View Full Version : Billy Corgan and Chris Cornell


Morlock
06-26-2012, 02:51 PM
Both were in huge alternative rock bands. After their bands broke up, both played in supergroups and pursued solo projects, alienating some of their fanbase. Both of their original bands have been "reborn", although Soundgarden now has all original members.

It is interesting how Chris Cornell managed to stay classy and respected despite some very mediocre music. That may be due to Chris not making an ass of himself on a regular basis. It will be interesting to see how Soundgarden's new album will turn out. My prediction is that just as Audioslave was much more successful than Zwan, the new Soundgarden record will do better than anything SP 2.0 touched.

Live to Rise is quite bland, though.

DeadOpera
06-26-2012, 02:56 PM
what is this shit?

Katy Lied
06-26-2012, 02:58 PM
I am a big Chris Cornell fan. Seen him live solo and with SG. I have all the SG and Audioslave albums and I have one of his solo albums. That being said, the mainstream has always been really important to Chris and he's made sure throughout his career that he'd always be a part of the conversation. Audioslave got bland near the end and his solo albums stunk. He played it too safe. Billy on the other hand I applaud for going the other route and not pandering as much to the mainstream. MSOTS and TFE were him doing his own thing and it didn't matter if he didn't achieve his former fame. While Billy was out on a limb, Chris was working with Timbaland...

Long story short, Billy is more interesting.

Kahlo
06-26-2012, 02:59 PM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/a/a6/Scream2.jpg/220px-Scream2.jpg

Thread invalid and now rendered retarded.

Trotskilicious
06-26-2012, 03:06 PM
That may be due to Chris not making an ass of himself on a regular basis.

of course it is

Trotskilicious
06-26-2012, 03:07 PM
also there was a significant group of SP haters when they were around, the backlash came to dominate the narrative because he gives them SO MUCH FODDER

i also think that he has an incredibly poor relationship with the press so they generally take shots at them when they can because by and large the music press are jealous of the people they are covering, much like the sports press is

reprise85
06-26-2012, 03:07 PM
euphoria morning is a good album

Kahlo
06-26-2012, 03:12 PM
It's an average album with one or two stand out tracks.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/fp8fW__JkRE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Cowlishaw
06-26-2012, 06:32 PM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/a/a6/Scream2.jpg/220px-Scream2.jpg

Thread invalid and now rendered retarded.

I can't believe I have to say Teargarden is better than another album.

Gossamer
06-26-2012, 06:33 PM
fresh tendrils :rockon::rockon::rockon:

Gossamer
06-26-2012, 06:34 PM
can't expect musicians to be "perfect" or even great forever...if you think that way then life and people in general will sorely disappoint

Shallowed
06-26-2012, 06:36 PM
Does anyone seriously give a fuck about Chris Cornell?

Shallowed
06-26-2012, 06:37 PM
Oops I meant to type Billy Corgan.

Morlock
06-26-2012, 06:43 PM
I can't believe I have to say Teargarden is better than another album.

Ground Zero and Scream are decent songs. I would rather listen to them than to anything on Teargarden except maybe Lightning Strikes.

morespsoon
06-26-2012, 10:17 PM
This question may get to the heart of the matter:

Which of the two bands, Soundgarden or Smashing Pumpkins will still have their music played on the radio (in whatever form it is then) in 200 years (if either)?

My money would be on neither but I think Soundgarden has more of a "classic rock" sound and therefore would fit better than the Pumpkins on a classic rock "radio station" along side other "classic rock" bands.

stumpycat
06-27-2012, 02:16 AM
^ahahaha
In 200 years time that shit would all be thrown into some overly broad and generic musical category like "classical music" is today; there will be little discernible difference between Soundgarden, SP, or 1970s era rock music if indeed there is still a way people are listening to any of it.

Trotskilicious
06-27-2012, 03:04 AM
morespoon.

Kahlo
06-27-2012, 03:10 AM
what the surgeon said when they carried out that particular users lobotomy

morespsoon
06-27-2012, 07:28 AM
^ahahaha
In 200 years time that shit would all be thrown into some overly broad and generic musical category like "classical music" is today; there will be little discernible difference between Soundgarden, SP, or 1970s era rock music if indeed there is still a way people are listening to any of it.

Right, so who between the Pumpkins and Soundgarden would fit better into a rotation featuring the Beatles, the Rolling Stones, Led Zepplin, etc.? I'm going with Soundgarden.

Kahlo
06-27-2012, 08:30 AM
Netphoria goes with not giving a fuck about a transmission medium that will be dead in 20 years never mind 200.

Morlock
06-27-2012, 08:50 AM
Right, so who between the Pumpkins and Soundgarden would fit better into a rotation featuring the Beatles, the Rolling Stones, Led Zepplin, etc.? I'm going with Soundgarden.

Soundgarden are more classic rock than SP, but SP is more Beatles than Soundgarden. Plus, SP has a wider range in general which makes them fit to a wider range of playlists.

RenewRevive
06-27-2012, 11:10 AM
This question may get to the heart of the matter:

Which of the two bands, Soundgarden or Smashing Pumpkins will still have their music played on the radio (in whatever form it is then) in 200 years (if either)?

My money would be on neither but I think Soundgarden has more of a "classic rock" sound and therefore would fit better than the Pumpkins on a classic rock "radio station" along side other "classic rock" bands.

:hanging:

Trotskilicious
06-27-2012, 11:16 AM
Right, so who between the Pumpkins and Soundgarden would fit better into a rotation featuring the Beatles, the Rolling Stones, Led Zepplin, etc.? I'm going with Soundgarden.

how do you come up with these ridiculous arguments

Sonic Johnny
06-27-2012, 04:04 PM
Big dumb thread is ultramega retarded.

Sonic Johnny
06-27-2012, 04:06 PM
And yeah, fucking LOL at the idea of radio still existing or anyone caring about shitty 20th century music in 200 years.

Trotskilicious
06-27-2012, 04:42 PM
lol at the idea of the human race still existing

Cowlishaw
06-27-2012, 04:52 PM
Teargarden will be half way finished by then.

Trotskilicious
06-27-2012, 05:02 PM
by the way guys i wonder when the signal of our radio transmissions reaches Picarius IX do you think the Picarians enjoy SP or Soundgarden more?

brutechinasky
06-27-2012, 05:52 PM
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/dn_ffXVVjzY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

meangreensp
06-27-2012, 05:56 PM
Netphoria goes with not giving a fuck about a transmission medium that will be dead in 20 years never mind 200.

LOL at being so dumb to think radio will be dead in 20 years.

Kahlo, welcome to the ignore list.

Kahlo
06-27-2012, 06:00 PM
Oh noes! ....who are you?

Shallowed
06-27-2012, 06:04 PM
What the fuck Kahlo? I don't get how someone could be so moronic to say something like that. I don't even know you anymore, man!

Kahlo
06-27-2012, 06:05 PM
I have shamed myself with my outlandish exaggerations.

I will sit in the corner and think about what I've done.

Kahlo
06-27-2012, 06:07 PM
Right.

Conclusion: Morespsoon and meangreensp are probably from a long and ignoble line of in-breeders.

meangreensp
06-27-2012, 06:08 PM
This user is on your ignore list

.

Cowlishaw
06-27-2012, 08:34 PM
Not enough mentioning of Radiohead in this thread. What gives?

Monet LSD
06-28-2012, 01:13 AM
No comment on Chris Cornell other than the fact that he seems very gracious & friendly to his fans, and you don't seem to hear stories about him bitching or throwing tantrums at paying concertgoers:

"...Chris Cornell at Newcastle City Hall 20-6-2012. A young Geordie shots up, "Chris can I play a song with you?" and next thing you know he's onstage and hammering away at Cornell's guitar while Chris does the vocal...totally unrehearsed and unexpected..."

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Kjybhj-4SC0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

stumpycat
06-28-2012, 01:29 AM
LOL at being so dumb to think radio will be dead in 20 years.

Kahlo, welcome to the ignore list.

It's already pretty fucking dead. I know you're getting all the same radio stations in Denton as I am, and right down to their "DJs" who know deep down they are sock puppet pieces of shit, they are not even trying anymore since anyone who cares about music enough has learned to entertain themselves through mediums other than broadcast radio.

morespsoon
06-28-2012, 02:39 AM
It's already pretty fucking dead. I know you're getting all the same radio stations in Denton as I am, and right down to their "DJs" who know deep down they are sock puppet pieces of shit, they are not even trying anymore since anyone who cares about music enough has learned to entertain themselves through mediums other than broadcast radio.

Talk radio is becoming more and more popular all the time and I think the internet is causing that in many ways. For example, I haven't listened to broadcast radio outside of the internet in about 10 years but I literally listen to talk radio on the net almost every day and I know that are a lot of people out there like that.

Now, I just did a search for "classic rock radio online" and I got 47 million results. Mere inertia and tradition will keep many of these stations going for 200 years imho. The only question then is Soundgarden or the Pumpkins or neither more likely to end up being played on "classic rock radio" in 200 years? I don't see why it's not common sense that that's a valid question?