PUMPKINS PARIS, FIRST IMPRESSIONS

But you implied that with you question….

Who cares about the real estate holdings of musicians besides Rhett?

Originally posted by Darth Ed:

Originally posted by Charlie Nakatestes,Japanese Golfer:
[QB]Oh, and by the way, I'm not a musician.

Um, I didn't say you were.

Very well. I shall rephrase the question to disambiguate:

Who besides Rhett cares about the real estate holdings of musicians?

Originally posted by nkotb:
I just don't really get the level of excitement. Can anyone explain it to me? I can get the "never seen them before" vibe; I'd probably jump on that bandwagon if I hadn't gotten a chance to see them in their prime. But to say "the Pumpkins are back" seems SUPER over the top to me.

If Paul & Ringo put a band together, played all Beatles songs and toured the world, would the Beatles be back? That's fairly similar: one main songwriter and a drummer.

Again, I'm not trying to be a killjoy…I'd really like to know why it's so exciting.

I'm 100% with you on this one. I liked "Gish" and thought of them as sort of a My Bloody Valentine that actually released records. (Just like I initially thought Oasis was a Stones Roses that actually released records. I was severly disappointed on both counts.) But after that they lost me. Billy Corgan and his minions insisted upon themselves.

And this new album? Doesn't the cover of "Zeitgeist" look exactly like an Offspring album cover?

As for the Beatles, at least you can say baby boomers are efficient. Let's consolidate! What are Ringo and Paul? A drummer and a bass player! Who have died from the Who? A drummer and bass player! Get 'em together! Pete Townsend, Roger Daltrey, Ringo Starr and Paul McCartney. The Whotles. Think about it. They could sell-out two (maybe three!) nights at Wolf Trap!

Brian

Billy Corgan has tens of millions of dollars. He's turned down opportunities to use Today and Tonite Tonite in commercials that would have paid over ten million dollars. So, I don't think he's exactly aching for cash. I don't see why it's so hard to believe he actually wants to play Pumpkins material and isn't looking for cash. Their solo shows are selling for $20-25 a ticket when they could easily charge three times as much and sell out the same venues.

Originally posted by Brian_Walalce:

Originally posted by nkotb:
I just don't really get the level of excitement. Can anyone explain it to me? I can get the "never seen them before" vibe; I'd probably jump on that bandwagon if I hadn't gotten a chance to see them in their prime. But to say "the Pumpkins are back" seems SUPER over the top to me.

If Paul & Ringo put a band together, played all Beatles songs and toured the world, would the Beatles be back? That's fairly similar: one main songwriter and a drummer.

Again, I'm not trying to be a killjoy…I'd really like to know why it's so exciting.

I'm 100% with you on this one. I liked "Gish" and thought of them as sort of a My Bloody Valentine that actually released records. (Just like I initially thought Oasis was a Stones Roses that actually released records. I was severly disappointed on both counts.) But after that they lost me. Billy Corgan and his minions insisted upon themselves.

And this new album? Doesn't the cover of "Zeitgeist" look exactly like an Offspring album cover?

As for the Beatles, at least you can say baby boomers are efficient. Let's consolidate! What are Ringo and Paul? A drummer and a bass player! Who have died from the Who? A drummer and bass player! Get 'em together! Pete Townsend, Roger Daltrey, Ringo Starr and Paul McCartney. The Whotles. Think about it. They could sell-out two (maybe three!) nights at Wolf Trap!

Brian

You have the wrong analogy. If Paul McCartney and John Lennon got together and started writing songs again, would that be worthy of the Beatles moniker?

Corgan and Chamberlin were the songwriters in the Smashing Pumpkins. That's a much more appropriate comparison.

But that's exactly my point. Why not just play Pumpkins material? Why brand it the Smashing Pumpkins when it's clearly not the same band? What's different about his solo album and Zeitgeist, especially if he's the main songwriter of both?

Everyone is shitting their pants over the reunion. If he had decided to tour under his name, even with Jimmy Chamberlain playing drums and playing the exact same set lists, a fraction of people would care. By putting that name on it, he knows people will respond. That sounds a little greedy to me.

Originally posted by Julian, faux celeb-porn CONNOISSEUR:
I don't see why it's so hard to believe he actually wants to play Pumpkins material and isn't looking for cash.

Hey, if Bonnie Princess Billy can do it, why not Billy Princess Zwan?

Originally posted by nkotb:
But that's exactly my point. Why not just play Pumpkins material? Why brand it the Smashing Pumpkins when it's clearly not the same band? What's different about his solo album and Zeitgeist, especially if he's the main songwriter of both?

Everyone is shitting their pants over the reunion. If he had decided to tour under his name, even with Jimmy Chamberlain playing drums and playing the exact same set lists, a fraction of people would care. By putting that name on it, he knows people will respond. That sounds a little greedy to me.

Originally posted by Julian, faux celeb-porn CONNOISSEUR:
I don't see why it's so hard to believe he actually wants to play Pumpkins material and isn't looking for cash.

According to allmusic.com, Corgan wrote a vast majority of the songs. James Iha was credited with at least co-writing credit on 6 songs. Chamberlain on none. Just saying.

Originally posted by callat703:
Corgan and Chamberlin were the songwriters in the Smashing Pumpkins. That's a much more appropriate comparison.

Originally posted by nkotb:
According to allmusic.com, Corgan wrote a vast majority of the songs. James Iha was credited with at least co-writing credit on 6 songs. Chamberlain on none. Just saying.

Originally posted by callat703:
Corgan and Chamberlin were the songwriters in the Smashing Pumpkins. That's a much more appropriate comparison.

So six songs out of a catalogue of what? A few hundred, counting B sides?

Songs credited to James Iha:

…Said Sadly
Believe
Blew Away
Bugg Superstar
Go
Take Me Down
The Bells
The Boy

Quick! Somebody sing the refrain from The Bells!

I think it's safe to say this version of the band will not be playing any of these songs.

If you've read any interviews with Billy Corgan, he has (throughout the band's history) cited Jimmy Chamberlin as his songwriting partner and creative foil. Just sayin'.

Right. So how is this not a Billy Corgan solo show?

Originally posted by callat703:
I think it's safe to say this version of the band will not be playing any of these songs.

Originally posted by nkotb:
Right. So how is this not a Billy Corgan solo show?

Originally posted by callat703:
I think it's safe to say this version of the band will not be playing any of these songs.

Wouldn't that also indicate that the Smashing Pumpkins were always a "Billy Corgan solo show?" I mean, seriously - the band almost never played any of those Iha songs live throughout their tenure with the original lineup. I'd venture to bet that some of them have NEVER been played live.

Take Me Down is a nice enough song, as is …Said Sadly and Go, but I don't think anybody would contend this was ANYWHERE near the best the Pumpkins had to offer.

Blah, in the end, I guess I really don't care. I'm bored at work and needed something to do, and pointing out that stinks of forced nostalgia and blatant greed. But hey, if that's your thing, more power to you ;)

Originally posted by callat703:
Wouldn't that also indicate that the Smashing Pumpkins were always a "Billy Corgan solo show?" I mean, seriously - the band almost never played any of those Iha songs live throughout their tenure with the original lineup. I'd venture to bet that some of them have NEVER been played live.

You're pretty cool, nkotb. (Does that stand for "New Kids on the Block?)

I just think a lot of people are naive enough to think that Smashing Pumpkins was EVER anything other than Billy Corgan's ego trip. I mean, he's been on the outs with Jimmy, D'arcy and James at various points in their history. I guess now it's the "Jimmy's cool, James and D'Arcy suck" era.

And if the music was there, I'd give it to them. But it just isn't. Rock n Roll is full of "talented a-holes." And sometimes the suffering is worth it. In this case, I don't feel it is.

Plus, I think there are SOME fanatics out there who own "The Aeroplane Flies High" and know every riff in "The Pastichio Medley" but let's face it, in a dire industry, you can make some profit off of "90's/alt" nostalgia (I just read yesterday that Counting Crows, Collective Soul, Third Eye Blind and Live will be touring together this summer. What, Sponge and Spacehog were too busy?) Most of the people going to these Smashing Pumpkins shows know about five, maybe six songs. They're trying to recapture a past and an era that never existed.

Brian

Originally posted by nkotb:
Except, uh, the Pixies shows were REUNIONS. This is Corgan solo playing Pumpkins songs. Who is this different than the new GNR?

Originally posted by bnyced0:
Just by a way of contrast, the Pixies endless reunion while great never rose above their past, which if you were there in the past wasnâ??t all that illustrious. They kind of took advantage of the fondness of the old fans, and the feeling of missing something of the younger newer fans.

First reason this is different than GNR: The Pumpkins have a new record set to be released on an actual date, as opposed to GNR, which have a new record that may or may not exist.

Further reasons: GNR wrote their almost all of their songs as a group and credit them as such. Those that were not a group effort were rather equally split between the members in terms of writing credits.

This just isn't true for the Pumpkins. Like him or not, Billy Corgan wrote almost all of the Pumpkins catalog.

Did someone forget to change all of your diapers today? Jeez louise. Boy would Billy Corgan love this thread just to see all the attention (good and bad) that he's getting.

Originally posted by nkotb:
I happen to like the pre-Mellon Collie albums quite a bit, and I've seen the band a handful of times previous, so it's not like I think they suck*. I just think it's a little weird to think this isn't some type of cash grab. Billy's tried two things since the split: Zwan, which tanked, and a solo record, which also tanked. If he had toured solo, with a backing band, and played the exact same set as you saw, would you have been as excited? Would it have made as much news and money? No…people are buying into the Smashing Pumpkins brand.

But I also honestly don't get the difference between this tour (two original members playing some new material and a lot of old tracks) and GNR (one original member, one auxiliary member, and a lot of bigger names added playing some new material and a lot of old tracks). How is one a nostalgia trip and the other isn't? How is one authentic and the other not?

If youre looking for the cash-cow reunion, you should have seen the Jesus & Mary Chain at Webster Hall. With tickets at $45 a pop (naturally not including service charges) and a catalog that is quite deep, they should have played for at least an hour and a half. Jim looked like he would have rather been anywhere else but there (I shouldnt have expected more, at least they faced us) and he just seemed to have no energy. Playing must have been the hardest thing he had to do. I must say the guitars were spot-on and really it probably didnt matter about Jim. They did sound great after all.

But I do wonder if it was all about the money. They played an hour long set, and the crowd was going nuts for them. Came back 5 seconds later to play a one song encore. And then *bam* they were gone!

I did see them in college with Mazzy Star and had such fond memories. This will not be leaving any sort of memory except, thank god I had great friends who were all there just for the music. We danced and had fun. But sadly even great company, didnt make the show worth $45.

The set list was probably something off of 21 singles? I forgot the name of it, but whatever their singles album was.

I guess Im hoping/thinking that the SP reunion is more than what JAMC are selling. The ticket prices are reasonable and Billy seems to be putting his heart into it and at least playing some pretty long shows, seeming to not leave people disappointed.

With so many reunions (crowded house, squeeze) and exorbitant ticket prices, it seems that perhaps the SP are on the right track. Even if its all about money, at least I dont have to pay a fortune to see them. and sadly, i couldnt get tickets so probably wotn be seeing them, unless they somehow play lolla :)

just my $.02. and btw - i initially loved SSPU because it reminded me so much of SP. I describe them to everyone as that same sound. too bad they sucked live (imho).

First:

Originally posted by Brian_Walalce:
You're pretty cool, nkotb. (Does that stand for "New Kids on the Block?)

Thanks for the kind word. Yes, it stands for New Kids on the Block. I first joined this board to make fun of some poster who complained that the Club raped (his words, not mine) Murder City Devils' fans when MDC cut their show sort torotest someone getting thrown out for throwing a bottle. Long story. Anyway, I figured using that as a screen name was so un-rock-n-roll it would bend the kid out of shape, and then I never felt like changing.

Second:

Originally posted by bearman:
Did someone forget to change all of your diapers today? Jeez louise. Boy would Billy Corgan love this thread just to see all the attention (good and bad) that he's getting.

Bearman and a lot of the rest of you are so concerned with music being "authentic," you have to come down on bands or posters that you don't considering real music fans. It just strikes me as odd that none of you think this stinks. Seems a little hypocritical to me is all. It's deemed indie-rock-worthy to think this is ok, but not in other cases. It's just like the argument about Arther Lee's death vs. Layne Staley's death we were having last week.

Third:

Originally posted by callat703:
Like him or not, Billy Corgan wrote almost all of the Pumpkins catalog.

I'll never argue against this. And I couldn't care less about any song James Iha has ever written. But no one has answered yet what the difference is between Billy Corgan's solo work (which was pretty universally dismissed) and the "reunited" Pumpkins band (which is universally revered, at least on this board). Does it being labeled the Pumpkins all of the sudden get him his inspiration back? Probably not, but it certainly get all of you salivating, didn't it!

Originally posted by nkotb:
But no one has answered yet what the difference is between Billy Corgan's solo work (which was pretty universally dismissed) and the "reunited" Pumpkins band (which is universally revered, at least on this board). Does it being labeled the Pumpkins all of the sudden get him his inspiration back? Probably not, but it certainly get all of you salivating, didn't it!

I don't know how to explain it, but the Pumpkins had a certain sound or style and Corgan explicitly stayed away from it during Zwan and TFE. In 2001, when Zwan played it's first shows, they had all these great tunes, virtually none of which made it to the album. When asked why, Corgan said they were scrapped because they sounded too much like TSP and Zwan wasn't TSP. Again, with TFE, Corgan stated that he set out to put out a certain record and wasn't trying to do a Pumpkins-esque record.

So, while I don't think it's about him getting his "inspiration" back, I do think there's a certain element of him making "Pumpkins music" vs. him making "non-Pumpkins music". I haven't heard all of Zeitgeist, obviously, but the live clips I've heard DO sound like Pumpkins songs. I almost think it's like a switch he throws - he's either trying to write "Pumpkins songs" or "non-Pumpkins songs". I'm not saying Zeitgeist is going to be as good as SD or MCIS, but I do think it'll be closer to those then MSOTS or TFE.

(For the record, I thought MSOTS was pretty decent, but TFE was terrible aside from a song or two.)

I mentioned this on another thread.

I think the key difference when it comes to the solo album versus the Smashing Pumpkins is the intention behind the writing. In the course of a number of interviews I've done with people that have multiple music projects, most musicians are able to separate the material that they use for each band.

One direct example. I interviewed Ted Stevens of Cursive, who also plays in Mayday, and asked him about the writing process for each band, and how he knew when he wrote a song whether it was a Cursive tune or a Mayday tune. And he said it was pretty clear from the outset where the song was going to end up. It had to do with mood and the initial songwriting goals.

I imagine this is the same for most musicians. As a musician myself, I know when I sit down to write something for my band, its different than when I sit down to write something for myself.

So when it comes to the Smashing Pumpkins, I think the name is indicative of Corgan's intent. Zwan set out to be a different project (read this interview I did with Jimmy Chamberlin to see his take on that: http://kyndmusic.com/june05/chamberlin.htm) in terms of artistic intent, and ended up morphing into something else due to label pressure.

Corgan's solo record is the same thing - way more keyboards, different collaborators, and ultimately a different product.

I think the Smashing Pumpkins name is reflective of Corgan's songwriting intent. And I think the first single definitely supports that - "Tarantula" just DOES NOT sound like Zwan or TheFutureEmbrace. It sounds much more akin to the Smashing Pumpkins than anything else Corgan has done.

Prolific songwriters are like that. Look at Ryan Adams - he has all kinds of random stuff that he does that ends up under different monikers - The Finger, for example, or doing a record "& The Cardinals" versus just using his name. They're just labels that represent the intention behind them.

Thanks, Julian. That was my only question, snarky comments aside ;)

I'll admit to never having listened to Zwan, or his solo record. Hell, I never heard all of the last two Pumpkins records until I got them from lala earlier this year. And for good reason, because they pretty much blow, IMO. That being said, I couldn't imagine what the big difference would make.

Still not convinced on my end, but that's a personal choice. Still, if I do go to the Virgin Festival, I'd be more than happy to check them out and be proven wrong.