pitchfork yet again insults billy corgan

sasoj

http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/page/news/43841-wilco-mia-pumpkins-rage-spoon-do-voodoo-fest

billy big bucks corgan????
fuck you pitchfork

oppie1

just because you like Corgan, doesnt mean everyone is required to...

superdeluxe

Pitchfork is a pile of crap.

THey blast corgan for having multiple titles..and yet they are in beds with Block Party, so they dont say crap about them

superdeluxe

oppie1 wrote:

just because you like Corgan, doesnt mean everyone is required to...

No one is saying everyone should like them. But if you going to have any journalistic integrity what soever, you blast everyone for doing this. Not pick and choose.

oppie1

superdeluxe wrote:

No one is saying everyone should like them. But if you going to have any journalistic integrity what soever, you blast everyone for doing this. Not pick and choose.

its called an editorial.. the writer is allowed to have an opinion, even if you don't agree with it

pjoasisrule

oppie1 wrote:

its called an editorial.. the writer is allowed to have an opinion, even if you don't agree with it

I am also allowed to have an opinion on an internet forum, quit contradicting yourself

oppie1

the difference between him and you is that you crap all over everything.. you're like a kid with the squirts....

muppet

I'm sorry but I think Pitchforks article about the new album with four different versions or whatever was spot on. Seems like a very dirty way of getting more money.

lukins fridge

Corgan still owes his fans an apology for this album cover. One of the worst ever:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/images/B0009G018Q/sr=8-1/qid=1182798860/ref=dp_image_text_0/102-9270078-0340107?ie=UTF8&n=5174&s=music&qid=1182798860&sr=8-1

Pearl Jam and toast

oppie1 wrote:

just because you like Corgan, doesnt mean everyone is required to...

Just cuz you don't like Corgan doesn't mean you have to resort to actually defending Pitchfork :rolleyes:


BTW, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the idea was posed to Corgan like this:

Record Exec. : "You're releasing 4 versions of the album. Put something on them."

You anti-Corgan people pick out every little thing you can use to stab at him with.


And think about it this way you pessimists..

Corgan is one of the most internet-capable artists out there. He knows about technology and uses it fully. He even released an album (a FREE album) over the internet. He knows as well as the rest of us that people don't give a fuck about buying all those versions, we're just gonna download them or get them sent from a friend.

Only collectors will actually buy the alt. versions and those people don't mind paying for it.

So if this was a stick for more money than I can't really see Corgan employing it. Wouldn't make sense.

oppie1

Pearl Jam and toast wrote:

Just cuz you don't like Corgan doesn't mean you have to resort to actually defending Pitchfork :rolleyes:

i defended pitchfork because they had a valid point slamming the Pumpkins for releasing 4 different versions of the album

Pearl Jam and toast

oppie1 wrote:

i defended pitchfork because they had a valid point slamming the Pumpkins for releasing 4 different versions of the album

They really didn't! It's just gossip about a guy they love to insult.

Corgan there is like Scott Stapp here practically. They insult the fuck out of him constantly.

The whole thing is a record company move anyway.

1STmammal2wearPants

Pitchfork bashes anything that isn't indie anyways. They trashed Wilco's new album calling it "dad rock," trashed Pearl Jam's new album, and support acts that have no talent just because they support an indie label. I like lesser acts, don't get me wrong, but Pitchfork is a little out of their fucking minds.

LostDawgPound

Everyone has their own opinions on Billy. I think that releasing multiple versions of LPs is really lame... I do like Special Edition packaging though... but outside of that; to have 7 different album cover variations, 2 Limited Edition Packages (DVD Package and Book Package) and 4 different track variations in my opinion is completely lame...

Love or hate Billy, you cannot blame this on him. This is the record company trying to push product. This is nothing new, record companies have been doing this for a while now… (QOTSA, NIN Imports, Deftones, Ryan Adams, Etc.) That is what record companies do. Whether they put the b-sides on Singles, Soundtracks, or Limited Edition Albums, they are trying to get the consumer to buy the more expensive version and/or multiple copies.

They KNOW The Smashing Pumpkins are a big band and have a large fan base. They also know that a lot of SP fans collect their records and versions, and will buy all 4 versions.

As for Pitchfork’s view on why they hate Billy and SP. Who really cares??? Let them not like them, each person is entitles to have their own view on SP.

Hopefully Billy will address this shortly in some way to let people know that this decision was not theirs to make.

illfated

lukins fridge wrote:

Corgan still owes his fans an apology for this album cover. One of the worst ever:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/images/B0009G018Q/sr=8-1/qid=1182798860/ref=dp_image_text_0/102-9270078-0340107?ie=UTF8&n=5174&s=music&qid=1182798860&sr=8-1

I never...EVER....want to see that again...HAHA

Pearl Jam and toast

Ava17adore wrote:

Everyone has their own opinions on Billy. I think that releasing multiple versions of LPs is really lame... I do like Special Edition packaging though... but outside of that; to have 7 different album cover variations, 2 Limited Edition Packages (DVD Package and Book Package) and 4 different track variations in my opinion is completely lame...

Love or hate Billy, you cannot blame this on him. This is the record company trying to push product. This is nothing new, record companies have been doing this for a while now… (QOTSA, NIN Imports, Deftones, Ryan Adams, Etc.) That is what record companies do. Whether they put the b-sides on Singles, Soundtracks, or Limited Edition Albums, they are trying to get the consumer to buy the more expensive version and/or multiple copies.

They KNOW The Smashing Pumpkins are a big band and have a large fan base. They also know that a lot of SP fans collect their records and versions, and will buy all 4 versions.

As for Pitchfork’s view on why they hate Billy and SP. Who really cares??? Let them not like them, each person is entitles to have their own view on SP.

Hopefully Billy will address this shortly in some way to let people know that this decision was not theirs to make.

I'm hoping he'll just put the b-sides up for download on his myspace or something. It wouldn't really be that bad (though I bet he's contractionally obligated not to do it).

He could say ..

"If you're a collector, buy them. If not, here you go. Listen to them."

facepollution

Wow this argument is still going?! If someone is stupid enough to go out there and buy four different copies of an album to get 3 extra tracks which they could get online for free, they deserve to be ripped off, the bloody mugs!

Considering how BC is embracing the whole digital age in actively encouraging people to bootleg their shows, I hardly think he believes he's going to make a load of cash just from releasing a few different versions. It's blatantly an arrangement made between the record company and the participating record stores.

Blackeyedangel

Pitchfork is fucking hilarious.

7 Kettles

Pitchfork is a hilariously terrible website...However, it seems to be one of those things in that I know i shouldn't care what they say, but when I read that article about Corgan, I nearly lost my mind with anger. They are the worst for praising their favorites (ie. Bloc Party, Arcade Fire) and shitting on the rest (ie. Smashing Pumpkins)

superdeluxe

Its called a choice people, buy the four if you want, or buy one and download the extras if you dont.

Anyone who doesnt think that WBR has a big hand in the marketing of this record has got to be kidding.

The simple fact that the band is playing shows at the orange peel and fillmore for 20$, shows they are not out to rape people out of their money.

Hell now a days you have fringe acts that charge for 20-30$ for a show.

superdeluxe

Exactly. Pitchfork is not a media source, it is just a place for people who suck on indie music's teat, to the point where they can't even call out the hypocricy (Bloc Party's multiple cds)

darthvedder88

Corgan is real media savy like that. He's gonna make sure his albums sell so he can once again be the "antihero" of rock n' roll.

Brain of mJ

If you look at Pitchfork's issue carefully, it's not with Billy releasing 4 versions, it's the fact that the independent stores get screwed out of one of them. They get the plain version while Itunes, Best Buy and Target get valued added ones. Why not give fans the incentive to buy from and Indie rather than the big box store that will already undercut the Indie on price, and that I agree with.

Alex_Coe

JHomme did the same thing with Era V.... Ultimately it's annoying but I don't throw a fit over collecting 2 or 3 extra songs.

darthvedder88

B-Sides are worth it, especially if it's the Smashing Pumpkins...

cc10106

so i've heard there's a new version of 'doomsday clock' they recorded? but wasn't it a b-side on the 'rocket' single. perhaps they started playing it live. help?

glasshouse

Blackeyedangel wrote:

Pitchfork is fucking hilarious.

i second this.

sasoj

cc10106 wrote:

so i've heard there's a new version of 'doomsday clock' they recorded? but wasn't it a b-side on the 'rocket' single. perhaps they started playing it live. help?

no

doomsday clock is a new song and it wasnt on rocket single
it is an opening for zeitgeist

facepollution

Brain of (M)J wrote:

If you look at Pitchfork's issue carefully, it's not with Billy releasing 4 versions, it's the fact that the independent stores get screwed out of one of them. They get the plain version while Itunes, Best Buy and Target get valued added ones. Why not give fans the incentive to buy from and Indie rather than the big box store that will already undercut the Indie on price, and that I agree with.

Yeah but the agreement will have been done between the record company and the big stores, given how many records the Pumpkins have sold, I'm willing to bet Corgan and co. wouldn't have to work another day in their lives if they didn't want to. If Billy Corgan was really just in it for the money, do you think he would be playing three hour long shows, when many bands in his position would play for half that time?

Scratchin a Letter

I'm not necessarily anti-Corgan, or pro-Pitchfork, but they have a point.

-Zwan fail to make any impact.
-Corgan changes a few of Zwan's members
-Swaps Zwan's catalogue with the Smashing Pumpkins backcatalogue
-Records an album under the name 'Smashing Pumpkins.

=Big bucks.

The 'Smashing Pumpkins' of today have about as much merit as the 'Guns N' Roses' of today.

darthvedder88

Scratchin a Letter wrote:

I'm not necessarily anti-Corgan, or pro-Pitchfork, but they have a point.

-Zwan fail to make any impact.
-Corgan changes a few of Zwan's members
-Swaps Zwan's catalogue with the Smashing Pumpkins backcatalogue
-Records an album under the name 'Smashing Pumpkins.

=Big bucks.

The 'Smashing Pumpkins' of today have about as much merit as the 'Guns N' Roses' of today.

Only difference is Smashing Pumpkins actually have an album coming out.