Guns n' Roses Announce Massive Box Set

The countdown clock ended and Guns n' Roses will release a massive box set to celebrate the reissue of Appetite for Destruction. The set will be out June 29th. The most exciting thing here is all the previously unreleased tracks -- 25 demos in all! The package will officially be called Appetite for Destruction: Locked and Loaded. You'll be able to get this set in a variety of formats. It comes with a big book and other stuff too like skull rings. Its already in the top 10 music sales on Amazon. You can pre-order now:

Appetite For Destruction [Super Deluxe Edition]

Guns N' Roses confirm rumors, detail massive 'Appetite for Destruction' box set including 25 previously unreleased demos https://t.co/IWrKwfXve1 pic.twitter.com/DVJUT9aXOD

— Rolling Stone (@RollingStone) May 4, 2018

Comments

[Gary]

Only $180?? I’ll take 4 or 5 and give the extras to random folks on the street for that “bargain price”. Although who am I to judge? Maybe Axl and Slash are donating proceeds to their favorite charity; “Rockstars without Private Islands”.

[Metalboy!]

What? No DVD of previously unreleased Pro-Shot Video of that era from Axl’s private collection?

Still. I’ll probably cave for the unreleased tracks provided they are not just alternative mixes in the vein of what Page pulled with the latest round of Zep remasters.

[Metalboy!]

Okay, so I checked out the track listings, etc. with the link Allyson provided in her post ... Looks like there are a few treasures, a few covers like “Jumpin’ Jack Flash” and a previously unreleased video of “It’s So Easy” from 1989.

[stu]

wow. that’s a lot of stuff. do fans really want all the postcards and replica tickets, etc? personally i just want the tunes - so i can listen to them once and put the discs on the shelf to collect dust.

[Gogmagog]

The demos have been on youtube for ages now. They're interesting to listen to, as it gives a good glimpse into the transformation of ordinary songs into great ones, in some cases. Personally, the second half of Rocket Queen is my favorite of anything in the band's catalog, and it's clear from the demo that part of the song needed tons of additional work.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddKBIPA66_Y

Hardly worth $180, IMHO.

[Bkallday]

It's actually $1000. 😳😳😳

[Niklas]

Perhaps I missed it in the track listing, but it seems odd that the great "Crash Diet" is not included in the box set.

[fletch]

Question for regular commenters (Especially Him):

What are your thoughts about the song "One in a Million" being excluded from the re-release?

Is GNR avoiding controversy? Is this the Dawn of Armageddon? The Onset of Doomsday? The Birth of Apocalypse? A Day of Reckoning?

Or, are we now living in A Chinese Democracy?

[Him]

Fletch, I certainly think the song merits inclusion . . . as a song that reflects the band, particularly Axl, at that time (or as he reflected on who he was stepping off that bus). Is it homophobic? Yup. Racist? Yup. Is it more an issue now and less then? Yup. Does that make it, or now, better or worse? I suppose that is a matter of perspective (more on that in a minute).

Personally, I think it not being included is problematic on a host of levels. Many a great song from the past wouldn't pass muster these days ("Stranglehold" comes to mind). But that type of evaluation is mere presentism (to use a clunky academic term). It is also dangerous. To avoid the past because it doesn't comport with the present is to selectively pick and choose what counts as history.

At the same time, consider the song coming out now. Imagine the uproar it might cause (consider Kayne West's recent comments about slavery as a more contemporary, if somewhat different, example). To my mind, the song remains--as most songs do, even those we call 'timeless'--context-specific. The dicier issues is admitting you like the song. Then you have to defend what you like about it. I can do that fairly easily. But it begs a series of questions that often don't deserve an answer because they are predicated on, again, presentism.

On a more band-specific basis, I think it reflects poorly on GnR. It not being included is a calculated move in advance of any controversy. That isn't the GnR I fell in love with back in the day. I'd rather see them defend its inclusion than explain its exclusion. But I don't see much in what GnR does these days as anything more than calculation. Can you dance to it? Sure. But it don't swing like it used to swing. Besides, "Appetite for Permission" doesn't have the same ring to it.

Great question, Fletch. I wonder what others think. Well?