You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
#141 Guns N' Roses » Guns n roses played the general » 86 weeks ago
- dave-gnfnr
- Replies: 100
https://x.com/axlculture/status/1720281 … 21448?s=20
first clip of it
#142 Re: Guns N' Roses » The General and Monsters » 86 weeks ago
#143 Re: Guns N' Roses » The General and Monsters » 86 weeks ago
They played the general>
#144 Re: Guns N' Roses » The General and Monsters » 86 weeks ago
Obfuscation and excuses.
Dave, this isn't a court. Heard something is hearsay if you're talking about "so and so has this and that" rumours. Heard something is evidence if you've spoke at length with someone and heard some tracks over the phone. it's also really suspicious if you then go radio silent right after that.
I give up.
its not Obfuscation and excuses, you just misunderstood Dark and instead of admitting that, you are trying to blame him.
AGAIN most of us have heard that closing it on you "leak" yet no one KNOWS for sure if its GNR or not. You can think it is or that its not but no one KNOWS either way So just because you hear something that someone claims is GnR does not mean you KNOW its guns n roses unless you have SEEN good evidence to support it is.
This is all very basic stuff.
#145 Re: Guns N' Roses » The General and Monsters » 86 weeks ago
darknemus wrote:The band's lack of information flow puts everyone into such a desperate mode for, well, anything that often times, rational thinking goes out the window - I've been guilty of that, myself, on occasion. I don't know what you want me to 'help' with.. I share what I know when I learn it.. I openly speculate with other people (AND PROCLAIM IT AS OPEN SPECULATION) and I allow myself to be open to all possibilities.. even if I have become jaundiced by the lack of 'real info' when it comes to this clusterfuck of a band that somehow draws us together.. it is what it is.. que sera sera.
This and the previous post are a really complicated and word salady way of dodging what I pointed out and BB is on the right track.
You claimed to have heard other material on the phone in a chat with me and others. You were going to be following up on that and then completely ghosted.
The difference between "seen" and "heard", is just semantic word BS.
So, were you lying then and it was all bullshit (which has been my theory for a while but I could never figure out why bother with that) OR are you lying now?
How is it a word salad? I have known Dark for years, and he is very pedantic in how he speaks.
its just weird you dont understand the difference between someone saying oh I have heard what is claimed to be new GNR songs on the phone and then saying I don't KNOW if there are other songs out there.
And no it's not semantic word BS saying there is a difference between seen and heard something.
Seeing something means you have evidence for a claim
Heard something hersay is totally difference.
Try claiming that is semantics in a court setting you will be laughed out of court.
For example. Oh I heard guns n roses soundchecked the general tonight
But I have not SEEN any evidence of that.
If you dont know the difference then maybe you should learn. Its clear you are just confused yet you are trying to blame Dark.
#146 Re: Guns N' Roses » The General and Monsters » 86 weeks ago
So is the consensus here that The General is an older demo, not the version they were going to release last week, and has been manipulated by the leaker? The vocals in the bridge are muddy AF, and the chorus sounds like it was recorded on a cellphone, which is too bad- with proper production, that chorus could be really special.
As for Monster- sounds like Axl auditioning for VR - pass.
That is what I think for the most part but I love Monsters, I think its great and the best slash has done on the old songs so far.
If it is slash on Monsters I would be curious to hear the BH and Robin version to see how different it is
If its not slash and it is Robin, then I have been praising slash all this time for nothing and I will be shocked at how much Tommy and Robin sound like VR here.
#147 Re: Guns N' Roses » The General and Monsters » 86 weeks ago
dave-gnfnr wrote:It makes way more sense for it to be just the General. Because most times those types of records the songs will be between a max of 4 mins 30 seconds to about 6 minutes.
The songs combined are about 9 minutes. Would it even fit? If they squeezed it on there the quality would drop big time. Plus with Perhaps being just 4:48 and the general being 4:23 its a perfect match.
I didn't know that, I've never had a vinyl player so know nothing about them at all.
But why were the rights listings combined? That's unusual isn't it? And why did Fernando link them as well?
Those are just the suggesed max if you want the quality to be top notch. But the reason the record was delayed is because they were not happy with the recordings on the record. So maybe the tried to squeeze 9 mins onto one side and that is what the issue is. If the record is at spinning at 33rpm speed maybe they can squeeze it in under the wire.
Just to be clear, I am not saying that both songs wont be on the B side. I am just saying, it makes the most sense for it to not be there because it would make way more sense to have two 4 and half minute songs on each side. But like I said this is GNR and its ran by a house keeper and pool boy, so nothing they do ever makes sense.
I am just saying dont be disapointed if Monsters is not on there. But if it is then great.
#148 Re: Guns N' Roses » The General and Monsters » 86 weeks ago
dave-gnfnr wrote:monsterscantkillme wrote:then the debate on who played what on The General would be over. Then we would know if it is a duplicate of the demo or something different.
I still dont think Monsters will be on the record, just the General.
How? Everything points to it being on there, even if it's a hidden track, or just part of 'The General' with an interlude inbetween. The evidence is the rights listing of 'The General and Monsters' and Fernando's comment on Reddit that 'The General is a monster'. They're clearly very linked in some way.
I guess if it turns out not to be on the vinyl it'll suggest the band leaked it intentionally, wouldn't it?
Here is the thing, it would not make sense to be there bc of the vinyl espeicaly it being a 7 inch record.
It makes way more sense for it to be just the General. Because most times those types of records the songs will be between a max of 4 mins 30 seconds to about 6 minutes.
The songs combined are about 9 minutes. Would it even fit? If they squeezed it on there the quality would drop big time. Plus with Perhaps being just 4:48 and the general being 4:23 its a perfect match to just have the general on there. Lets say they fit Monsters on there, would they put perhaps on the A side twice? Or ust have all that unused space.
Now that being said, nothing GNR ever does makes sense, so both songs could be on there.
Also the band never leaks anything out, so they had nothing to do with this leak.
#149 Re: Guns N' Roses » The General and Monsters » 86 weeks ago
dave-gnfnr wrote:monsterscantkillme wrote:then the debate on who played what on The General would be over. Then we would know if it is a duplicate of the demo or something different.
I still dont think Monsters will be on the record, just the General.
If Monsters is left off does that mean Monsters isn't who the majority thinks it is?
No not necessarily
The only person who right not, without any offical word, can answer that is the leaker and where they got it from
#150 Re: Guns N' Roses » Oh My God Question » 86 weeks ago
I can't find OMG on Spotify. Why wouldn't it be on there?
does this work
https://open.spotify.com/track/0fOAaGXM … 950e4c4de4
