlists.

Now compare it to the version on the album.  Long melodramatic intro.  Double tracked vocals.  Which, while hardly a first for Axl, really takes away some of the power of the song here.  Does the added guitar work really add to the song?  Or just make it longer?

The versions of 'Chinese Democracy', 'Madagascar', and 'Street Of Dreams' we hear at RIR III in 2001 give you great hope.

Do you honestly think any of them *improved* by the time we got their studio versions in 2008?

Chinese. I prefer the final 2008 version. Because i like the double solo thats missing from the 2001 verison, and i prefer Franks drum beat over Brains, also i dig the intro.
Street Of Dreams i prefer the 2008 version. Because the intro of the song is better on the album comparred to the ''stop and start'' of the 2001 verison.
Madagascar is a tie. Maybe a slight preference to the Boston 2002 live version. No big differences. Both are 6/5

[D-GenerationX]

Chinese. I prefer the final 2008 version. Because i like the double solo thats missing from the 2001 verison, and i prefer Franks drum beat over Brains, also i dig the intro.
Street Of Dreams i prefer the 2008 version. Because the intro of the song is better on the album comparred to the ''stop and start'' of the 2001 verison.
Madagascar is a tie. Maybe a slight preference to the Boston 2002 live version. No big differences. Both are 6/5

That 2002 Boston show is excellent.  And yes, 'Madagascar' a particular standout.

[rebelhipi]

Chinese. I prefer the final 2008 version. Because i like the double solo thats missing from the 2001 verison, and i prefer Franks drum beat over Brains, also i dig the intro.
Street Of Dreams i prefer the 2008 version. Because the intro of the song is better on the album comparred to the ''stop and start'' of the 2001 verison.
Madagascar is a tie. Maybe a slight preference to the Boston 2002 live version. No big differences. Both are 6/5

That 2002 Boston show is excellent.  And yes, 'Madagascar' a particular standout.

Yes!
Remember the fan made music video made from it?
It was introduction to the song and i have a sweet spot for it. And the video could honestly be official its so good.

A shame that they never did videos for it.

[rebelhipi]

Found it!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpPyFNNgyC8

(Bad quality and spanish lyrics.)

[ITARocker]

basically good songs which sound bad because they are overproduced, too much cut and paste, abuse of pro tools, too many people who come and go from musicians to producers. Something I've said many times.

If u listen to hard school and even absurd (if you can get rid of all the effects) u can feel how the songs are more tight even if they are a rework of a couple of old songs. Because people need to play togheter and go straight to the point.

It's a little too pompous (as example the neverending outros) but it's Axl Rose work so u are ready for it.

I see this said a lot, but I never see any specifics. Where do you hear a cut and paste? What exactly makes it "overproduced"? What's wrong with pro tools and how is that audible on the record?

Producers came and went in the early stages, but the final product was Axl & Caram's work, and has a consistent sonic footprint throughout.

It was also one of the rare albums that broke with the trend of brickwalling (AKA the loudness wars), and has a high dynamic range as a result. To criticize the production is strange, it's very well done. IDK why "overproduction" has become a catchall term for "includes instruments that I dislike".

It's not easy to explain, it's more of a feeling when i listen to the songs... An example that always comes to my mind...The guitar slide during the break of better: it's been attached after (years) they completed the song using a different guitar with a different setting compared to the rest of the song: that wasnt really needed and that sounds "out of the context" (i mean the context of the mix). But you can hear these things everywhere. Plus many songs sound artificially complicated while they are really "flat", it's like adding here and there everything that comes to mind just to build the song (ex: madagascar). I think it happens cause the songs were built probably on a laptop before they were brought into a rehearsal studio (if they were ever brought into the studio...). And that's why them sound better live, because some things come more naturally when u play the songs with other people and not while you're sitting in your room working alone on a track sent by email. I think this could work better for e certain type of music where even the "fake sound" is pretty normal (hip hop) but when it comes to rock, un can't lose the dynamics and the interactions between musicians, throwing a cut/past/rebuilt solo (ex: remember what happened to the brian may's solo) on a song played by another guy, and so on. I don't know if everybody can hear that. But I can. It's not about the thousands of layers, the neverending outros etc (we are talking about axl rose at the end of the day)... It's the way the songs are built trough the years and a never ending process.

If i had to find a couple of songs which sound good because people worked on them without any waste of time, in a short amount of time and straight to the point i would say shackler and sorry. But that's it.

[Wooody]

Most of the songs from CHIDEM are better live.... it's a shame we don't have a live album.

I hate madagascar on the record, love RIR. Same with This I love.

[PermissionToLand]

It's not easy to explain, it's more of a feeling when i listen to the songs... An example that always comes to my mind...The guitar slide during the break of better: it's been attached after (years) they completed the song using a different guitar with a different setting compared to the rest of the song: that wasnt really needed and that sounds "out of the context" (i mean the context of the mix). But you can hear these things everywhere. Plus many songs sound artificially complicated while they are really "flat"

The 2006 leak of Better had a weird synth part where the guitar slide is. I guarantee you if it was the other way around and a guitar was replaced with a synth, everyone would be saying the opposite. It just reeks of such contrarianism and groupthink to me.

Again, we come back to vague terms like "artificially complicated" and "flat". What makes it "flat", exactly? I've pointed out the low compression levels that actually allow the sound to breathe more than most modern albums that are brickwalled.

it's like adding here and there everything that comes to mind just to build the song (ex: madagascar). I think it happens cause the songs were built probably on a laptop before they were brought into a rehearsal studio (if they were ever brought into the studio...). And that's why them sound better live, because some things come more naturally when u play the songs with other people and not while you're sitting in your room working alone on a track sent by email. I think this could work better for e certain type of music where even the "fake sound" is pretty normal (hip hop) but when it comes to rock, un can't lose the dynamics and the interactions between musicians, throwing a cut/past/rebuilt solo (ex: remember what happened to the brian may's solo) on a song played by another guy, and so on. I don't know if everybody can hear that. But I can. It's not about the thousands of layers, the neverending outros etc (we are talking about axl rose at the end of the day)... It's the way the songs are built trough the years and a never ending process.

What was changed in Madagascar? At RIR 2001 it already had all the sound clips of quotes in the middle section.

Do you know for a fact that the songs were written by sending clips back and forth? They spent a ton of money on studio time, why would they not use it? Axl wasn't there singing with the live band when they recorded AFD either. Most artists don't work that way. Same goes for solos. They are recorded after the band lays down a rhythm section. That's how all the classic GNR albums were recorded. Do you really think they all just went into the studio and recorded AFD like a live performance?

[ITARocker]

It's not easy to explain, it's more of a feeling when i listen to the songs... An example that always comes to my mind...The guitar slide during the break of better: it's been attached after (years) they completed the song using a different guitar with a different setting compared to the rest of the song: that wasnt really needed and that sounds "out of the context" (i mean the context of the mix). But you can hear these things everywhere. Plus many songs sound artificially complicated while they are really "flat"

The 2006 leak of Better had a weird synth part where the guitar slide is. I guarantee you if it was the other way around and a guitar was replaced with a synth, everyone would be saying the opposite. It just reeks of such contrarianism and groupthink to me.

Again, we come back to vague terms like "artificially complicated" and "flat". What makes it "flat", exactly? I've pointed out the low compression levels that actually allow the sound to breathe more than most modern albums that are brickwalled.

it's like adding here and there everything that comes to mind just to build the song (ex: madagascar). I think it happens cause the songs were built probably on a laptop before they were brought into a rehearsal studio (if they were ever brought into the studio...). And that's why them sound better live, because some things come more naturally when u play the songs with other people and not while you're sitting in your room working alone on a track sent by email. I think this could work better for e certain type of music where even the "fake sound" is pretty normal (hip hop) but when it comes to rock, un can't lose the dynamics and the interactions between musicians, throwing a cut/past/rebuilt solo (ex: remember what happened to the brian may's solo) on a song played by another guy, and so on. I don't know if everybody can hear that. But I can. It's not about the thousands of layers, the neverending outros etc (we are talking about axl rose at the end of the day)... It's the way the songs are built trough the years and a never ending process.

What was changed in Madagascar? At RIR 2001 it already had all the sound clips of quotes in the middle section.

Do you know for a fact that the songs were written by sending clips back and forth? They spent a ton of money on studio time, why would they not use it? Axl wasn't there singing with the live band when they recorded AFD either. Most artists don't work that way. Same goes for solos. They are recorded after the band lays down a rhythm section. That's how all the classic GNR albums were recorded. Do you really think they all just went into the studio and recorded AFD like a live performance?

That's not what i was saying. I'm not naive, i know how it works. But take Hard school as an example, which is "just" a reworked song. When i first listened to the leak i started mentally to chop the song (this part, that part, the intro was made later etc etc) i felt the song was a "complicated" effort to build up something over an easy base. Take the new version reworked by 2 people who works togheter from the dawn of time. They first cut the "artificial things" made just to make the song longer (the intro, which it was even a nice one but it just didn't belong ot the song), changed the weak solo and go straight to the point, that's their take they wanted the song to sound that way and that's it, boom. The result is a tight song which works, even with the cut past vocals coming from another song (the "hey hey" part).. Because the base is solid, and it doesnt come from 300 different people and their 100000 efforts.

Now the RIR thing. Why, generally speaking, people likes more MAdagascar RIR 3 "softer and darkest" (and even weaker in a sense) version of he song? Because the song was meant to sound that way, with that industrial sound and atmosphere, cause people involved at that point were supposed to use that sound and it worked better, in a sense. But fans wanted gnr sound (the classic one) so axl changed idea. He gave up the industrial vibe, pitman was the second frontman and suddenly became the useless tamburine man. Somehow I think it really went downhill from there in axl's mind: how we can manage these industrial songs and make them more hard rock?  If you take the cd final version is actually the original industrial song with all its industrial effects and guitars volume turned down and heavier rock guitars pasted all over it. It's the way you work on a song? really? This is what i call overproduction: you have all these songs parts (maybe made years ago), or almost ended songs but you're  not satisfied with them so u keep adding things (and u barely remove the other things, so you have 400000 layers) just trying to make them better, But it doesn't fully work.  Because u don't have really a clear idea on how the songs should be, how the songs should sound like etc.

Now don't focus on these examples i made, it's just a general speaking, the "vibe" i have listening to cd. Maybe it's just me, but i think i'm not that far from the truth.

[jarmo]

But take Hard school as an example, which is "just" a reworked song. When i first listened to the leak i started mentally to chop the song (this part, that part, the intro was made later etc etc) i felt the song was a "complicated" effort to build up something over an easy base.

Serious question. Do you do this with every song?

Over the years, I've noticed that many GN'R songs are like multiple songs in one. Would Patience be a great song without that end? What about Rocket Queen? Paradise City without the sped up outro?

My point is that this is a common theme through the band's history. Songs are multiple ideas put together into one. Somehow it works...




/jarmo

[ITARocker]

But take Hard school as an example, which is "just" a reworked song. When i first listened to the leak i started mentally to chop the song (this part, that part, the intro was made later etc etc) i felt the song was a "complicated" effort to build up something over an easy base.

Serious question. Do you do this with every song?

Over the years, I've noticed that many GN'R songs are like multiple songs in one. Would Patience be a great song without that end? What about Rocket Queen? Paradise City without the sped up outro?

My point is that this is a common theme through the band's history. Songs are multiple ideas put together into one. Somehow it works...




/jarmo

Not at all, but It's something that happens automatically when the song doesn't flow like it should. As i said, when i listen to the song "sorry" i think that's a good song which sounds right, i can't feel that something has been forced into it, attached or whatever. We know s. bach vocals were put later into the song, but you don't even notice that, because the song stands by itself in the right way. It sounds solid, well written and produced. The effects fit into the atmosphere of the song. it's just all right, i can say that song didn't change hands many times.

I mean, It's all about to work on an idea , focus on that idea, stick with it and have a fuckin' result. Obviously you can add things, change things etc. but to fullfill the songs with too many things for too many years or to revisit it every 2 years with different people it becomes  a nightmare. It's not a casuality that u take as an example 3 songs coming from the first years of the band: the same 5 people.

I would say You can even "overproduce" a song even by your own, when you start to overthink about it. You can undestand better  when u play an instrument and u try to turn into music your ideas.

I tell you this personal story...I had this song 20 years ago (omg) with this catchy riff  inspired by the song " i need you tonight" by inxs. So...it started with a drum loop, simple wha solo without distortion and then the riff kicks in.

Again "simple" song, catchy riff built having that inxs song in mind, ok?

I started to think that maybe it was "too simple"

After 2/3 years it had this intro made with synths and 2 orchestra instruments, the easy wha solo without distorsion became a ultra distorted shred solo. The simple riff had all these effects to "reinforce it". ANd why not having  a full string  orchestra playing trough all the song? Oh i forgot the piano during the break...
Result: the song sounded ok(it was never finished, like many of the other songs i made  ) but the "catchy riff" was buried by all the other things. The original idea was completely lost.

I havent listened to this song for many years when 3 years ago i started to listen again to the old song i made (now i dont even try to record "new" music, i have no time, i just play guitar and piano in my room and thats it) and this song comes to my ears... You know what? The first version sounded better, hands down.

[PermissionToLand]

That's not what i was saying. I'm not naive, i know how it works. But take Hard school as an example, which is "just" a reworked song. When i first listened to the leak i started mentally to chop the song (this part, that part, the intro was made later etc etc) i felt the song was a "complicated" effort to build up something over an easy base. Take the new version reworked by 2 people who works togheter from the dawn of time. They first cut the "artificial things" made just to make the song longer (the intro, which it was even a nice one but it just didn't belong ot the song), changed the weak solo and go straight to the point, that's their take they wanted the song to sound that way and that's it, boom. The result is a tight song which works, even with the cut past vocals coming from another song (the "hey hey" part)..

You wouldn't have even thought to try to mentally chop the song if you didn't know how the sausage was made. I guarantee you there is far more cutting and pasting in AFD than you would even imagine. This idea that any song/album is recorded all at once is just not how it works.

Why is any kind of intro always called "artificial"? What makes the intro to November Rain "natural"? The strings in that are just as synthetic as the synths in Madagascar.

I doubt Slash and Duff cut the intro, that's not their part so not really their decision. If you like Slash's solo better, that's fine but it doesn't make the previous one somehow "bloated". The only structural change at all was removing the intro. How is that some significant change that "goes straight to the point"? They could have cut out the entire breakdown, which I bet you'd be arguing was "bloated" if they did.

Because the base is solid, and it doesnt come from 300 different people and their 100000 efforts.

Yeah, now it comes from 300 +2 people...

This is the kind of hyperbole I was talking about. Nobody can specifically call out their actual criticisms, it's always just vague hyperbole.

Now the RIR thing. Why, generally speaking, people likes more MAdagascar RIR 3 "softer and darkest" (and even weaker in a sense) version of he song? Because the song was meant to sound that way, with that industrial sound and atmosphere, cause people involved at that point were supposed to use that sound and it worked better, in a sense.

Says who? Obviously it wasn't meant to sound that way since they changed it.

But fans wanted gnr sound (the classic one) so axl changed idea. He gave up the industrial vibe, pitman was the second frontman and suddenly became the useless tamburine man. Somehow I think it really went downhill from there in axl's mind: how we can manage these industrial songs and make them more hard rock?  If you take the cd final version is actually the original industrial song with all its industrial effects and guitars volume turned down and heavier rock guitars pasted all over it. It's the way you work on a song? really? This is what i call overproduction: you have all these songs parts (maybe made years ago), or almost ended songs but you're  not satisfied with them so u keep adding things

This is some wild speculation. How is the final version in any way going back to classic GNR? Since when does Axl give a crap what anyone else thinks about his vision?

So your idea of "overproduction" is... making the guitars louder?

So if we take a lick that was added to a song the same week the rest of it was recorded, but instead add that same exact lick a year later, that makes it somehow worse? Even though it's the exact same thing? And you can hear the difference somehow? Adding layers is only okay if it's done within a week? A month? Or are layers bad in general?

(and u barely remove the other things, so you have 400000 layers) just trying to make them better, But it doesn't fully work.  

More hyperbole. What you ignore is how the layers are spaced out. You never have more than a couple extra layers playing at the same time; it's a lick here, a synth there, and they all are quite deliberately fit into the song's structure. It's not like they're haphazardly crammed in where they don't fit. It amazes me how people act like Axl wasn't thinking when he put it together over those many years.

Because u don't have really a clear idea on how the songs should be, how the songs should sound like etc.

Of course, legendary artist Axl Rose doesn't, but you do.

[jarmo]

Not at all, but It's something that happens automatically when the song doesn't flow like it should.

Which is what I pointed out. Songs sometimes aren't as straightforward so it doesn't "flow like it should". Instead they take a different route, it goes somewhere unexpected.





/jarmo

[ITARocker]

I think i made my point really clear, if u want to get the general meaning of it it's ok,  oththerwise I don't care.

But at least i want to focus on this:

Now the RIR thing. Why, generally speaking, people likes more MAdagascar RIR 3 "softer and darkest" (and even weaker in a sense) version of he song? Because the song was meant to sound that way, with that industrial sound and atmosphere, cause people involved at that point were supposed to use that sound and it worked better, in a sense.

Says who? Obviously it wasn't meant to sound that way since they changed it.

My ears say that.

You don't pick robin finck, chris pitman and buckethead to play hard rock. The only song between old gnr and new gnr is OH MY GOD (dave navarro, josh freese). You already forgot that? You already forgot the NIN obsession axl had? really? It's pretty clear that a lot of the songs they made (i won't say all the songs, of course) before CD had at least an industrial vibe. Already forgot silkworms (Aka absurd)? And the first chinese democracy of RIR III (remember how dark and cacophonic was robin finck guitar and the general atmosphere? And let's talk about brain's drumming). And the abuse of the synths on that stage? The songs were born to sound that way. And I don't won't to argue about that, because facts are facts. As it's a fact that they tried to give a different vibe to the songs from appetite, and after a little the classic songs had their classic sound again. You want to deny that?

[AdZ]

You don't pick robin finck, chris pitman and buckethead to play hard rock.

While I see your argument, and don't agree with it, this statement is the real weird part.

Have you ever listened to the guitar parts Robin would play live with NIN? There's a lot of things in here [link]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIPPwkfa3YE[/link] that would definitely make me hire him for my hard rock band.

There's a lot of heavy Buckethead stuff too...

[Wooody]

Yeah in 2006 when he was wearing a garbage bag over his body, glasses and beard, Robin was a full on rocker.

[ITARocker]

You don't pick robin finck, chris pitman and buckethead to play hard rock.

While I see your argument, and don't agree with it, this statement is the real weird part.

Have you ever listened to the guitar parts Robin would play live with NIN? There's a lot of things in here [link]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIPPwkfa3YE[/link] that would definitely make me hire him for my hard rock band.

There's a lot of heavy Buckethead stuff too...

gosh,,, doesnt matter what I say You always twist my words…Where did I say robin finck can’t play hard rock? I just said axl was obsessed wit NIN and ta dah he picked robin finck to play what? A better cover of mama kim? It’s like when people feel that frank ferrer doesn’t fit. Of course he can play drums, but he comes from another musical culture, and u can fuckin hear it cause when steven joins everything changes...and let's talk about taylor hawkins on it's easy…You pick a certain kind of musician because u want to play a certain kind of music. end of the story. Robin  (the best pick ever in the "new gnr" era imho. it's the only 1 i really miss because it was the only 1 who could bring a true different sound and style) in Rock in Rio III and at the house of blues show had his best sound. After that, he softened it to suit better a more classic gnr sound.

[AdZ]

I literally read your words and replied to them  There was no twisting. I disagreed with you, and supplied evidence for my disagreement.

[PermissionToLand]

I think i made my point really clear, if u want to get the general meaning of it it's ok,  oththerwise I don't care.

And my entire point was asking for specifics. Not sure why you chose to respond to that with vague generalizing.

You don't pick robin finck, chris pitman and buckethead to play hard rock. The only song between old gnr and new gnr is OH MY GOD (dave navarro, josh freese). You already forgot that? You already forgot the NIN obsession axl had? really? It's pretty clear that a lot of the songs they made (i won't say all the songs, of course) before CD had at least an industrial vibe. Already forgot silkworms (Aka absurd)? And the first chinese democracy of RIR III (remember how dark and cacophonic was robin finck guitar and the general atmosphere? And let's talk about brain's drumming). And the abuse of the synths on that stage? The songs were born to sound that way. And I don't won't to argue about that, because facts are facts. As it's a fact that they tried to give a different vibe to the songs from appetite, and after a little the classic songs had their classic sound again. You want to deny that?

It seems you didn't read a word I wrote and are just responding to some strawman in your head.

Making the guitars louder does not suddenly change the entire genre of a song. None of these songs were ever purely industrial, they were always industrial rock. Industrial rock still has loud guitars. I want what you're smoking...

Funny how you're bouncing back and forth between saying that it's bad when they removed synths but also bad when they added them. Axl is damned if he does, damned if he doesn't.

Was Rocket Queen a better song when it was just a riff in Slash and Duff's band Road Crew, before it was combined with the outro from another song and all those evil layers were added? I'm sure you only listen to the 1990 demos of unfinished UYI songs and never the finished versions, right? The 10 minute long Sound City version of November Rain?

[ITARocker]

Funny how you're bouncing back and forth between saying that it's bad when they removed synths but also bad when they added them. Axl is damned if he does, damned if he doesn't.

Lol when did i say that? I never said that. You misread. When i talk about the "abuse" of synth on stage is obviosuly paradoxical, it's not negative because it was a choice made by them for those songs, and i accept it, ok? (I actually like those "dark" versions of the songs). those songs were almost ready at that point because even axl said quote "let's see you next summer whith a bunch of new songs".  Why it took another 8 years to have the final album? maybe the boss wasn't satisfied with the sound or just changed idea? IT'S OK, i can understand that. But i think that u can understand that maybe if they took them semi-industrial songs, and they start to do something like this: "ok buck try to play a solo here" and after 50 takes they cut/past parts of his solos in order to have the final one, then AFTER YEARS bumble joins "ok bumble we have 4 guitars here, but the song still sounds empty put your guitar there" and everything is pretty like that and built all over pre-existing "industrial" songs (with some elements, like the synths, turned down), how can't you hear the "overproduced" thing? What's the meaning of having brain telling us those crazy stories about his drum kits and at the end of the day we have those drums sounding like a drum machine on the album? It's not about "playing all togheter in the same room recording all at once", it's all about having a decent amount of ideas put togheter by almost the same people in a decent time frame. Just this. That's why even absurd and hard school sound fresh and tight...then we can talk about this and about that, but generally speaking how can't you hear that those songs were a troubled birth? When u work like this, the songs lose their dynamics, they sound more an engineering product (bad or good) than a spontaneous work coming from the interaction between musicians. It can work for some music genre (hip hop and the industrial one -here we go-) but it can't work for everything. That's why i actually like those songs but i prefer the live versions... Catcher in the rye is one of my favourite song EVER and i can't listen to it on the album. it gives me a headache. Axl's voice is so reworked that it sounds like an instrument more than a voice (can you hear his vocal cords vibrating? because i can't...)...all those instruments to make your "wall of sound" and at the end of the day the song is focused on axl's voice/chorus and the (weak) drums only.