You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
#6671 Re: Guns N' Roses » The next two things to look forward to? » 924 weeks ago
thats why i dont think that this is a good idea for axl's resurrected career....he's putting the future success of GnR on the shoulders of Baz....
God help us all
Exactly. The possiblities of this ending up bad far outweigh the possibilities of this inspiring Axl to release CD.
#6672 Re: Guns N' Roses » KICKASS preview of Bach's album » 924 weeks ago
I don't understand how any gnr fan wouldn't be psyched to hear the original band was going to reunite, but there are people that feel that way. I don't care about Axl on Bach's album, it is meaningless. The possible bad things to come out of this far outweigh the good. One negative review by RS or Blender and we're back to the dead period for 4 more years of perfecting the vocals on CD. How ANY gnr fan is excited by that prospect is beyond me. Look a little further ahead than your nose.
#6673 Re: Guns N' Roses » KICKASS preview of Bach's album » 924 weeks ago
1 song would have been enough to draw attention. 3 is overkill, especially considering one is singing lead. There is more to this than just paying back a friend.
#6674 Re: Guns N' Roses » KICKASS preview of Bach's album » 924 weeks ago
buzzsaw wrote:When is the last time a singer did a solo album that had a guest singer do 3 songs on the same album and sing lead on one of them? Doesn't this raise red flags for anybody?
When was the last time a singer got Axl Rose to actually record vocals for an official release? Wouldn't you milk that for all it's worth.
I don't blame Bach for a second. Think about that though. Your solo album as a singer is supposed to be the best of the 21st century, but you have a more famous guy sing one of the songs and add vocals to 2 other songs? Something about that doesn't seem right. If it was me and I felt my material was that good, I sure wouldn't bring someone more famous to sing on it unless either the material isn't really that good or it is a cash grab. Either way, this isn't a good thing.
#6675 Re: Guns N' Roses » The next two things to look forward to? » 924 weeks ago
I am buying the CD. Not a huge Bach fan, but with Axl being on it, I want to see it be successful..
That's exactly what Bach is counting on.
#6676 Re: Guns N' Roses » KICKASS preview of Bach's album » 924 weeks ago
When is the last time a singer did a solo album that had a guest singer do 3 songs on the same album and sing lead on one of them? Doesn't this raise red flags for anybody?
#6677 Re: Guns N' Roses » If "Chinese Democracy" Was A Slash Thing...? » 924 weeks ago
If Slash owned the name, I think he would have gotten the same deal (not that it ever would have gotten to this point). They didn't make their investment in Axl and wouldn't have if he was working on a solo project. That is why Axl got the name - he knew that he had nothing without it.
#6678 Re: Guns N' Roses » KICKASS preview of Bach's album » 924 weeks ago
There's no chance that this album lives up to this review. None. There's no chance that an 80s singer that couldn't write lyrics comes back and has some fantastic album 20 years later. Axl on there is a publicity stunt and should tell you everything you need to know about the quality of the material.
#6679 Re: Guns N' Roses » The next two things to look forward to? » 924 weeks ago
I won't even be doing that.
#6680 Re: Dust N' Bones & Cyborg Slunks » Slash still isn't talking about Axl » 924 weeks ago
The questions will never go away, not that I blame people for asking. If Axl ever did interviews, he'd get asked about Slash all the time, which is probably one of the reasons he doesn't do interviews. Whether either of them likes it or not, they will forever be intertwined no matter what they do or don't accomplish the rest of their lives.