Red Mosquito

mastaflatch wrote:Although Corgan tries to minimize Radiohead's output of the 90s, there's an awful lot of people who consider Ok Computer to be the defining album of the 90s (and maybe the most important album since Nevermind). SP had a nice 5 year slot in the limelight (if I'm being generous) but then, they became way less important. Another thing that bothers me is the supposedly implicit statement that Corgan makes about SP being influential because, let's be honest, a band can have hits after hits can easily go on not changing a damn thing around it and I have a hard time figuring who or what SP paved the way for. In my opinion, they were just as derivative as PJ or FF. More musically varied, yes, but Corgan didn't invent a new musical style. As far as leaving a stamp on an era and yielding a shitload of copycats, PJ certainly succeeded.

Speaking as someone who's paid good attention to PJ during the 90s, they sure had songs - they just didn't try as hard as Corgan to get them to the public.

One last thing - someone correct me if I'm wrong - Vedder never used this kind of desperately pathetic promo stunt i.e. shitting on his peers to make him look better.

darth_vedder wrote:I don't think what Corgan said was necessarily off the mark. Actually, I think he's spot on about the Foo Fighters, but then again, I've never really liked them. As for PJ, I can see his point with some of their recent output, but the Vitalogy -> Binaural stretch is about as good of a stretch as any rock band has ever had, so I gotta disagree with him there.

Iprefertheiroldstuff wrote:by sighting his chord choices as being uninspired rip-offs of the big players who came before him.

The perfect mix of recycled 60's chord progressions and 90's distortion pedal-as-songwriting, with lyrics that make you feel like anybody can be a lyricist because apparently yes.

But his band had a sound that made it stand out on the radio. PJ Harvey, Nick Cave, and many others were vastly better songwriters.

But all this legacy retrofitting by almost every 90's band is hilarious, and he's just the most blatant and unapologetic of the bunch. Hardly the only guilty party.

I like the record too. I just don't think it's better than good

Yeah it's pretty good.

McParadigm wrote:90's distortion pedal-as-songwriting

McParadigm wrote:Who can say what any of this means?

I don't think it means anything.

theplatypus wrote:I'm listening to Siamese Dream right now. I don't know about this "top scribes" boast but this album is better than Vs and In Utero.

And there it is. Nothing to see here.

malice wrote:

McParadigm wrote:Who can say what any of this means?

I don't think it means anything.

so you mean if one washed up rock star calls himself and a dead rock star better than another washed up rock star its all purely, uh, subjective?

McParadigm wrote:

And there it is. Nothing to see here.

It really was a lot of noise about nothing.

Sort of like how bands from the 90's would step on their distortion pedal in order to exaggerate dynamic transitions, and how at some of these times maybe more creative or engaging songwriting would have served them better than simply layering fuzz or volume.

But I dunno.