Home› Other Music

rolling stone on Cornell

sasojsasoj Posts: 239
edited June 2007 in Other Music
fuck rolling stone...

why?

read this "review":

http://www.rollingstone.com/reviews/album/14898791/review/14952831/carry_on

they are dissing him for having short hair and because his is wearing shirts????????????????????????????????????????????

what the hell?
i guess hair is important in making an album
i love rock chicks
Post edited by Unknown User on
«13

Comments

  • TheGossmanTheGossman Posts: 1,120
    I read half of it and threw the fuckin magazine in the garbage, how could they give him 2 stars, and not even talk about his album in the review and only about his short hair and him "wishing he was still grunge", and "why does he wear a shit and sing nowadays", the little bit I read they didn't even mention the album itself, and then I turned the page and R. Kelly's new album got 3 stars, fuck RS again!
    9/4/98, 8/4/00, 12/8/02, 12/9/02, 4/15/03, 4/16/03, 4/19/03, 4/25/03, 4/26/03, 4/28/03, 4/29/03, 4/30/03, 7/8/03, 7/9/03, 9/28/04, 9/29/04, 10/6/04, 9/1/05, 9/2/05, 5/16/06, 5/17/06, 5/27/06, 5/28/06, 5/30/06, 6/1/06, 6/3/06, 8/5/07, 6/11/08, 6/12/08, 6/14/08, 6/16/08, 6/24/08, 6/25/08
  • chris05chris05 Posts: 347
    yeh Rolling Stone is fuckin brutal. Nothing but a bunch of assholes who know nothing writing reviews.
    Who cares if the world is going down the toilet? Eddie Vedder got his mojo back!
  • dunkmandunkman Posts: 19,646
    i love Rolling Stone magazine :):)
    oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
  • pirlo21pirlo21 Posts: 534
    Wow! That's a pretty lazy review. No backing up of any comments.
    Just seems to slate Cornell for his hair and clothes.
    Has this guy been paid for the review? Should be ashamed.
    Whether you like the album or not, at least back up what your saying.

    I've never really taken much notice of Rolling Stone, didn't have an opinion one way or the other. Maybe from now on I'll steer clear!
    Cymru Am Byth

    PJ albums, at the moment!! -
    1,Vs 2,Vitalogy 3,No Code 4,Yield 5,Ten 6,Backspacer, 7Pearl Jam 8,Binaural 9,Riot Act.
  • pearljamharmonypearljamharmony Posts: 120
    sasoj wrote:
    fuck rolling stone...

    why?

    read this "review":

    http://www.rollingstone.com/reviews/album/14898791/review/14952831/carry_on

    they are dissing him for having short hair and because his is wearing shirts????????????????????????????????????????????

    what the hell?
    i guess hair is important in making an album

    See they were making a statement saying that when he had longer hair and no shirt ala soundgarden he was making his best material. Chirs cornell's best material was in soundgarden and thats a fact, he's trying too hard to step out of the shadow of soundgarden and thats the problem. Rollingstone was SPOT ON on this review. Could you Cornell fanboys just give it up? He made a medicore record. It got two stars because its complete garbage (PS I listened to it endlessly for a week, and wished so hard for grittier 90s cornell and got poppy meaningless garbage). If you guys haven't bought the record yet and need to get your hands on it, wait two months and it will be in your local bargain bin.

    PS did you see Era Vulgaris got four stars because it kicks ass.

    PSS Why are you guys mocking R. Kelly and his review? Its a genre of music which you people have absolutely no knowledge in, and don't listen to! STOP MAKING BIASISED opinions because your precious Chris Cornell is past his prime and is getting blasted for that steaming pile of shit carry on.
  • harmless_little_f***harmless_little_f*** Posts: 8,005
    Maybe they're only talking about Soundgarden, CC's shirt and CC's hair because they've got to fill up some space and the new album lacks enough substance to constitute even a few lines of comment. Thought of that?
    'We're learning songs for baby Jesus' birthday. His mum and dad were Merry and Joseph. He had a bed made of clay and the three kings bought him Gold, Frankenstein and Merv as presents.'

    - the great Sir Leo Harrison
  • redrockredrock Posts: 18,341
    I like it when he fiddles with the buttons on his shirt... :o

    Re his last album... I think just like when EM came out, a lot of people have difficulties/problems with his change of direction... After the demise of Rage, I guess a lot of people were hoping he would be going back to his soundgarden days...

    Nevertheless, he kicks ass live and the songs from the album sound much better live (for those he played).
  • nuffingmannuffingman Posts: 3,014
    Just bought the Cornell album ........ so average. I'd avoid the bargain bin.
  • sasojsasoj Posts: 239
    pearljamharmony wrote:
    See they were making a statement saying that when he had longer hair and no shirt ala soundgarden he was making his best material. Chirs cornell's best material was in soundgarden and thats a fact, he's trying too hard to step out of the shadow of soundgarden and thats the problem. Rollingstone was SPOT ON on this review. Could you Cornell fanboys just give it up? He made a medicore record. It got two stars because its complete garbage (PS I listened to it endlessly for a week, and wished so hard for grittier 90s cornell and got poppy meaningless garbage). If you guys haven't bought the record yet and need to get your hands on it, wait two months and it will be in your local bargain bin.

    PS did you see Era Vulgaris got four stars because it kicks ass.

    PSS Why are you guys mocking R. Kelly and his review? Its a genre of music which you people have absolutely no knowledge in, and don't listen to! STOP MAKING BIASISED opinions because your precious Chris Cornell is past his prime and is getting blasted for that steaming pile of shit carry on.

    well with soundgarden chris was young, now he is 42 and is making mature music proper to his age ...
    if a 42 old guy would be jumping around with long hair and no shirt then that would be crazy ...
    he has an amazing voice ...
    the hair doesnt matter
    i love rock chicks
  • MCGMCG Posts: 780
    That review was uncalled for. If it was me I honestly would have given the album 3 stars. Was it great? Nope. Was it an enjoyable listen? Absolutely. Not quite up to par with Euphoria Morning and not even close to the best album released this year but that Rolling Stone review was more some guy trying to be funny than an actual observational comment on the ablum material.
    Which came first,
    the bad idea or me befallen by it?
  • TheGossmanTheGossman Posts: 1,120
    pearljamharmony wrote:
    See they were making a statement saying that when he had longer hair and no shirt ala soundgarden he was making his best material. Chirs cornell's best material was in soundgarden and thats a fact, he's trying too hard to step out of the shadow of soundgarden and thats the problem. Rollingstone was SPOT ON on this review. Could you Cornell fanboys just give it up? He made a medicore record. It got two stars because its complete garbage (PS I listened to it endlessly for a week, and wished so hard for grittier 90s cornell and got poppy meaningless garbage). If you guys haven't bought the record yet and need to get your hands on it, wait two months and it will be in your local bargain bin.

    PS did you see Era Vulgaris got four stars because it kicks ass.

    PSS Why are you guys mocking R. Kelly and his review? Its a genre of music which you people have absolutely no knowledge in, and don't listen to! STOP MAKING BIASISED opinions because your precious Chris Cornell is past his prime and is getting blasted for that steaming pile of shit carry on.

    Chris Cornell is a musician, R. Kelly is a sicko that pisses on 15 years olds, the fact that people still buy his records sickens me, I haven't heard Cornell's record but I disagree with you, they need to quit comparing him to the Chris that was with Soundgarden, alot has changed since then, he's married, has a kid, he's in love, doesn't have as much rage. Its like when people compare PJ's latest work to Ten, LET IT DIE!
    9/4/98, 8/4/00, 12/8/02, 12/9/02, 4/15/03, 4/16/03, 4/19/03, 4/25/03, 4/26/03, 4/28/03, 4/29/03, 4/30/03, 7/8/03, 7/9/03, 9/28/04, 9/29/04, 10/6/04, 9/1/05, 9/2/05, 5/16/06, 5/17/06, 5/27/06, 5/28/06, 5/30/06, 6/1/06, 6/3/06, 8/5/07, 6/11/08, 6/12/08, 6/14/08, 6/16/08, 6/24/08, 6/25/08
  • MCGMCG Posts: 780
    TheGossman wrote:
    Chris Cornell is a musician, R. Kelly is a sicko that pisses on 15 years olds, the fact that people still buy his records sickens me, I haven't heard Cornell's record but I disagree with you, they need to quit comparing him to the Chris that was with Soundgarden, alot has changed since then, he's married, has a kid, he's in love, doesn't have as much rage. Its like when people compare PJ's latest work to Ten, LET IT DIE!

    R. Kelly may have urinated on somebody but that doesn't make him any less a musician than Cornell. He writes songs and sings on records, no different from Cornell, just a different genre.
    Which came first,
    the bad idea or me befallen by it?
  • pearljamharmonypearljamharmony Posts: 120
    sasoj wrote:
    well with soundgarden Chris was young, now he is 42 and is making mature music proper to his age ...
    if a 42 old guy would be jumping around with long hair and no shirt then that would be crazy ...
    he has an amazing voice ...
    the hair doesnt matter

    What about the first 2 slave albums those were relatively not that long ago? True his music is maturing but not for the better. Don't get me wrong I'm not anti Cornell solo because Euphoria morning was great. Other than Revelations look at the string of albums starting with Bad Motorfinger

    Bad Motorfinger ---> Superunknown ---> Down on The Upside ---> Euphoria Morning ---> Audioslave ---> Out of Exile ---> 1/3rd of Revelations

    Dare I compare that string of albums to?

    Rubber Soul ---> Revolver--->Sgt Peppers ---> Magical Mystery Tour ---> The White Album ---> Abbey Road ---> Let it Be

    Well maybe not, but still a great string of records none the less. Continuing with the Beatles comparisons, hearing Carry On is the equivalent of a Beatles fan hearing Paul McCartney singing Ebony and Ivory (you tube the video for douche chills). Like there was a mood Chris Cornell had going (starting from SG to his solo and even to slave) it was a dark grungy tone and it was excellent, this poppy garbage is not what was expected when we were so stoked a year ago when this solo album was announced. DARE I SAY JUMPING THE SHARK.
  • pearljamharmonypearljamharmony Posts: 120
    accidental double post
  • hendrix78hendrix78 Posts: 507
    I haven't heard the album, apart from the song he did on Leno and the Bond tune. I like the bond tune because I think it is a good combination of modern rock and the more classic bond music sound. I thought the tune he did on Leno was ok, but nothing special.

    Regardless of whether it's a good album or not, that was a piss poor review. There was no description of the music. The reviewer threw out a couple of song titles, but said nothing about the actual songs. If I was on the fence about getting the album, that review would not be helpful at all becuase it told me nothing about WHY the reviewer didn't like the music. Just like on message boards, when someone just says "that sucks," and doesn't attempt to explain why they think it sucks, I find their opinion meaningless.
  • DOSWDOSW Posts: 2,014
    I think a common mistake on here is the notion that anyone who doesn't like Carry On thinks that it's bad because it's not Soundgarden. That's just completely untrue... I don't like it because it's genuinely lame. Chris has done many things over his career that wasn't hard rock- things like TotD and Euphoria Morning, and those were REALLY good. Carry On isn't terrible, but it seems to me like he's trying to get into the mainstream again more than focusing on making great songs. There's no substance to anything on the album except for maybe two or three songs, and even those don't live up to the standards he's set for himself before. Two stars is about right, although the written review was completely stupid.

    What I'm saying is, it's not the type of music that Carry On haters can't deal with... it's the quality.
    It's a town full of losers and I'm pulling out of here to win
  • MCGMCG Posts: 780
    DOSW wrote:
    What I'm saying is, it's not the type of music that Carry On haters can't deal with... it's the quality.

    While this may be true for the majority, it is certainly not true for the population of "Carry On haters". There are a lot of senseless comments comming from individuals on both sides of the "Is Chris Cornell still any good?" debate.
    Which came first,
    the bad idea or me befallen by it?
  • TheGossmanTheGossman Posts: 1,120
    MCG wrote:
    R. Kelly may have urinated on somebody but that doesn't make him any less a musician than Cornell. He writes songs and sings on records, no different from Cornell, just a different genre.

    you call R. Kelly a musician, I'll call him one extremely lucky guy!
    9/4/98, 8/4/00, 12/8/02, 12/9/02, 4/15/03, 4/16/03, 4/19/03, 4/25/03, 4/26/03, 4/28/03, 4/29/03, 4/30/03, 7/8/03, 7/9/03, 9/28/04, 9/29/04, 10/6/04, 9/1/05, 9/2/05, 5/16/06, 5/17/06, 5/27/06, 5/28/06, 5/30/06, 6/1/06, 6/3/06, 8/5/07, 6/11/08, 6/12/08, 6/14/08, 6/16/08, 6/24/08, 6/25/08
  • DieasGreyDieasGrey Posts: 124
    I love Soundgarden and Cornell..but hes washed up. His voice is really really bad. Anything you hear live is brutal. His melodies are muddied up and run into each other more often than not.

    Cornell 87-97 10 out of 10

    Cornell 1998+ 3 out of 10
    No one is Righteous.......
  • sasojsasoj Posts: 239
    TheGossman wrote:
    you call R. Kelly a musician, I'll call him one extremely lucky guy!

    i believe i can fly?
    i love rock chicks
  • Alex_CoeAlex_Coe Posts: 762
    pearljamharmony wrote:
    See they were making a statement saying that when he had longer hair and no shirt ala soundgarden he was making his best material. Chirs cornell's best material was in soundgarden and thats a fact, he's trying too hard to step out of the shadow of soundgarden and thats the problem. Rollingstone was SPOT ON on this review. Could you Cornell fanboys just give it up? He made a medicore record. It got two stars because its complete garbage (PS I listened to it endlessly for a week, and wished so hard for grittier 90s cornell and got poppy meaningless garbage). If you guys haven't bought the record yet and need to get your hands on it, wait two months and it will be in your local bargain bin.

    PS did you see Era Vulgaris got four stars because it kicks ass.

    PSS Why are you guys mocking R. Kelly and his review? Its a genre of music which you people have absolutely no knowledge in, and don't listen to! STOP MAKING BIASISED opinions because your precious Chris Cornell is past his prime and is getting blasted for that steaming pile of shit carry on.

    I give this post 5 stars.

    pearljamharmoy: (star)(star)(star)(star)(star)
  • hendrix78hendrix78 Posts: 507
    It's still a pathetic excuse for a professional review. I can't believe the magazine would publish something so useless. I have no problem with them giving the album a bad review, but at least actually review it instead of essentially saying "this sucks, I wish Chris was still in Soundgarden."
  • IndifferenceIndifference Posts: 2,739
    While I disagree with the review angle - I don;t think the album is any good. I saw him a few weeks ago and the show was amazing - I downloaded the new album and have already deleted it. Not that good.

    SHOW COUNT: (164) 1990's=3, 2000's=53, 2010/20's=108, US=118, CAN=15, Europe=20 ,New Zealand=4, Australia=5
    Mexico=1, Colombia=1 



  • originalfireoriginalfire Posts: 61
    pearljamharmony wrote:
    See they were making a statement saying that when he had longer hair and no shirt ala soundgarden he was making his best material. Chirs cornell's best material was in soundgarden and thats a fact, he's trying too hard to step out of the shadow of soundgarden and thats the problem. Rollingstone was SPOT ON on this review. Could you Cornell fanboys just give it up? He made a medicore record. It got two stars because its complete garbage (PS I listened to it endlessly for a week, and wished so hard for grittier 90s cornell and got poppy meaningless garbage). If you guys haven't bought the record yet and need to get your hands on it, wait two months and it will be in your local bargain bin.

    PS did you see Era Vulgaris got four stars because it kicks ass.

    PSS Why are you guys mocking R. Kelly and his review? Its a genre of music which you people have absolutely no knowledge in, and don't listen to! STOP MAKING BIASISED opinions because your precious Chris Cornell is past his prime and is getting blasted for that steaming pile of shit carry on.

    ETHER!
  • otis mcflusterotis mcfluster Posts: 536
    That review was spot on. Especially the Audioslave comment.

    Why are people still holding on? It is OK to admit that Cornell sucks now.
  • pjoasisrulepjoasisrule Posts: 3,412
    You can tell from the very beginning of the review that they have something against him. Here are the problems with Rolling Stone..........ANYTHING that is political automatically gets a great review, they give bad reviews to just about any band that doesnt have their own original sound, even if they dont like a band they cant ever even talk about the good points and why somebody else might like the music, they love corporate music and anything that is really trendy, and worst of all they change their mind on bands they once hated when that band is seen as incredibly important and classic (example: Led Zeppelin)
    Alpine Valley 2000
    Summerfest 2006

    "Why would they come to our concert just to boo us?" -Lisa Simpson
  • Ledbetterman10Ledbetterman10 Posts: 16,936
    pearljamharmony wrote:

    Bad Motorfinger ---> Superunknown ---> Down on The Upside ---> Euphoria Morning ---> Audioslave ---> Out of Exile ---> 1/3rd of Revelations

    Dare I compare that string of albums to?

    Rubber Soul ---> Revolver--->Sgt Peppers ---> Magical Mystery Tour ---> The White Album ---> Abbey Road ---> Let it Be


    oh...my...god. all you were trying to do here is show that you know the correct order of the Beatles' album releases right? you COULDN'T actually be comparing Chris Cornell's output (while quite strong) to that of the Beatles. I mean come on.
    2000: Camden 1, 2003: Philly, State College, Camden 1, MSG 2, Hershey, 2004: Reading, 2005: Philly, 2006: Camden 1, 2, East Rutherford 1, 2007: Lollapalooza, 2008: Camden 1, Washington D.C., MSG 1, 2, 2009: Philly 1, 2, 3, 4, 2010: Bristol, MSG 2, 2011: PJ20 1, 2, 2012: Made In America, 2013: Brooklyn 2, Philly 2, 2014: Denver, 2015: Global Citizen Festival, 2016: Philly 2, Fenway 1, 2018: Fenway 1, 2, 2021: Sea. Hear. Now. 2022: Camden, 2024: Philly 2

    Pearl Jam bootlegs:
    http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
  • Dick JonesDick Jones Posts: 777
    What do you guys want? An article that is truth, or one that just says "oh yeah, he is a god,...great album, 5 stars...." He's washed up. Audioslave was bland, so is the new album.

    People read those reviews and judge wether they should buy an album or not, so I'd say they were right on with this one, and Era Vulgaris.
    Are you too good to tango with the poor poor boys?
  • PJamGrunge10PJamGrunge10 California Posts: 596
    sasoj wrote:
    well with soundgarden chris was young, now he is 42 and is making mature music proper to his age ...
    if a 42 old guy would be jumping around with long hair and no shirt then that would be crazy ...
    he has an amazing voice ...
    the hair doesnt matter

    What is that supposed to mean? You can only make slow songs if you aren't in your 20's? I don't see why age has to matter in the type of music someone creates or listens to.
    Stone Gossard...riffmeister extraordinaire!

    I am a man, I am advanced.....I am the first man to borrow Stone's leather pants!
  • DaytimeDilemmaDaytimeDilemma Posts: 2,008
    Wow, I feel like some of you took that review as a personal insult. Calm down, I'm sure Chris will be fine.
Sign In or Register to comment.