Motley Crue Not Releasing Final Album: 'Blame Radio'

Albums "fall on deaf ears" these days, Nikki Sixx explains.

Ultimate Guitar

Although Motley Crue's retirement plans included an album accompanying the massive global tour, Nikki Sixx recently stated that a full-length is an unlikely endeavor after all.

Chatting with Classic Rock, the bassist attributed such state of affairs to radio and the general reception of albums these days. As Sixx explained it, full-lengths "fall to deaf ears."

"We've written some songs," Nikki said. "But this is difficult to say and probably harder to hear: when you spend nine months working on an album, all the work that goes into it and recording it, mixing it, mastering it, then you release it and it falls on deaf ears."

Bashing radio stations, Sixx added, "Radio is so f--kin' formatted, if you don't have a banjo and a beard they're not playing you over here. If you're this kind of band at this stage of your career you can't be played on Active Rock; if you've been around for more than fifteen years you're classic rock, but classic rock radio doesn't play new music. You just think, 'F--k, man, this sucks.'"

Further explaining the decision to avoid releasing albums, the bassist concluded, "I have the belief that I would rather have less music reach more people through different opportunities, whether it be through movies, through sponsorships or co-sponsorships through integrated marketing with other types of companies that want to use your song specifically to reach tens of millions of people. I'd rather work on two songs under that plan than do eleven songs that only reach 100,000 people."

As reported, the band recently announced dates of farewell tour, also signing a contract banning future treks after 2015. Details and ticket info here.

Trending stories

105 comments sorted by best / new / date

comments policy
    I don't know if I should think "wow, what an arrogant prick not releasing an album because it won't be on the radio!" or "Somehow he has a point..."
    Is it just me, or is it kinda hypocritical that he's got a radio show, yet he's bashing radio.
    All his radio show plays is the same banjo-pickin' beard stroking music he bashed.
    It's a bit of both. It's somewhat ironic and hilarious that he's angry about current stylized trends getting all the attention, when that's exactly what his band used to be. It's also stupid to not release an album that you like just because you don't think it'll get radio play. However, he is right about modern rock and classic rock radio. Modern rock radio shouldn't just focus on new bands, but on new music. It's a big problem when a band is only hot for 3 years and then their stuff isn't new enough anymore to get radio play, even if they're still popular. Classic rock radio has the issue that their stuff isn't governed by a real style, just that it's older. If anything, they should be playing old stuff, but also work on finding bands that will be actually be classic rock in 20 years. Doesn't have to be all their content, but it would be a lot better than the current strategy many stations have of just play whatever was popular 15 years before, even if it's not great or doesn't fit in with the rest of their line up. (I mean, I don't know many people that actively listen to dad rock or 70s prog and then are okay with listening to a plethora of post-grunge or nu-metal.)
    I think it's both. But not releasing an album because it won't played on the radio seems silly to me. The radio is not the ultimate form of consuming music and less people are listening it then before anyways. Although the stations are stupid in the categorizations of what to play, it seems sillier to choose to make music based on what radio stations say.
    I am not a big 'Crue' fan but I agree with what he is saying. Regardless of the band, if they are 10 or more years old you will not hear anything from them on the newer stations and the 'Classic Rock' stations will only play old material. Look at John Fogerty who recently released an album. You will not hear any of it on the radio.
    Exactly...I feel sorry for younger music fans today. We used to have something called "album rock" mentality throughout the radio network and all songs on released albums could be played live on the radio. This led to more hit singles for the bands/musicians and it allowed the experience of enjoying more than what the record companies thought you should listen you only get to hear what some programming GEEK thinks is good...
    Not a bad thing.
    In other words, "we have nothing left."
    Right? It doesn't keep him from releasing albums with Sixx A.M. does it? I'm sure this speech is bull$h*t.
    Sixx A.M. is less than 15 years old so this is still in line with what he said about older bands (not old band members) getting less airplay with new music.
    What a wonderful attitude towards his fans. It's not going to be played on the radio? Alright, f*ck the fans, **** the people who fed us with money all the years, we're not going to release that thing. What should bands like Cannibal Corpse say? No radio - no album? Come on
    Guys like Tom Keifer and Slash are getting airplay on my local rock station, theyve been around 15+ years... Even Sabbaths new stuff is getting some airtime
    It's almost sad how out-of touch Nikki Sixx sounds in this interview. The 1980's and '90's were a long time ago. I understand that he's pining for the time when bands could win the major-label-contract-lottery and get offensively rich off of record sales but it's just not like that anymore (unless you're one of the selected few pop artists that major labels actually care about). Bottom Line - If you're a musician and are lucky enough to make a living by making music... Shut up and make music. Quit whining about not making the millions that you used to (or wish you could) and MAKE MUSIC OR GO GET A REGULAR JOB.
    Motley Crue have been retired for years as far as I'm concerned. No big news here
    Radio, yeah talk about a weak excuse. More like they cant come up with the material for a full album...
    I don't agree with him. If you make good music, it will spread. Don't rely on the radio to market out your music. To me, this is basically saying that his music isn't good enough and would have to be pushed in people's faces through ways they will hear it without intending to
    "If you make good music, it will spread." If only it were that easy nowadays. If he can't rely on the radio then what is he to rely on? Vevo-dominated Youtube? Word of mouth?
    Well, yes, word of mouth. If it truly touches people as an art form then it will naturally find it's way around. The problem with the popular music today is that it gets pushed in your face immediately and nothing gains natural ground. What Nikki is implying is that he wants instant gratification. That's where popular music has been lost - instant gratification
    Yeah, music still spreads through word of mouth and technology can really help that. Someone put a friend of mine's music on reddit and it ended up on the front page. She's still in highschool and she's mildly famous. Music can spread without the radio.
    I'm releasing an album that I'll be surprised if five people ever hear. I understand the need to make money off you're art if your art is your career, so I'm not offended when bands sign to major labels, or show up on MTV, or start selling massive amounts of merchandise, or whatever other things often get bands accused of selling out.... but refusing to create more music because it won't make you enough money, especially when you're already infinitely rich for the rest of your life? Not okay.
    How about releasing something the fans would like and buy? The last several releases were crap. Beards and banjos?..... what station is he listening to?
    So.. They're not recording a new Crue album because albums 'fall on deaf ears' yet Sixx:AM will continue to record and release their third album?
    Allow me to play the world's smallest violin... Motley Crüe is just in it for the money. If they actually enjoyed playing the music, it's more than likely that they'd release an album even though it won't get radio airplay, like most other rock artists out there.
    I don't see how they're "just in it for the money." The band announced a final tour (and even signed a contract promising it was "final") and that's about the only money they'll make at this time. Wouldn't making an album despite them enjoying the music be a money grab?
    Farewell... I'll take a 7 shots for you on this day each year.....ok 5, 2 shots.... I'll think about you.....I won't.
    My friend Roger said something like that once, we were running scams and the last thing he said to me was: You realize we can't speak to one another for a long time. Don't try to find me. But if I hear that you die before me, I'll leave a rose on your grave every year. Well, every five years. Once. I'll think of you. I won't.
    HA!!! I was hoping someone would get the reference!
    I did a double take at first, that's one of my favourite Roger lines. I love the show and it's rare I miss a reference, always good to see another fan of the show.
    Sounds like an excuse... They probably don't have enough new material or it just isn't that good. They would rather not release an album to bad reception then try and please themselves or their fans.
    I disagree. If your express goal is having a hit record, then maybe you have a point, but making an album for the sake of saying or expressing something is still totally viable. I think this just says their heart is in the wrong place with regards to making new music, so given that, maybe it's a good thing there's not gonna be a new album.
    The same old bla bla bla... there are thousands of bands releasing albums for their fans even if it's not played on radio... these guys want money, everything is "marketing", "opportunities", "sponsorships", etc. Just put an album and get on the road like most other bands do or leave the whole thing already.