Chris Cornell - Long Gone

Well he's written straightforwrd punk( SU/DOTU), metal (Pre-SU), hard rock (SU/DOTU/Audisolave), blues (Audioslave ST and TOTD), prog rock (DOTU), pop (EM/Carry On) and now Rnb (shit new record). Plus any combination of those. He's a guy who has mixed t up more than any of his contempories from the hard rock world.

teskeinc wrote:

he played HOB Vegas in May 2007 and The Pearl at the Palms in November 2007 so its been awhile. Plus Las Vegas is a city of almost 2 million and is notorios for alot of tourists , you might have heard. HOB lists capacity at 2000, the reserved seating which I tried estimating last night has maybe 750 seats which were about half full. The floor was nowhere near as tight as previous shows Ive seen there so I guess maybe 2/3 full. So he drew 1200-1300 people last night. Rationalize anyway you want. A rock icon like Chris Cornell? At 40$ a pop, youre grossing around $50,000 - $60,000. Nothing. He may have lost money on that show.

all good signs

hopefully he reads it as a response to his new material and not a defense of even further pop pandering down the road

searchlightsoul wrote:

Well he's written straightforwrd punk( SU/DOTU), metal (Pre-SU), hard rock (SU/DOTU/Audisolave), blues (Audioslave ST and TOTD), prog rock (DOTU), pop (EM/Carry On) and now Rnb (shit new record). Plus any combination of those. He's a guy who has mixed t up more than any of his contempories from the hard rock world.

I think we have a winner of the annual PJMP straw clutching contest.

JimNastics wrote:

I think we have a winner of the annual PJMP straw clutching contest.

Sure I wasn't claiming that the entire albums are genre specific-but large parts of them are.

Take "get a way car" or "last remaining light" off Audioslave's ST-that sounds like blues to me. "Kick Stand/ Ty Cobb/ No Attention/ An Unkind etc" are punk songs. I don't care and it doesn't matter who wrote them or that the band was considered a "hard rock band". Thats what they sound like to me.

This thread has been amazing: hilarious and insightful. I saw Cornell last night in Phoenix; here was what I posted as a review on his site shortly thereafter:

Pros:

- Overall performance. Despite headlining last night (8/6) in Las Vegas, Cornell showed little signs of fatigue. He engaged the crowd between virtually every song and, most importantly, demonstrated once more his return to near-peak vocal form since the start of the Carry On/Scream touring.
- Intro/outro. The string version of "Black Hole Sun" was an excellent touch, and got the audience pumped before Cornell and Co. hit the stage.

Cons:

- Predictable setlist. He played all but one of the 12 songs during his concert in Tucson last April. The exception was "Be Yourself," which is hardly a personal favorite. Fans inexplicably voted for "Can't Change Me" over "Set It Off," "Blow Up The Outside World," or "Loud Love."
- New songs (and, by extension, additional touring band member). Cornell stuck to "Watch Out" and "Long Gone" from his new album, and both drew only polite applause and groans from fellow listeners on the venue lawn. The keyboardist, obviously a Timbaland lackey, managed to not be too intrusive, as Cornell's vocals stampeded over his.

Setlist (more or less in chronological order):

Cochise
No Such Thing
Outshined
Spoonman
Watch Out
Hunger Strike
Like A Stone
Can't Change Me
Show Me How To Live
Long Gone
Black Hole Sun
Rusty Cage

***

Epilogue: I consider this performance the best I've seen from Cornell live. Although I would have liked to hear something relatively underplayed from within his catalog (even "What You Are" would have sufficed), he nailed every song he did and then some.

However, a thought nagged me as I drove home. I still can't help but suspect that Cornell, to a slight extent during the Carry On touring and to an exponentially greater one at present, is intent on selling out his past work to return to mainstream relevance. I scanned the audience frequently last night, and what I noticed was a vast range in age, representing not only the younger fans who might have learned of him through Audioslave or later, but also quite a few middle-aged folks who doubtless rocked out to "Outshined" and that ilk when they first hit airwaves. Throughout the performance, I picked up on at least three indicators of Cornell trying to exploit these people, for lack of a better phrase, to sustain their interest in him and get them to purchase Scream.

The first was the setlist, which included songs recorded from 1990 to 2008. It was clearly meant to correspond to the age disparity above described. The second, curiously enough, was his outfit. With his long, curly hair, lack of shirt, long shorts, and black boots, Cornell appeared fresh-picked from filming the music video for "Jesus Christ Pose." Older fans could conceivably recognize that, presumably making his renditions of the new songs more palatable despite an inherent juxtaposition, while perhaps younger fans would appreciate his "edgy" choice of outfit and/or well-toned physique. The final indicator was a rather blunt marketing tactic: the depiction of the Scream album cover before, during, and after Cornell performed each new song. The cover art, as we well know by now, shows him breaking a guitar -- maybe while muttering, "Didn't use this; might as well get rid of it" -- and looking generally fierce and very rock-star. This visual, I'm sure, was meant to have the same effect as his outfit, and each of those images basically reinforces the other's effectiveness. In all, I believe these indicators point to Cornell trying to rein in as many diverse groups of people as he can at each venue, playing to their respective sensibilities and tastes toward a profitable end once Scream (not the hit Michael Jackson single, remember) is ready for purchase.

This is an extremely cynical view, especially as an addendum to a positive concert review, but too many ominous pieces were apparent to me and seemed to fit. I'm interested to see what others think, especially if anyone actually agrees with this outlook.

***

Sorry for the length here, but I know that people have been interested in how he's performed of late, as well as integrated his new material. The two new songs he played were mostly atrocious (though better than the recorded versions) and sounded woefully out of place with the likes of "Outshined," "Rusty Cage," and even "Be Yourself."

Final note: I'm betting that "Never Far Away" comes immediately after "Long Gone" on the album. The music that ends the latter would seem to flow well into that of the former, and thematically the lyrics are complimentary ("Now I'm gone" --> "Now that's I'm gone, you're still never far away").

Forgive the immediate above: I like to do CSI in my spare time ...

and for my 7,500 post (and new song title) id just like to say...

"Listen, hear, he is inside
One who lives while others lie
I close my eyes and walk a thousand years
A thousand years that arent mine
It seems hes near me as I walk
One who loved what love denied
He lives these years that I walk blind
All these years cannot be mine
Tomorrow begat tomorrow"

now THOSE are lyrics

tknauer wrote:

Epilogue: I consider this performance the best I've seen from Cornell live. Although I would have liked to hear something relatively underplayed from within his catalog (even "What You Are" would have sufficed), he nailed every song he did and then some.

However, a thought nagged me as I drove home. I still can't help but suspect that Cornell, to a slight extent during the Carry On touring and to an exponentially greater one at present, is intent on selling out his past work to return to mainstream relevance. I scanned the audience frequently last night, and what I noticed was a vast range in age, representing not only the younger fans who might have learned of him through Audioslave or later, but also quite a few middle-aged folks who doubtless rocked out to "Outshined" and that ilk when they first hit airwaves. Throughout the performance, I picked up on at least three indicators of Cornell trying to exploit these people, for lack of a better phrase, to sustain their interest in him and get them to purchase Scream.

The first was the setlist, which included songs recorded from 1990 to 2008. It was clearly meant to correspond to the age disparity above described. The second, curiously enough, was his outfit. With his long, curly hair, lack of shirt, long shorts, and black boots, Cornell appeared fresh-picked from filming the music video for "Jesus Christ Pose." Older fans could conceivably recognize that, presumably making his renditions of the new songs more palatable despite an inherent juxtaposition, while perhaps younger fans would appreciate his "edgy" choice of outfit and/or well-toned physique. The final indicator was a rather blunt marketing tactic: the depiction of the Scream album cover before, during, and after Cornell performed each new song. The cover art, as we well know by now, shows him breaking a guitar -- maybe while muttering, "Didn't use this; might as well get rid of it" -- and looking generally fierce and very rock-star. This visual, I'm sure, was meant to have the same effect as his outfit, and each of those images basically reinforces the other's effectiveness. In all, I believe these indicators point to Cornell trying to rein in as many diverse groups of people as he can at each venue, playing to their respective sensibilities and tastes toward a profitable end once Scream (not the hit Michael Jackson single, remember) is ready for purchase.

This is an extremely cynical view, especially as an addendum to a positive concert review, but too many ominous pieces were apparent to me and seemed to fit. I'm interested to see what others think, especially if anyone actually agrees with this outlook.

...

Well, it seems that you are right about him trying to get the max album sales possible and working his usual audience. Except for the part about his dress - Arizona in August, no shirt with shorts - thats what I've been wearing most of this summer.

Essentially, the new songs themselves are determine the amount of sales. Many old fans are already set against buying this. His outfit doesn't change the sound. All bands play their "hits" at concerts, except may be Radiohead. And bands have some sort of big poster or sheet that displays their new album in hopes of the audience recognizing it in the stores. And he possibly is very impressed with how he looks in his new photos. Obviously, he trying to sell his album - what a strange thing for you to be paranoid of. I mean, thats what recording musicians try to do weather they are selling it out of their trunk or through a big label. What is wrong with Cornell trying to "rein in as many diverse groups as he can at each venue" ???

sgossard3 wrote:

ha... well i guess that explains it... chris NEEDS HIM... those really are some of my favorite SG lyrics though... along with "drawing flies", "no attention", and "tighter & tighter"

They need each other, Kim can't sing, lol.