BIlly Corgan talks shit on PJ on Howard Stern show..
Comments
-
Mac-HINE!!!!!!
0 -
-
I saw Pearl Jam at the ACC (Toronto) in 2011 and SP at the same venue in 2012.
Pearl Jam packed the place two nights for in a row while SP played one night only to just the "lower bowl" - they did't even sell tickets for the upper bowl as it was blacked out!
0 -
Speaking of the Foo Fighters and Howard Stern...this is such a better listen
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjwa_QspPiE Bristow 05132010 to Amsterdam 2 061320180 -
FRAUDS!the tiki bomb wrote: »They're in too.<br />
<br />
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBgf4vWq-S0<br />
<br />
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ru3gH27Fn6E
0 -
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.
and Charles Barkley is an idiot.Your boos mean nothing to me, for I have seen what makes you cheer0 -
paulonious wrote: »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.
and Charles Barkley is an idiot.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2487969/Mick-Jagger-admitted-Rolling-Stones-outshone-Beatles.htmlwww.myspace.com0 -
The Juggler wrote: »paulonious wrote: »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.
and Charles Barkley is an idiot.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2487969/Mick-Jagger-admitted-Rolling-Stones-outshone-Beatles.html
that rivalry/competition was conceived and bred by the media. No one is saying they are in competition with BC except BC himself.
the difference between Billy trashing artists and, say, Ed openly mocking Marky Mark, is that Billy is shouting from the rooftops that he's the best ever. No one else from that era does that. Only assholes do that. I don't care if he sees himself as just "being honest". He's being a dick. If he wants to say "I didn't much like the last PJ record", fine, but he keeps putting himself above others, and if you can tell me you enjoy listening to people in daily life praise themselves by putting others down at the same time putting their own work at a level that it is a reach at best, then I tip my hat to you, sir.
I walk away from douchebags like that in mid-sentence.
Your boos mean nothing to me, for I have seen what makes you cheer0 -
paulonious wrote: »The Juggler wrote: »paulonious wrote: »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.
and Charles Barkley is an idiot.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2487969/Mick-Jagger-admitted-Rolling-Stones-outshone-Beatles.html
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.www.myspace.com0 -
The Juggler wrote: »paulonious wrote: »The Juggler wrote: »paulonious wrote: »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.
and Charles Barkley is an idiot.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2487969/Mick-Jagger-admitted-Rolling-Stones-outshone-Beatles.html
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?
Your boos mean nothing to me, for I have seen what makes you cheer0 -
http://www.alternativenation.net/billy-corgan-new-bands-michael-bay/
Read the above and tell me he's not a prick.Your boos mean nothing to me, for I have seen what makes you cheer0 -
Um...yeah, he's a prick, I suppose, but whatever.
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 061320180 -
paulonious wrote: »The Juggler wrote: »paulonious wrote: »The Juggler wrote: »paulonious wrote: »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.
and Charles Barkley is an idiot.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2487969/Mick-Jagger-admitted-Rolling-Stones-outshone-Beatles.html
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. hawww.myspace.com0 -
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
Seattle0 -
The Juggler wrote: »paulonious wrote: »The Juggler wrote: »paulonious wrote: »The Juggler wrote: »paulonious wrote: »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.
and Charles Barkley is an idiot.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2487969/Mick-Jagger-admitted-Rolling-Stones-outshone-Beatles.html
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.
Your boos mean nothing to me, for I have seen what makes you cheer0 -
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 -
paulonious wrote: »The Juggler wrote: »paulonious wrote: »The Juggler wrote: »paulonious wrote: »The Juggler wrote: »paulonious wrote: »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.
and Charles Barkley is an idiot.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2487969/Mick-Jagger-admitted-Rolling-Stones-outshone-Beatles.html
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 onwww.myspace.com0 -
Last-12-Exit wrote: »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.www.myspace.com0 -
The Juggler wrote: »Last-12-Exit wrote: »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.
Not true - Justin Beiber.
Beilebe it!
Post edited by PJfanwillneverleave1 on0 -
Corgan may be a jerk but the new album is actually pretty good0
Categories
- All Categories
- 149K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110.2K The Porch
- 279 Vitalogy
- 35.1K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.3K Flea Market
- 39.3K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help