I just got home and this was in the mail. Kind of strange that Guitar Center would feature "The Smashing Pumpkins" as Bildo's signature axe is now discontinued, but whatever...

According to the article, the latest Austin gig was filmed to featured on some kind of DirecTV program. Can't wait to see those Mikey non-fills in HD.

http://imgur.com/a/uIeoj

Why does Jeff look like that in every photo?

Why does Jeff look like that in every photo?

He has the Downs

ah the interview is finally out.

ya the broadcast is May 17th

I don't get Bildo's comment on "the level of musicianship [today] is far higher then it was in the 90's...". Wasn't he just fucking quoted saying somewhere that today's scene lacks talent and that everything is faked/auto tuned/polished? Christ, his level of musicianship discredits his own statement.

Maybe he was talking just about SP?

Either way it's bullshit but it makes sense that he believes that.

He also upgraded his circus analogy.

"You wanna go to the circus, and to get into the circus it costs you five … pence. So, you stand in line, you don't have five pence, but you really wanna go to the circus. So someone comes along and says, "Well, I'll take you in the circus and I'll pay the five pence, but you gotta pay me back later." So, you go in the circus, they take you out. "Oh, OK, well, when you gonna pay me back?" "I don't know. I'll get around to it sooner or later." … That's the story of the band."

Why does Jeff look like that in every photo?

he looks like he just wandered into the shoot of the street.

no doubt, but he still looks lost.

Jeff is a HIPSTER

how?

James was a hipster. Jeff not so much. Jeff is just a nerd.

but he wears plaid pearl snaps and has plastic frame glasses

obvs a hipstar

on that flyer he just looks lame

Didn't he graduate from UCLA with a political science degree?

That's a really good school.

that's a really shitty degree

Didn't he graduate from UCLA with a political science degree?

Not quite.

Jeff is also finishing his graduate studies in comparative literature at UCLA.

source: http://iamkoream.com/november-issue-smashing-pumpkins-jeff-schroeders-infinite-booklist/

I wonder how Jeff feels whenever Billy goes on Alex Jones to talk about chemtrails or whatever. I bet he has seen/heard some pretty crazy shit from ol' Bilbo during the last six years.

I'll bet it's a musical relationship only and that Jeff nods along awkwardly if the subject is ever broached. However useless in reality his degree(s) may be, he's still got a hell of a lot of education over B0lls and likely thinks that shit is way over in tin foil hat territory. At the least to get where he is he's been trained in a manner of thinking where thought processes are subject to critical rigor.

just dropping by to endorse referring to Jeff as "Corky"

I missed another advertisement that says this will air on Direct Audience network channel 239 May 17, 9pm.

At the least to get where he is he's been trained in a manner of thinking where thought processes are subject to critical rigor.

A-friggin'-men

I missed another advertisement that says this will air on Direct Audience network channel 239 May 17, 9pm.

An exclusive clip of The Smashing Pumpkins performing "Bullet with Butterfly" from this special episode of Guitar Center Sessions Live from Austin, Texas on DIRECTV.
See an all new episode on May 17th at 9pm ET | 10pm PT on DIRECTV's Audience Network, channel 239.


<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/0tOTw38P4GE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Yeah that's what I want to hear. And as a bonus it is titled in Montese as well. Oh fucking joy.

Aw, poor guy looks like he might have fainted. Maybe he didn't sing for a few lines after the screaming bit because he was short of breath.

Bullet with Butterfly is no longer available.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/FaqyeZPcbXE?list=PLYcgtf-ag-xnScnlZA0VcGvsI_6OAu4Zt" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

shit, anyone have an another video for the BWBW performance?

yeah I neglected to make a thread about this leaflet thing cause there's not even in interview inside and honestly who wants to read another interview with Old Angry Pants

shit, anyone have an another video for the BWBW performance?
/crucial
irony LOL!

I love Bullet With Butterfly.

I hope they play Send This Smile Over To You next.

http://sessions.guitarcenter.com

I hope they do Let Me Out for the encore again, but I'm really worried that if I buy a ticket they might not play it.

http://salvationmods.com/uploads/images/jeff.jpg

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/W7wXtdL8Y_Y" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>



<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/RooP3aP5TCg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Why is it that all aging rockstars start to think that they are fucking singer/songwriters?

i think it stems from years of attention being given to the guy in the band that writes the songs, coupled with rock being a young man's game, and how bands always break up.

Because as you grow up, your skull bones fuse tighter and hinder the creative juices from flowing properly. This is why kids and cats are so smitten with cardboard boxes.

I'll just blame it on low T. That would explain why it starts to sound like douche commercial music, and why so many of the female artists already make that sort of music. Only partially kidding.

so you're sexist huh

I've never been able to stomach the "girly stuff" TBH. I don't really get girls. And I'm female. So yeah, growing up I suppose I was really sexist in the sense that I felt a certain way about "female things" because I never particularly felt part of their world or that their things were particularly applicable to me anyway. And as long as I maintained that attitude I can honestly say that I never really experienced sexism on a first hand basis. As I grew older and developed less egocentric theory of mind I realized that yes, some females genuinely loved being female and would not have it any other way. Deep down I still can't fully comprehend that but it seems true and I am working on it. However, I will NEVER be able to train myself to enjoy that very feminine sort of music because it just doesn't do anything for me.

But I'm not imagining that artists' music tends to be heavier, more aggressive, and more impassioned earlier as opposed to later in their careers. Even when bands inevitably go do their supposed "return to the roots of their sound" type album, it usually turns up a bit, well, limpid - no matter how hard they try to replicate the original sound. It's why I know that Billy Corgan is basically bluffing when he dismisses critics of his lackluster new music by saying that he "could always put out another Siamese Dream if he wanted to." Yeah fucking right you could.

There are many reasons why this happens. Ideas get played out like a sitcom pushing through its 10th season, and there are changes to the brain that literally make people more set in their ways and gradually chip away at creative spontaneity (look at the research related to peak performance by age in various academic fields...ones requiring the most wildly abstract and novel thinking to yield progress, such as theoretical physics, peak in their 20s.) Bands of course probably lose drive when their ambitions have already been realized and they are living comfortably as opposed to suffering for their art and a goal. But also so much of life changes ARE hormonally driven that this elephant in the room cannot be avoided. Even the extent to which one is motivated to engage in goal directed behaviors due to the increased perceptual salience of the reward is driven strongly by hormones in this developmental period. The most crime prone demographic are males 18-25 years of age, and the general perception is that this is the best "soldiering age". More passion, more of a stomach for risk to gain reward, more neophilia. None of this is a coincidence.

(IMO bands collectively in their late 20s tend to achieve the best balance of energy, creativity, in sophistication in their music. It's usually kind of down hill after that.)

all i'm saying is that women do not necessarily make "feminine" music (sleater-kinney), whatever that means

but i like some "girly" stuff myself, like robyn

Well, see, even you have some inherent sense of what "feminine" music sounds like as you have identified females who make gender typical vs. gender-atypical music!

YES I KNOW THERE ARE ALWAYS EXCEPTIONS TO THE RULE. That is pretty obvious. But going by the population norm, for whatever reason this may be, women tend to pick up acoustic guitars (or piano...or violin...or whatever culturally appropriate instrument is assigned to them by their parents) and NOT rock out. I'm just not at all convinced that it is purely a cultural thing. Culture, as it is, tends to simply be an embellishment on underlying biology. And this isn't really about technical proficiency...violins are hard to play WELL, certainly more difficult to not sound like shit on than a guitar. (Well there is this issue that violins may be easier to play than a guitar for smaller hands...but then again, most acoustic guitars are more cumbersome to play than starting on an electric...so that hypothesis is probably null.) It's about modes of expression and why they would choose certain forms of music as opposed to others.

It's sort of like the current obsession over moving women into STEM fields...but not quite. Undoubtedly there are women out there whose abilities are going unused in these areas, but I feel fairly certain that no matter how hard one tries to push women into these fields to achieve parity, it just won't happen completely. Some of those barriers are cultural (which can and should be changed for the women who would truly want to pursue this path) but some of them are probably indeed biological (such as in visual/spatial reasoning, where ON POPULATION AVERAGE women and men indeed differ, and a desire for careers which are more flexible to valuing family time over work.) I find it unacceptable that a woman would not be made to feel welcome in living up to her aptitude and interests; however, I recognize that talents and interests are not a purely cultural phenomenon, and on average there appear to be some sex based differences. I've heard some sociologists try to assert everything is somehow a culturally born phenomenon but its seems more often than not a quiet academic attempt at social activism than born out of the genuine science. Humans aren't SO different and special from their animal counterparts that the influence of biology has somehow been nullified purely in favor of culture. Sexual dimorphism exists in the natural world, and we are a part of that world. Males and females clearly look different physically; is it really a surprise that a physical structure like the brain would also differ in some ways which happen to be meaningful to shaping behavior?

Society's real problem seems to be making the environment welcoming to those who are exceptions to the rule (thus diminishing the cultural components which may be at work in creating disparities unnecessarily) rather than pouring time and resources into attempting to eliminate natural differences which seem to exist. Which means I'll have to put up with girls making their douche commercial music and pestering me about ways to make myself look soft and pretty for potential mates in marriage (I'm not very interested BTW.)

I'll just blame it on low T. That would explain why it starts to sound like douche commercial music, and why so many of the female artists already make that sort of music. Only partially kidding.

:rofl:

all i'm saying is that women do not necessarily make "feminine" music (sleater-kinney), whatever that means

but i like some "girly" stuff myself, like robyn

whoa Robyn ain't girly, man. she a tough girl.

Not quite.



source: http://iamkoream.com/november-issue-smashing-pumpkins-jeff-schroeders-infinite-booklist/

......generally you need an undergraduate degree before you can enter a graduate program.

not that an undergrad degree means anything but still i imagine he has one.

She wasn't insinuating that he didn't have a bachelor's degree...she was simply stating that he probably received an undergraudate degree in something other than political science. (I don't know what his BA/BS is in actually...many people do pursue graduate degrees that are not directly related to their undergrad degree, however.) In any case, to even be accepted for doctoral study as Jeff was (and especially to a school like UCLA) you have to pass a pretty high bar which includes with absolute certitude a bachelor's, if not an MS/MA. (How most programs work is when you do PhD track you will earn your MS/MA "along the way" in your first two years, and after thesis completion they will decide whether you are fully worthy to move on to dissertation track PhD.)