You are not logged in. Please register or login.

RussTCB
 Rep: 633 

Re: Stuck Inside

RussTCB wrote:

removed

James
 Rep: 612 

Re: Stuck Inside

James wrote:
russtcb wrote:

So.... back on the subject of Stuck Inside and the quality of it:

I like it alot and I agree that it's better then most of whats on rock radio these days. Bach's never been a great lyricist and I think that's the songs weakest point. Also, while I think Axl sounds great on it, I find him to be a distraction in the song. Like it almost would've been better with just Bach on this one.

I agree. His presence is out of place. He comes in at about the middle point, and the song doesn't really do anything or go anywhere. Its like it just exists for the purpose of existing. I do think its Baz's best solo track though.


As far as the lyrics, there was a reason that he wasn't a primary songwriter in Skid Row.:haha:

monkeychow
 Rep: 634 

Re: Stuck Inside

monkeychow wrote:
buzzsaw wrote:

The obvious:
1) Baz is washed up.

Why? I would agree if this song was far below the music he used to make. But to me this sounds like it could be on any of the records that made him famous. So he hasn't lost his gifts. Unless your saying he is washed up cos he hasn't evolved to a new style - in which case maybe you have something. But then who wants baz to start sounding like J. Timberlake or something? Not me. And besides...sometimes sticking to what you do best rocks - ala Ac/Dc!!

buzzsaw wrote:

The obvious:
2) Baz used Axl to sell albums for him.

Baz likes Axl's voice, and wanted him on the album cos he likes his singing, he is friends with the guy, and yeah - will help his record sell. Why is that a problem?

buzzsaw wrote:

3) Axl's performances on the songs are below the standards he's set for himself when he last released albums.

I think this is my problem with what you've been saying in these threads. I'd agree in the sence that its not the best song he has ever recorded. But like - its not even his own songs - he's just helping out a friends tracks - if everything you do has to be groundbreaking and the best ever then you create a barrier that prevents new material from even existing.

So i'd say firstly - dont judge a Sebastian record on the basis of a GNR record - think of it more as an Axl cameo in Skid Row land...and 2 - theres nothing wrong with a few fun songs that have some cool screams and stuff in them. Doesnt mean he wont go on to make another Estranged in his own time.

I'd say most arts can do things in different styles, don't condem axl to only being aloud to remake UYI over and over again. To me its this insistance that he has to live up to some preset standard that is more likely to hard CD comming out than if he was to cameo on a record that floped (assuming it did).

buzzsaw wrote:

4) The album will fail.

Depends what you mean by fail. Sure i dont think it will be #1 on the charts and destroy the world. But does anyone? i would expect it to sell well amongst hard rock fans, and do well the way stuff like Black Label Society does - to a particualr audience.

buzzsaw wrote:

5) The media will lump Axl is with Baz when the album fails.
6) Axl's already fragile ego will take another hit which will not help the possible release of CD.

Well...i dunno...would Axl feel responsible if Baz's album failed? I mean its not like he wrong the songs for Baz. And as i stated earlier I think its this kind of reasoning if anything that would hurt Axl's ego. But to be honest - I think in the end he doesnt care too much what people think - you do what you think is best as an artist and hope people agree.

buzzsaw wrote:

7) The few vocal fans that support Axl no matter what he does will blast me for this post.

Well i'm not one of those. I have some issues with lots of stuff GNR and Axl has done. Myself i'm a fan of Axl's singing, a fan of Slash's playing and a fan of sebastian. I think they're all great musos - but that doesnt mean everything they do is perfect - and doesnt mean they always make great decisions in their personal lives (eg drugs etc). But hey - we're all human.

Anyway...all i'm saying is that i'm someone who disagrees with what you've said. As i genuinely am enjoying these songs. Maybe i'm a minority though..maybe theres more of you than me. Who knows smile

Re: Stuck Inside

Baz is Baz he isn't going to change his style it's pointless to keep going on about that.   Axl guested on these songs as a favor to Baz, this isn't a GNR album that will need to get reviewed as such.   If you like 80's music, I can't see how a band of today making 80's sounding music would get bashed for not moving on, if you liked Skid Row with Sabastian I can't understand how you would not like him now.   His following of fans love the fact he hasn't changed his style and they will be the core of him selling albums not Axl and IMO if the albums sales do horrendous, it will only be people that are already complaining that will blame Axl for the poor album sales when it's not Axl that should make or brake the sales.

I also agree that Axl does come in, in an odd way but that scream is awesome!

RussTCB
 Rep: 633 

Re: Stuck Inside

RussTCB wrote:

removed

sandman
 Rep: 30 

Re: Stuck Inside

sandman wrote:

good song. i actually like everything except the chorus. for me, that's where it really sounds dated. but the whole intro is awesome. i like the changes in tempo. some good guitar riffs. and alot of the song is really heavy - definitely something i will crank in my car, but i don't think this has a chance of being a radio hit. and axl sounds absolutely phenominal.

haven't heard the other songs so i can't compare. but i'd love to hear them!

buzzsaw
 Rep: 426 

Re: Stuck Inside

buzzsaw wrote:

What was good and cutting edge in the 80s is now dated and uninspired.  I still love the 80s music that was good in the 80s.  Part of that is it reminds me of good times, part of it is that I still enjoy that style of music for what it is.  It is now 2007.  I don't want to hear what was popular in 1987 recreated.  I want to hear what I liked in the 80s taken to a new level.  I want to hear growth as an artist.

If it was as simple as just making an album that is the same as everything you always did, once an artist becomes big, they would always be big.  It doesn't work that way.  Times change, music changes.  Bands that don't change become nostolgia acts, which I guess is fine.  Baz is a nostolgia act.  Axl (in my opinion) has turned Guns N' Roses into a nostolgia act and that is something that is almost impossible to emerge from and singing on Baz's album further solidifies Axl as a nostolgia act.  Why Guns N' Roses fans would think that's a good thing is something I'll never understand.

Re: Stuck Inside

Sky Dog wrote:

can you give me an example of a modern rock act that has taken rock to a "new" level?

buzzsaw
 Rep: 426 

Re: Stuck Inside

buzzsaw wrote:
madagas wrote:

can you give me an example of a modern rock act that has taken rock to a "new" level?

No.  Green Day or Matchbox Twenty have both grown (I guess) depending on what you call modern, but neither broke new ground.  That's a big reason why today's rock music sucks.  There are a couple bands from the 80s that have grown such as U2.  Bon Jovi managed to recreate itself as well, though they went a different route than I would have.  Duran Duran and Metallica have always evolved (for better or worse).  Rock music today sucks.  That doesn't mean I want to hear Baz and Axl pretending it's still 1986.

monkeychow
 Rep: 634 

Re: Stuck Inside

monkeychow wrote:

I think we can see what was good in the 80s taken to a new level through production recording technology - but I don't agree in terms of musical style.

That is - from an audio perspective I think TSI sounds better than AFD in that the latter mixing and recording techniques enabled the different parts of the tracks to sound cleaner and crisper. (However thats not to say that TSI is better than AFD or have better songs - i'm talking purely about production.)

As for music itself changing over the years, i could get into a much larger philosophical discussion. I mean some music, especially when a genre is new - does initally grow and evolve. Like say rap - you can listen to the early commerical rap artists like say NWA, and then listen to a modern rap song - and theres a clear progression in the musical form.

I think this is also true of metal and hard rock - you can go back to the earliest roots of stuff and watch changes. Like from Robert Johnston on an accoustic guitar, to early electric players, then came to people like black sabbath to make it heavier, then people like korn to tune down more. As an art form is new theres a lot of experemenation.

But there comes a time when everything is done, well i guess everything is never done, but where change for the sake of doing something new alone is perhaps not going to make anything of a better quality that using what was already found to be great. I think this is especially true of one artist. While its nice for an artist to grow - at some point you need to consider what your gifts are - and what things your best at doing. Like baz's lungs were born to make the rock style he does, should he move into some other art from like rap - (as he's been doing lol) he might be ok at it - but its not his real calling IMHO.

Anyway...so i'm saying that while some music does evolve over the years, theres also no harm in recgonsing what styles were good and going with them. Jazz and blues are old and cool. So is classic rock.

I agree GNR is getting nostalga in the sence that they arn't releasing new music and seem to tour based off the old albums. But at the same time - we have to accept that once a band did massive things 2o years ago - they become respected for that contribution. Like the rolling stones are.

But overall its not so much about Baz or Axl being nostalga - its more about fashion changing. Baz has ALWAYS been a rock demon with a killer scream and wicked range and a party animal stage presence. In the 1980s it was the done thing in popular culture to dig it. Apparently your saying its not in the 00s.

But myself I got it then, and I got it now, long live real rock and fucking roll!

EDIT: And i just wanna add to this by saying I dont think anyone is pretending its the 1980s - its just that some of us are comftorable with a hard rock genre and not self concious about music fashions.

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB