BC has been around long enough and had more than enough "success" to be able to say whatever he wants when an interviewer poses a question. It quite often takes a little bit of that type of self inflated attitude to be successful. Honestly, I prefer his honest opinion to mindless ass kissing.
Bristow 05132010 to Amsterdam 2 06132018
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,315
Smashing Pumpkins frontman Billy Corgan discussed his recent criticism of Eddie Vedder and Pearl Jam in an interview with ESPN Radio‘s Dan Le Batard & Stugotz.
“I wouldn’t call it a beef, Howard [Stern] asked me an honest question, to rate my generation’s greats, and I gave an honest answer, and suddenly I’m a bad guy. I’ve held that opinion for over 20 years, so nothing new. I wouldn’t discourage anybody from listening to a band like Pearl Jam, it’s not that. Look, they once asked Charles Barkley if he thought Michael Jordan was better than him, and he said, ‘Hell no. I wouldn’t play if I thought Michael Jordan was better than me.’ So in the gist of competition, I view as an equal or lesser than, and in that case, I gave an honest answer.”
The host asked if BillCo felt Pearl Jam went too commercial. Corgan responded, “I would say it’s kind of the opposite, I would say they never completely fulfilled their commercial promise. I think they were a great band who kind of got wrapped up in a trip, like we all get wrapped up in trips, and never completely fulfilled their promise. It’s weird because I know people who are fans don’t feel that way, but a lot of people that I know feel the opposite, so there’s that weird divide. But again, it’s not a diss to say that you don’t rate somebody as high as you rate somebody else, I don’t get that. I listen to your program all of the time, you guys sit there and rate football teams, players. Is that a personal attack? No. It’s just the way you see it.”
again, he sees music/art as competition. I just find that mindset completely odd unless you work for a record company/label.
that rivalry/competition was conceived and bred by the media.
ha. that article was about a book detailing the rivalry between the two bands. this particular excerpt was about mick's jealousy towards the beatles' popularity.
So?
well...it discredits the fact that it was "conceived and bred" by the media. thought that was obvious. ha
Non PJ talk, I agree 100% with William when talking about the state of music. People forget how hard it is to actually make money in music now. It was always really tough but not like this. Many good new bands die a horrible death with debt from their incursion to boot. Red Line Chemistry being a great example. The ones that do are the ones that master how to make money using the new tools such as youtube and can play the commercial tech industry games. Releasing great albums and touring non stop are just not enough anymore when they are a newer band trying to cut their teeth. I have a 14 year old daughter who loves rock and hard rock (I'm working on her with Grunge). When I ask her out of all these bands she loves who she thinks will still be around in 20 years I can never get an answer because she falls in love with new bands every month. The posters in her room change every few months beyond a couple staples like Slipknot and 5FDP. The internet spits out new bands for the masses and then quickly replaces them shortly there after with something else. Sadly I don't think there will ever be another Nirvana who can smash through all that and rise above it. I dont think we will ever see another Elvis, Beatles, Grateful Dead or any other rock band that can galvanize a movement. It may be a pessimistic view of music but that is where we are at. There are still great new musicians but their ceilings are limited.
Tom Brady & Donald Trump, BFF's Fuckus rules all Rob Seattle
Smashing Pumpkins frontman Billy Corgan discussed his recent criticism of Eddie Vedder and Pearl Jam in an interview with ESPN Radio‘s Dan Le Batard & Stugotz.
“I wouldn’t call it a beef, Howard [Stern] asked me an honest question, to rate my generation’s greats, and I gave an honest answer, and suddenly I’m a bad guy. I’ve held that opinion for over 20 years, so nothing new. I wouldn’t discourage anybody from listening to a band like Pearl Jam, it’s not that. Look, they once asked Charles Barkley if he thought Michael Jordan was better than him, and he said, ‘Hell no. I wouldn’t play if I thought Michael Jordan was better than me.’ So in the gist of competition, I view as an equal or lesser than, and in that case, I gave an honest answer.”
The host asked if BillCo felt Pearl Jam went too commercial. Corgan responded, “I would say it’s kind of the opposite, I would say they never completely fulfilled their commercial promise. I think they were a great band who kind of got wrapped up in a trip, like we all get wrapped up in trips, and never completely fulfilled their promise. It’s weird because I know people who are fans don’t feel that way, but a lot of people that I know feel the opposite, so there’s that weird divide. But again, it’s not a diss to say that you don’t rate somebody as high as you rate somebody else, I don’t get that. I listen to your program all of the time, you guys sit there and rate football teams, players. Is that a personal attack? No. It’s just the way you see it.”
again, he sees music/art as competition. I just find that mindset completely odd unless you work for a record company/label.
that rivalry/competition was conceived and bred by the media.
ha. that article was about a book detailing the rivalry between the two bands. this particular excerpt was about mick's jealousy towards the beatles' popularity.
So?
well...it discredits the fact that it was "conceived and bred" by the media. thought that was obvious. ha
it does nothing of the kind. ha.
he is JUST NOW admitting to his own jealousy. that has zero to do with the competitiveness at the time. and it is apples and oranges to BC putting other bands down to elevate himself.
thought that was obvious.
ha.
your constant attempts at looking superior are failing miserably. try having a discussion without trying to belittle others.
Non PJ talk, I agree 100% with William when talking about the state of music. People forget how hard it is to actually make money in music now. It was always really tough but not like this. Many good new bands die a horrible death with debt from their incursion to boot. Red Line Chemistry being a great example. The ones that do are the ones that master how to make money using the new tools such as youtube and can play the commercial tech industry games. Releasing great albums and touring non stop are just not enough anymore when they are a newer band trying to cut their teeth. I have a 14 year old daughter who loves rock and hard rock (I'm working on her with Grunge). When I ask her out of all these bands she loves who she thinks will still be around in 20 years I can never get an answer because she falls in love with new bands every month. The posters in her room change every few months beyond a couple staples like Slipknot and 5FDP. The internet spits out new bands for the masses and then quickly replaces them shortly there after with something else. Sadly I don't think there will ever be another Nirvana who can smash through all that and rise above it. I dont think we will ever see another Elvis, Beatles, Grateful Dead or any other rock band that can galvanize a movement. It may be a pessimistic view of music but that is where we are at. There are still great new musicians but their ceilings are limited.
I disagree. Not about how difficult it is to make it in the music business. But when you say there will never be another groundbreaking band like nirvana. People said no one would ever top Chuck berry, then Elvis Presley, then the beattles, then led zepplain, etc. I think there will eventually be a band that comes out and shakes the industry to its core much like nirvana did. It has to. It takes about 20-30 years for people to get bored with the pop music of the day. There will always be someone better.
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,315
Smashing Pumpkins frontman Billy Corgan discussed his recent criticism of Eddie Vedder and Pearl Jam in an interview with ESPN Radio‘s Dan Le Batard & Stugotz.
“I wouldn’t call it a beef, Howard [Stern] asked me an honest question, to rate my generation’s greats, and I gave an honest answer, and suddenly I’m a bad guy. I’ve held that opinion for over 20 years, so nothing new. I wouldn’t discourage anybody from listening to a band like Pearl Jam, it’s not that. Look, they once asked Charles Barkley if he thought Michael Jordan was better than him, and he said, ‘Hell no. I wouldn’t play if I thought Michael Jordan was better than me.’ So in the gist of competition, I view as an equal or lesser than, and in that case, I gave an honest answer.”
The host asked if BillCo felt Pearl Jam went too commercial. Corgan responded, “I would say it’s kind of the opposite, I would say they never completely fulfilled their commercial promise. I think they were a great band who kind of got wrapped up in a trip, like we all get wrapped up in trips, and never completely fulfilled their promise. It’s weird because I know people who are fans don’t feel that way, but a lot of people that I know feel the opposite, so there’s that weird divide. But again, it’s not a diss to say that you don’t rate somebody as high as you rate somebody else, I don’t get that. I listen to your program all of the time, you guys sit there and rate football teams, players. Is that a personal attack? No. It’s just the way you see it.”
again, he sees music/art as competition. I just find that mindset completely odd unless you work for a record company/label.
that rivalry/competition was conceived and bred by the media.
ha. that article was about a book detailing the rivalry between the two bands. this particular excerpt was about mick's jealousy towards the beatles' popularity.
So?
well...it discredits the fact that it was "conceived and bred" by the media. thought that was obvious. ha
it does nothing of the kind. ha.
he is JUST NOW admitting to his own jealousy. that has zero to do with the competitiveness at the time. and it is apples and oranges to BC putting other bands down to elevate himself.
thought that was obvious.
ha.
your constant attempts at looking superior are failing miserably. try having a discussion without trying to belittle others.
do you feel like I am belittling you? sorry, man. didn't mean to do that. thought we were just having a discussion.
so i think you're wrong about that rivalry being conceived and bred by the media, though. the article was an excerpt from a book that disproves that theory.
bc might be a douche and a prick and all that stuff but it doesn't change the fact that he's not the only one who looks at other bands of his genre as his competition. case in point: the stones and the beatles.
Post edited by The Juggler on
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,315
Non PJ talk, I agree 100% with William when talking about the state of music. People forget how hard it is to actually make money in music now. It was always really tough but not like this. Many good new bands die a horrible death with debt from their incursion to boot. Red Line Chemistry being a great example. The ones that do are the ones that master how to make money using the new tools such as youtube and can play the commercial tech industry games. Releasing great albums and touring non stop are just not enough anymore when they are a newer band trying to cut their teeth. I have a 14 year old daughter who loves rock and hard rock (I'm working on her with Grunge). When I ask her out of all these bands she loves who she thinks will still be around in 20 years I can never get an answer because she falls in love with new bands every month. The posters in her room change every few months beyond a couple staples like Slipknot and 5FDP. The internet spits out new bands for the masses and then quickly replaces them shortly there after with something else. Sadly I don't think there will ever be another Nirvana who can smash through all that and rise above it. I dont think we will ever see another Elvis, Beatles, Grateful Dead or any other rock band that can galvanize a movement. It may be a pessimistic view of music but that is where we are at. There are still great new musicians but their ceilings are limited.
I disagree. Not about how difficult it is to make it in the music business. But when you say there will never be another groundbreaking band like nirvana. People said no one would ever top Chuck berry, then Elvis Presley, then the beattles, then led zepplain, etc. I think there will eventually be a band that comes out and shakes the industry to its core much like nirvana did. It has to. It takes about 20-30 years for people to get bored with the pop music of the day. There will always be someone better.
but there were HUGE rock bands in the 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's and 90's ( at least the early 90's). in the last 15 years, while there are still great bands out there, no new ones have really broken through to mainstream popularity.
mmj is one of those bands i've always thought would have been huge had they came out a decade or so earlier. people just don't buy albums anymore. it's singles or they stream their music. just so much tougher to get noticed nowadays.
Non PJ talk, I agree 100% with William when talking about the state of music. People forget how hard it is to actually make money in music now. It was always really tough but not like this. Many good new bands die a horrible death with debt from their incursion to boot. Red Line Chemistry being a great example. The ones that do are the ones that master how to make money using the new tools such as youtube and can play the commercial tech industry games. Releasing great albums and touring non stop are just not enough anymore when they are a newer band trying to cut their teeth. I have a 14 year old daughter who loves rock and hard rock (I'm working on her with Grunge). When I ask her out of all these bands she loves who she thinks will still be around in 20 years I can never get an answer because she falls in love with new bands every month. The posters in her room change every few months beyond a couple staples like Slipknot and 5FDP. The internet spits out new bands for the masses and then quickly replaces them shortly there after with something else. Sadly I don't think there will ever be another Nirvana who can smash through all that and rise above it. I dont think we will ever see another Elvis, Beatles, Grateful Dead or any other rock band that can galvanize a movement. It may be a pessimistic view of music but that is where we are at. There are still great new musicians but their ceilings are limited.
I disagree. Not about how difficult it is to make it in the music business. But when you say there will never be another groundbreaking band like nirvana. People said no one would ever top Chuck berry, then Elvis Presley, then the beattles, then led zepplain, etc. I think there will eventually be a band that comes out and shakes the industry to its core much like nirvana did. It has to. It takes about 20-30 years for people to get bored with the pop music of the day. There will always be someone better.
but there were HUGE rock bands in the 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's and 90's ( at least the early 90's). in the last 15 years, while there are still great bands out there, no new ones have really broken through to mainstream popularity.
Corgan may be a jerk but the new album is actually pretty good
it's funny, I'm not a big fan of it at all. And I love Zeitgeist, which to my surprise, most don't like at all. But what do I know? I also can't stand Adore.
Don't care who loves or hates PJ but the Pumpkins catalog has aged pretty badly to my ears. In my teens i loved his voice and his lyrics. In my 30s i think both are pretty embarassing. I still like his guitar playing though.
I group them in with STP and Bush. Good musicians who got bigger than most but to me the lasting power isn't there. Corgan has very few essential tunes and i was a huge huge fan. So i disagree with him that he's up there with Kurt. If anyone is from the 90s it's likely someone like Jeff Mangum or someone along those lines. I remember in the 90s id laugh at the hair rockers who were trying to stay relevant. All they did was look like fools. It's weird and sad when bands you loved enter that territory. Looking at you, Billy.
BC has been around long enough and had more than enough "success" to be able to say whatever he wants when an interviewer poses a question. It quite often takes a little bit of that type of self inflated attitude to be successful. Honestly, I prefer his honest opinion to mindless ass kissing.
I think most people prefer honest opinion over mindless ass kissing. but those aren't the only two options. and most often, he's not even asked about bands specifically. he's asked a general question (or no question at all) and he proceeds to slam other artists.
and I don't equate any level of "success" with a higher level of freedom of speaking one's mind.
can you imagine his whining and crying if he was the target of half of the criticism from other bands as he gives them? I think that's part of why it's so annoying; context is everything. he is SUCH a big baby ("I'm quitting music! wah! Britney sells more records than I do! Wah!").
I can take it from such assholes as the Gallagher brothers, because it comes from humorous egotism, and it just makes me laugh. Billy's comes from a place of whining insecurity. you almost feel sorry for the guy.
almost.
he so desperately wants to be thought of as a songwriting great, then says he doesn't care, then says he so desperately wants to be thought of as a songwriting great, then.......
Flight Risk out NOW!
www.headstonesband.com
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,315
So sorry, Juggs. Didn't realize the thread had expired according to you. No one is upset. Just discussion man. Get over that already.
I think you have an unhealthy obsession with Mr. Corgan.
what a strange comment. zero basis in reality. it's actually quite the opposite. check out www.alternativenation.net if you want to see a BC obsession (ScottStappsucks on here is the owner of that site).
I enjoy some of his music, and some of his antics. beyond that, not much else.
as you said they have a BC obsession and more traffic on the site is more money for them. i quit going on that site for that reason a long time ago. don't fall for it. if you look hard enough you can see they enjoy it when readers attack each other on the site. gets your news somewhere else.
as you said they have a BC obsession and more traffic on the site is more money for them. i quit going on that site for that reason a long time ago. don't fall for it. if you look hard enough you can see they enjoy it when readers attack each other on the site. gets your news somewhere else.
Fall for what? I get some news there of bands I like, the other, more obvious TMZ for grunge I don't even click on.
One of the contributors on that site is so disgusting, I can't even read his shit. Hesays incredibly graphic sex stuff about his obsession with taylor momsen (i dont even know who that is) and yes, the pwner has mentioned one insulting commenter as being "entertaining". But they arent getting money from me, so what do i care?
Flight Risk out NOW!
www.headstonesband.com
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,315
So sorry, Juggs. Didn't realize the thread had expired according to you. No one is upset. Just discussion man. Get over that already.
I think you have an unhealthy obsession with Mr. Corgan.
what a strange comment. zero basis in reality. it's actually quite the opposite. check out www.alternativenation.net if you want to see a BC obsession (ScottStappsucks on here is the owner of that site).
I enjoy some of his music, and some of his antics. beyond that, not much else.
Relax. I'm just giving you a hard time.
I check out that site on Facebook daily. It can be annoying at times.
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14
as you said they have a BC obsession and more traffic on the site is more money for them. i quit going on that site for that reason a long time ago. don't fall for it. if you look hard enough you can see they enjoy it when readers attack each other on the site. gets your news somewhere else.
Fall for what? I get some news there of bands I like, the other, more obvious TMZ for grunge I don't even click on.
One of the contributors on that site is so disgusting, I can't even read his shit. Hesays incredibly graphic sex stuff about his obsession with taylor momsen (i dont even know who that is) and yes, the pwner has mentioned one insulting commenter as being "entertaining". But they arent getting money from me, so what do i care?
you aren't actually giving them money out of your pocket but sites like that generate money based on traffic volume. you should care because you are upset over something you are promoting by visiting it.
as you said they have a BC obsession and more traffic on the site is more money for them. i quit going on that site for that reason a long time ago. don't fall for it. if you look hard enough you can see they enjoy it when readers attack each other on the site. gets your news somewhere else.
Fall for what? I get some news there of bands I like, the other, more obvious TMZ for grunge I don't even click on.
One of the contributors on that site is so disgusting, I can't even read his shit. Hesays incredibly graphic sex stuff about his obsession with taylor momsen (i dont even know who that is) and yes, the pwner has mentioned one insulting commenter as being "entertaining". But they arent getting money from me, so what do i care?
you aren't actually giving them money out of your pocket but sites like that generate money based on traffic volume. you should care because you are upset over something you are promoting by visiting it.
No, i shouldnt care. I go there for some news that i find relevant. And i stay from the articles written by that one guy. Do you refuse to read an entire newspaper simply because you dont like one columnist? Thats a bit silly.
Flight Risk out NOW!
www.headstonesband.com
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,315
Comments
Read the above and tell me he's not a prick.
www.headstonesband.com
BC has been around long enough and had more than enough "success" to be able to say whatever he wants when an interviewer poses a question. It quite often takes a little bit of that type of self inflated attitude to be successful. Honestly, I prefer his honest opinion to mindless ass kissing.
well...it discredits the fact that it was "conceived and bred" by the media. thought that was obvious. ha
Fuckus rules all
Rob
Seattle
it does nothing of the kind. ha.
he is JUST NOW admitting to his own jealousy. that has zero to do with the competitiveness at the time. and it is apples and oranges to BC putting other bands down to elevate himself.
thought that was obvious.
ha.
your constant attempts at looking superior are failing miserably. try having a discussion without trying to belittle others.
www.headstonesband.com
I disagree. Not about how difficult it is to make it in the music business. But when you say there will never be another groundbreaking band like nirvana. People said no one would ever top Chuck berry, then Elvis Presley, then the beattles, then led zepplain, etc. I think there will eventually be a band that comes out and shakes the industry to its core much like nirvana did. It has to. It takes about 20-30 years for people to get bored with the pop music of the day. There will always be someone better.
do you feel like I am belittling you? sorry, man. didn't mean to do that. thought we were just having a discussion.
so i think you're wrong about that rivalry being conceived and bred by the media, though. the article was an excerpt from a book that disproves that theory.
bc might be a douche and a prick and all that stuff but it doesn't change the fact that he's not the only one who looks at other bands of his genre as his competition. case in point: the stones and the beatles.
but there were HUGE rock bands in the 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's and 90's ( at least the early 90's). in the last 15 years, while there are still great bands out there, no new ones have really broken through to mainstream popularity.
mmj is one of those bands i've always thought would have been huge had they came out a decade or so earlier. people just don't buy albums anymore. it's singles or they stream their music. just so much tougher to get noticed nowadays.
Not true - Justin Beiber.
Beilebe it!
it's funny, I'm not a big fan of it at all. And I love Zeitgeist, which to my surprise, most don't like at all. But what do I know? I also can't stand Adore.
www.headstonesband.com
correction, actually 9 songs for a whopping 32 mins!
I have to ask you... Do you know how to count?? And yes it's very solid.
I group them in with STP and Bush. Good musicians who got bigger than most but to me the lasting power isn't there. Corgan has very few essential tunes and i was a huge huge fan. So i disagree with him that he's up there with Kurt. If anyone is from the 90s it's likely someone like Jeff Mangum or someone along those lines. I remember in the 90s id laugh at the hair rockers who were trying to stay relevant. All they did was look like fools. It's weird and sad when bands you loved enter that territory. Looking at you, Billy.
Clearly not! I just remembered it was 32 mins - surely that couldn't actually be 9 songs??
I guess there is no need to amend the PJ @ The Gorge in 2015 petition to ask for the Pumpkins as the opener ...
I think most people prefer honest opinion over mindless ass kissing. but those aren't the only two options. and most often, he's not even asked about bands specifically. he's asked a general question (or no question at all) and he proceeds to slam other artists.
and I don't equate any level of "success" with a higher level of freedom of speaking one's mind.
can you imagine his whining and crying if he was the target of half of the criticism from other bands as he gives them? I think that's part of why it's so annoying; context is everything. he is SUCH a big baby ("I'm quitting music! wah! Britney sells more records than I do! Wah!").
I can take it from such assholes as the Gallagher brothers, because it comes from humorous egotism, and it just makes me laugh. Billy's comes from a place of whining insecurity. you almost feel sorry for the guy.
almost.
he so desperately wants to be thought of as a songwriting great, then says he doesn't care, then says he so desperately wants to be thought of as a songwriting great, then.......
www.headstonesband.com
So sorry, Juggs. Didn't realize the thread had expired according to you. No one is upset. Just discussion man. Get over that already.
www.headstonesband.com
I think you have an unhealthy obsession with Mr. Corgan.
He has an unhealthy obsession with you?
what a strange comment. zero basis in reality. it's actually quite the opposite. check out www.alternativenation.net if you want to see a BC obsession (ScottStappsucks on here is the owner of that site).
I enjoy some of his music, and some of his antics. beyond that, not much else.
www.headstonesband.com
Fall for what? I get some news there of bands I like, the other, more obvious TMZ for grunge I don't even click on.
One of the contributors on that site is so disgusting, I can't even read his shit. Hesays incredibly graphic sex stuff about his obsession with taylor momsen (i dont even know who that is) and yes, the pwner has mentioned one insulting commenter as being "entertaining". But they arent getting money from me, so what do i care?
www.headstonesband.com
I check out that site on Facebook daily. It can be annoying at times.
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14
you aren't actually giving them money out of your pocket but sites like that generate money based on traffic volume. you should care because you are upset over something you are promoting by visiting it.
Is that Dr Evil?
No, i shouldnt care. I go there for some news that i find relevant. And i stay from the articles written by that one guy. Do you refuse to read an entire newspaper simply because you dont like one columnist? Thats a bit silly.
www.headstonesband.com
Haha. He loves this thread