View Full Version : Siamese Dream 2


DeviousJ
01-27-2008, 09:31 AM
<embed src="http://static.boomp3.com/player.swf?id=cbe25cd34934" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="200" height="20" allowScriptAccess="always" align="middle"></embed><a style="font-size: 9px; color: #ccc; letter-spacing: -1px; text-decoration: none" href="http://boomp3.com/m/cbe25cd34934">boomp3.com</a><img style="visibility:hidden;width:0px;height:0px;" border=0 width=0 height=0 src="http://counters.gigya.com/wildfire/CIMP/Jmx*PTEyMDE*NDQyMTkyNzMmcHQ9MTIwMTQ*NDIyNTk*MyZwPT cwNzUxJmQ9Jm49.jpg" />

Cool As Ice Cream
01-27-2008, 09:38 AM
dunno

???
01-27-2008, 09:47 AM
just how much time do you put into these man

DeviousJ
01-27-2008, 09:51 AM
More time than Billy

athankyew

New Art Rioter
01-27-2008, 09:56 AM
What an ungodly racket

rolmos
01-27-2008, 10:13 AM
This will make a great alarm clock tune, thanks.

Mariner
01-27-2008, 10:31 AM
athankyew

nothing like a good sunday morning lol

Mariner
01-27-2008, 10:34 AM
oh ps. THANK YOU I HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR THIS SINCE 1994 EAT BALLZ, CORGAN RULES

mayday
01-27-2008, 11:16 AM
lol!

reminds me of how awesome Geekusa is

Gish08
01-27-2008, 02:46 PM
Eh, not quite.

The only similar section would be the quiet part, but even then the approach is still a little different.

wHATcOLOR
01-27-2008, 03:25 PM
fucking awesome

DeviousJ
01-27-2008, 03:38 PM
Eh, not quite.

The only similar section would be the quiet part, but even then the approach is still a little different.

Exactly the same held note at 0:04
Woo double cymbal hits
Widdly lead -> <i>exactly</i> the same slow bend into a quiet part
Atmospheric quiet part with soft vocals, exactly the same waaaoowaaa bent note
Same vocal melody and meter on the last phrase -> rock up drums -> practically the same widdly solo intro

I didn't bother matching the speeds or anything, mainly because the similarities were hilariously obvious as it is. The approach is a little different but the structure and dynamics are almost a carbon copy in those parts

duovamp
01-27-2008, 03:50 PM
I'd like to hear Cherub Rock playing over Moleasskiss.

Mo
01-27-2008, 04:29 PM
I think I love you.

tcm
01-27-2008, 04:35 PM
fake. it's a fake.

tcm
01-27-2008, 04:40 PM
def. gonna try syncing Zeitgeist to Fantasia 2000 now, though. later.

the sellout
01-27-2008, 11:21 PM
Yeah, i thought it was pretty obvious without having to make such a mess. Remember when those guys broke into the Pumpkins' rehearsal space and heard them practicing what they were 1000% sure was Geek through the door? $50 on it being Tarantoola.

xezton
01-28-2008, 08:30 AM
Exactly the same held note at 0:04
Woo double cymbal hits
Widdly lead -> <i>exactly</i> the same slow bend into a quiet part
Atmospheric quiet part with soft vocals, exactly the same waaaoowaaa bent note
Same vocal melody and meter on the last phrase -> rock up drums -> practically the same widdly solo intro

I didn't bother matching the speeds or anything, mainly because the similarities were hilariously obvious as it is. The approach is a little different but the structure and dynamics are almost a carbon copy in those parts

While I think it's nifty that you discovered this, and some of the transitions are pretty much the exact same thing, I still wonder what you're trying to prove by saying that the Smashing Pumpkins sound like the Smashing Pumpkins.

The songs are very different, with different energies and overall sound, other than some transitions and the typical loud-soft-loud SP style that they've been doing forever (which obviously isn't something the pumpkins invented or anything, since all music is borrowed music). Plus, I think they have borrowed sounds from just about every previous album before Zeitgeist because... well, they're the Smashing Pumpkins.

I'm sure you can do this with any band that has been around for so long and has so many hundreds of songs.

It's when you can do this to a band that only has one or two albums that it's funny, because then they're obviously not even trying.

IWishIWasBlank
01-28-2008, 09:27 AM
That's shite. Boo Hiss. Thread fail.

DeviousJ
01-28-2008, 09:41 AM
While I think it's nifty that you discovered this, and some of the transitions are pretty much the exact same thing, I still wonder what you're trying to prove by saying that the Smashing Pumpkins sound like the Smashing Pumpkins.

The songs are very different, with different energies and overall sound, other than some transitions and the typical loud-soft-loud SP style that they've been doing forever (which obviously isn't something the pumpkins invented or anything, since all music is borrowed music). Plus, I think they have borrowed sounds from just about every previous album before Zeitgeist because... well, they're the Smashing Pumpkins.

I'm sure you can do this with any band that has been around for so long and has so many hundreds of songs.

It's when you can do this to a band that only has one or two albums that it's funny, because then they're obviously not even trying.

Well it's partly funny in light of the whole 'we're progressive, we started off sounding like 90s Pumpkins and intentionally moved away from that'/'you haters just want Siamese Dream 2! Billy has moved on!' stuff, but it's also weird how closely Tarantula cribs from Geek USA - if it's not intentional, you'd think they'd have noticed. I mean I know I did the first time I heard it, even if I didn't notice the little things like that first held note while they're both rocking along. It all feels a bit like a halfhearted attempt to recapture the glory days, like a lot things about this 'revival' or whatever.

Anyway this isn't new, there's all the 'Doomsday Clock wants to be Bodies' etc. stuff and I just thought Tarantula was the most blatant example. I layered the 'similar' parts over each other and I thought the results were funny

???
01-28-2008, 09:50 AM
i have to disagree about them sounding similar. yeah some of the parts might layer over each other, they both have that sort of rollercoaster song structure, but the application is totally different. i think you're being facetious

DeviousJ
01-28-2008, 09:59 AM
i have to disagree about them sounding similar. yeah some of the parts might layer over each other, they both have that sort of rollercoaster song structure, but the application is totally different. i think you're being facetious

Are you kidding me? They rock along, then suddenly die into the exact same long bent note, there's a quiet atmospheric part with soft vocals and drums and guitars going 'weeoooweew', then there's the same vocal phrase before the drums rock up and they hit very similar solo parts. It's almost like they were writing the song and said 'ok we have the meat of the song, what should we do near the end? I know, we'll basically do exactly what we did in Geek USA. Now let's break for lunch.'

Cool As Ice Cream
01-28-2008, 10:14 AM
i don't like tarantula.

???
01-28-2008, 10:30 AM
there would be no point in intentionally plagiarising their own song. i wouldn't call it a total coincidence, but the outcome of tarantula depended more on what i think you could call billy's structural "affectations" rather than an explicit desire to rehash geek usa. he likes his guitar solos OTT, indulgent and meandering, he likes his notes to bend a certain way, he likes quiet parts to explode predictably into loud ones and get back into the chorus. look at the elements that don't sync up though- totally different (and oddly generic) drum beat, super-lazy 3-note guitar riff that doesn't compare to geek usa at all, no major musical progessions in the song apart from the brief strummy breakdown (geek has what, 4 totally distinct sections?). you're overanalysing this

xezton
01-28-2008, 11:14 AM
Are you kidding me? They rock along, then suddenly die into the exact same long bent note, there's a quiet atmospheric part with soft vocals and drums and guitars going 'weeoooweew', then there's the same vocal phrase before the drums rock up and they hit very similar solo parts. It's almost like they were writing the song and said 'ok we have the meat of the song, what should we do near the end? I know, we'll basically do exactly what we did in Geek USA. Now let's break for lunch.'

Isn't this what most Smashing Pumpkins songs sound like? :think:

Let's see:
Siva
Rocks along until 1:50
quiet atmosphereic until 2:20
Drums kick up and solo

Silverfuck
Rocks along until about 3:03
quiet atmospheric until about 6:47
drums kick up and "solo" starts about 7:05

Daphne Descends
"Rocks" until about 2:38
quiet atmospheric until 3:13
drums kick up and song finishes

The Everlasting Gaze
Rocks along until 2:45
quiet until 2:58
drums kick in and "solo" till the end

Bullet With Butterfly Wings
Rocks along until 3:05
quiet until 3:26
drums kick in and song finishes

Bodies
Rocks along until 1:56
quiet until 2:14
drums kick in and solo

The only similarity that is striking is that long bent note and somewhat similar solos. The rest is just the Smashing Pumpkins.

I think you're claim that they're not being progressive because one song, that follows the ABA song structure of hundreds of thousands of songs in the world, has a lead-in and solo that sounds very similar to another song, is shallow. The two songs as a whole don't sound anything like each other except for those two parts and the fact that they sound like most typical Smashing Pumpkins (and hundreds of other bands for that matter) songs.

???
01-28-2008, 11:46 AM
deviousj = fail

Cool As Ice Cream
01-28-2008, 11:50 AM
deviousj = fail

you're overanalyzing this.

DeviousJ
01-28-2008, 02:47 PM
Yeah, I wasn't saying 'hey it's loud then it's quiet and then loud again' but whatever you guys are into

xezton
01-28-2008, 02:58 PM
Yeah, I wasn't saying 'hey it's loud then it's quiet and then loud again' but whatever you guys are into

I kinda quoted you saying exactly that.

But no hard feelings. I know what you MEAN. And it is still funny that the transitions you found are so similar.

But it doesn't say anything about the pumpkins other than that they are the Smashing Pumpkins.

DeviousJ
01-28-2008, 03:45 PM
I kinda quoted you saying exactly that.

But no hard feelings. I know what you MEAN. And it is still funny that the transitions you found are so similar.

But it doesn't say anything about the pumpkins other than that they are the Smashing Pumpkins.

Well if by 'kinda' you mean 'not really because I went into specific detail' then sure, but at least you get what I mean. But don't you think it's weird that those parts fit so exactly, echo each other so near perfectly - especially when the band are reaching for past glories but claiming to be moving on and away from how they used to do things? To me it's just one more thing that sounds calculated and forced, to be honest

IWishIWasBlank
01-28-2008, 03:54 PM
I repeat. Thread fail.

xezton
01-28-2008, 04:27 PM
Well if by 'kinda' you mean 'not really because I went into specific detail' then sure, but at least you get what I mean. But don't you think it's weird that those parts fit so exactly, echo each other so near perfectly - especially when the band are reaching for past glories but claiming to be moving on and away from how they used to do things? To me it's just one more thing that sounds calculated and forced, to be honest

Most people listen to entire songs, not just 5 second transitions.

If the entire song sounded more like Geek U.S.A. I would agree with you on this.

So I don't think it's weird that musicians use similar tools to reach new ends.


If there was a painter, and he wanted to paint something new every time he painted, but in order to paint he always had to use a brush, you would be saying that because he's using the same brush, no matter what he paints, it's "calculated and forced". That's not true.

Billy uses things that he, and a billion other musicians, have used before to create music. Sure that means you get the occasional overlap, but that doesn't mean the entire piece is just a ripoff of an older one. It just means that he has a set of nice tools that he uses to put together songs he likes.


I think Tarantula is a far cry from Geek U.S.A. Other than the small things you pointed out, the song is very different, but still sounds like it was done by the same band (hence the same brush that was used to paint both songs). Sure you can even say it sounds like it's from the SD era, but not really. It wouldn't be hard for anyone to listen to Tarantula mixed in with SD and be able to pick it out as being different.



Like I've already said several times and we seem to at least agree on:

What you've pointed out is novel.





But it doesn't say anything about the progression of the band.





Blah blah blah. Regardless, I won't argue with you anymore :) we will clearly never agree on that last part. lol :)