kidglov3s
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Wants her Shot
Who is Tiger Maskooo?
Posts: 15,870
|
Post by kidglov3s on Dec 10, 2014 7:26:15 GMT -5
I suppose he really will crucify the insincere tonight.
Tonight.
|
|
|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on Dec 10, 2014 9:39:27 GMT -5
I thought Oceania was pretty good, but come on Bill, srsly?
|
|
|
Post by "Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay on Dec 10, 2014 9:44:11 GMT -5
Half of the people replying to this thread are not understanding what he's saying. The focal point is here: “I would define a fan as someone who explores the depth of the artist’s work, and allows the artist to show you something. It’s not up to the artist to walk you by the hand. I don’t think there are that many of those people who exist. I’d say they’re in the low thousands” Saying 'bullshit! I still love the old stuff!' is irrelevant. If you are still buying every new Pumpkins release just to find that one great track off the new album, then you are the kind of fan he's talking about here. What I think he means is that the vast majority of people no longer delve into an artist's catalogues finding all the old B-sides and offcuts and radio sessions, hell most people don't even bother with full albums. They get the instant gratification of the individual songs that they wanted and explore no further. And he's right, most people don't really do that any more, and as such many musicians are not even bothering with making their albums even slightly worth investigating, instead just churning out the singles with some stocking fillers. With pop musicians to some extent this was always the case, but the pop stars that were a cut above - your George Michaels, your Madonnas, your Spice Girlses - would make sure an album at least had effort put into it. He's also making a point about the shallowness of music, about how everything must be spoonfed to people for them to understand the point of songs nowadays, which to an extent he may have a point about given how much misunderstood satire there currently is in the world. Whether you agree is another question, but let's at least understand what he's saying before we agree or disagree.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Dec 10, 2014 10:26:57 GMT -5
I mean, dude makes good music but it's not like he's Mozart
|
|
|
Post by notonyourradar on Dec 10, 2014 10:51:28 GMT -5
Billy Corgan is my favorite musician hands down, and his guitar playing has been vastly overlooked. He wrote great songs in his day and you can't take that away from him.
He is a colossal douche bag, and hasn't captured the success because the songs aren't good anymore. He seems to hide behind the "I'm an evolving artist and you don't get it" but it's just the songs aren't good any more.
|
|
Brood Lone Wolf Funker
Ozymandius
Got fined anyway. Possibly a Moose
James Franco is the white Donald Glover
Posts: 62,404
|
Post by Brood Lone Wolf Funker on Dec 10, 2014 11:08:07 GMT -5
Half of the people replying to this thread are not understanding what he's saying. The focal point is here: “I would define a fan as someone who explores the depth of the artist’s work, and allows the artist to show you something. It’s not up to the artist to walk you by the hand. I don’t think there are that many of those people who exist. I’d say they’re in the low thousands” Saying 'bullshit! I still love the old stuff!' is irrelevant. If you are still buying every new Pumpkins release just to find that one great track off the new album, then you are the kind of fan he's talking about here. What I think he means is that the vast majority of people no longer delve into an artist's catalogues finding all the old B-sides and offcuts and radio sessions, hell most people don't even bother with full albums. They get the instant gratification of the individual songs that they wanted and explore no further. And he's right, most people don't really do that any more, and as such many musicians are not even bothering with making their albums even slightly worth investigating, instead just churning out the singles with some stocking fillers. With pop musicians to some extent this was always the case, but the pop stars that were a cut above - your George Michaels, your Madonnas, your Spice Girlses - would make sure an album at least had effort put into it. He's also making a point about the shallowness of music, about how everything must be spoonfed to people for them to understand the point of songs nowadays, which to an extent he may have a point about given how much misunderstood satire there currently is in the world. Whether you agree is another question, but let's at least understand what he's saying before we agree or disagree. But than you have bands that are doing the opposite, most of them putting out albums with only their B-Sides and covers. Rise Against did this recently putting out one album with nothing but B-Sides, pop musicians though are more exposed than rock, and metal artists so they have no choice but to get radio airplay and churn out one to four singles. If a rock musician makes one album that sucks a few fans are up in arms but if a pop artist puts out a shitty single their whole fanbase is in revolt saying they want the old singer back.
|
|
|
Post by "Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay on Dec 10, 2014 11:48:45 GMT -5
Half of the people replying to this thread are not understanding what he's saying. The focal point is here: Saying 'bullshit! I still love the old stuff!' is irrelevant. If you are still buying every new Pumpkins release just to find that one great track off the new album, then you are the kind of fan he's talking about here. What I think he means is that the vast majority of people no longer delve into an artist's catalogues finding all the old B-sides and offcuts and radio sessions, hell most people don't even bother with full albums. They get the instant gratification of the individual songs that they wanted and explore no further. And he's right, most people don't really do that any more, and as such many musicians are not even bothering with making their albums even slightly worth investigating, instead just churning out the singles with some stocking fillers. With pop musicians to some extent this was always the case, but the pop stars that were a cut above - your George Michaels, your Madonnas, your Spice Girlses - would make sure an album at least had effort put into it. He's also making a point about the shallowness of music, about how everything must be spoonfed to people for them to understand the point of songs nowadays, which to an extent he may have a point about given how much misunderstood satire there currently is in the world. Whether you agree is another question, but let's at least understand what he's saying before we agree or disagree. But than you have bands that are doing the opposite, most of them putting out albums with only their B-Sides and covers. Rise Against did this recently putting out one album with nothing but B-Sides, pop musicians though are more exposed than rock, and metal artists so they have no choice but to get radio airplay and churn out one to four singles. If a rock musician makes one album that sucks a few fans are up in arms but if a pop artist puts out a shitty single their whole fanbase is in revolt saying they want the old singer back. This is why I put my last sentence in as a get out clause:
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 10, 2014 11:59:25 GMT -5
Seriously comes off as him basically saying "people are being such dicks by not loving me and praising my intellect enough, mostly because they just don't get how clever I am". I really dislike this kind of attitude. "No, you see, it's not that as an artist, I failed to create a work that connects with the crowd and gets my message across, it's that people are too dumb to get it". pretty much. it's no different than how Lars Ulrich acted when people didn't like Lulu. Well, Lars has had a credibility problem with fans ever since the Napster fiasco, and that was more than a decade ago, in spite of the fact that he was right about his argument. This is my problem with people like Corgan, who are good musicians, but don't understand that not everybody is going to approve of them at the level they feel they are entitled to. The majority of music fans don't really care too much about the inner workings of an album, rather the rhythm or the lyrics. That does not mean they don't care about you, because they still pay for your CDs and itunes tracks. But, in spite of his rage, he's just a douche in a cage.
|
|