I don't understand the appeal of this, if the music is not very good (with any album) then it's consistently crappy. I've heard people say things like "Sure Adore was better but this is more consistent." as if that made it just as good. This makes no sense!! Someone explain!

I like some of the songs on TFE but they do all sound pretty similar and I dont think this is a good thing since most songs don't really stand out and just seem average.

tfe is more consistent in its shittiness than adore.

siamese dream is one of the most consistent albums i know though.

I don't go by consistency.. I just go by the ratio of songs I like per songs on the album. For instance, on TFE I really like 6 or 7 of the 12 songs on the album, therefore I think its a pretty solid album.

Just to give a frame of reference, on Machina I'd say 5 of the 15 songs are good and Adore 8 of 16.

Siamese Dream 13 of 13 - Best album ever.

Originally posted by SpFission
I don't go by consistency.. I just go by the ratio of songs I like per songs on the album.
stupid.

Originally posted by Rockin' Cherub

stupid.

S T F U

Consistent as in the sound you dipshit

i don't think TFE is consistent at all. I'd like to think an album is consistent if a certain feeling or atmosphere carries thru the whole of the record, let's say like Adore. Or SD.

i judge an album by its cover. so, TFE is the best eveR.

so i guess Gish is your favourite album then?

Ok Computer.

first off, let me just say adore is probably the closest to perfection an artist and billy in particular has reached making music.
in my eyes its absolutely brilliant in its songwriting, cohesiveness, feel and performance.
the only complaints i have is that the production is a bit tinny and that annie dog is *******d instead of blissed and gone.
what makes TFE an album that is not as good as corgan's older work is the fact that its a very unique type of music that only fits a certain mood - and its not as timeless and wide scoped as other albums .
you can always find a song that hits the spot no matter how you feel with sd, mcis, gish, adore, machina - but TFE is very limited in that sense.. and thats its weakness.

all of his records(cept zwan of course) are years above any other "mainstream rock"....to pick and dissect otherwise should only be exercising preference to what stage of his art you appreciate...look at bowies records...there are about 4 of them i hated when i first got...but i followed them through and now those records have become my favorite.new art is just that...new..i dont know of many records that i love now that i loved on first listen...its about change and evolution.ok..so im sure some posting veteran loser on here is gona call me a "fag" or "noob" but you can go fuck yourself with the new system of a down record.....

bubuy

mixing new order with my bloody valentine and boring pop lyrics is so... so... so NEW.

I'd rather have a consistent meal to eat while listening to a poor album than the opposite. :cool: Because food is very important, and music too, but less important, and also because food helps you to make music, whereas music doesn't help you to make food. ;)

I like tacos.:cool:

Originally posted by Dead
I don't understand the appeal of this, if the music is not very good (with any album) then it's consistently crappy. I've heard people say things like "Sure Adore was better but this is more consistent." as if that made it just as good. This makes no sense!! Someone explain!
I think what people are saying when they say TFE is more consistent is that it has nothing that really sucks to the point that you want to skip it every time and ruin the flow of the album. I think an album of songs that are consistently average to good (TFE) can be a better listen than one that's all over the place from really good to really bad (Adore). I don't think anyone says consistency is a virtue in itself. Something that's consistently bad doesn't become good because its got a consistent feel.

I like some of the songs on TFE but they do all sound pretty similar and I dont think this is a good thing since most songs don't really stand out and just seem average.
Personally I'd say that's not such a bad thing. Standout tracks stand out for a reason. They're either a lot better or a lot worse than the rest of the album. There's a difference between songs that sound same-y, and songs that are of similar quality.

If you're willing to defend an album's total worth by the ability of its best songs to make you kinda ignore the bad ones (ie. "For Martha is really good....so it makes up for Annie Dog"), then I can see how consistency isn't important. But if you're judging the album on how well all the songs are put together to make one unit, its at least something that has to be taken into account.

Originally posted by kriyzjsczjshtof
whereas music doesn't help you to make food. ;)

Oh, I disagree. My baking comes out a lot better when I listen to Hank Williams.

Consistency is overrated. One of the reasons I like SP so much was because they were good at different kinds of songs. My favorite albums are always the ones with the most variety.

I think TFE is the bomb. I really like every single song on it. When "Strayz" is over, I always say, that's it? And then I start it over. I can't understand why people think that this is a bad album songwriting wise. I think it's some of the best stuff Corgan has ever written. The music totally rocks, IMO - and the lyrics are very honest. What's not to like about TFE? MCIS is my favorite Smashing Pumpkins album, and that's because I didn't discover the Pumpkins until shortly after its release. Even with all of its variety, there's an underlying cohesiveness to it.

what album does ******* "Spiteface"? :confused:


....:rolleyes:

Originally posted by '|' jIMMY '|'
what album does ******* "Spiteface"? :confused:


....:rolleyes:




thats the machina mystery. :rolleyes:

Originally posted by youngod
all of his records(cept zwan of course) are years above any other "mainstream rock"....to pick and dissect otherwise should only be exercising preference to what stage of his art you appreciate...look at bowies records...there are about 4 of them i hated when i first got...but i followed them through and now those records have become my favorite.new art is just that...new..i dont know of many records that i love now that i loved on first listen...its about change and evolution.ok..so im sure some posting veteran loser on here is gona call me a "fag" or "noob" but you can go fuck yourself with the new system of a down record.....

bubuy

The new System of a Down record kicks ass, fagn00b.

Just follow your advice and listen to it until you like it.

---

I thought consistency was in reference to the quality of the music itself, not in terms of the 'sound'.

But a great record with an over-arching feeling, atmosphere or theme certainly is more than the sum of its parts. If that record had the same songs, but lacked that "togetherness", it would still be no less than a great record, but it may not have the same impact on me.

Album continuity is always a nice touch, but it's entirely optional. It works in favor of TFE, for sure.

Originally posted by Corganist

I think what people are saying when they say TFE is more consistent is that it has nothing that really sucks to the point that you want to skip it every time and ruin the flow of the album. I think an album of songs that are consistently average to good (TFE) can be a better listen than one that's all over the place from really good to really bad (Adore). I don't think anyone says consistency is a virtue in itself. Something that's consistently bad doesn't become good because its got a consistent feel.

[b]
Personally I'd say that's not such a bad thing. Standout tracks stand out for a reason. They're either a lot better or a lot worse than the rest of the album. There's a difference between songs that sound same-y, and songs that are of similar quality.

If you're willing to defend an album's total worth by the ability of its best songs to make you kinda ignore the bad ones (ie. "For Martha is really good....so it makes up for Annie Dog"), then I can see how consistency isn't important. But if you're judging the album on how well all the songs are put together to make one unit, its at least something that has to be taken into account.

How can you say TFE is consistently good and Adore isn't? that's just your opinion. I'm sure most people on this board will agree with me that Adore is consistently awesome. Fair enough, Annie Dog ain't brilliant, but IMO it's still better than pretty, pretty star. and don't say anything about Shame now, it's one of my favourite SP songs.

Originally posted by Phoenix Down
I'd like to think an album is consistent if a certain feeling or atmosphere carries thru the whole of the record, let's say like Adore. Or SD.
I don't think of Adore this way. The songs are so different from each other. For example, To Sheila, Perfect, Pug. I felt like the weirdo distortion sound in TFE carries through the whole album pretty much. SD is also like this but not 100%.

Originally posted by Corganist

I think what people are saying when they say TFE is more consistent is that it has nothing that really sucks to the point that you want to skip it every time and ruin the flow of the album. I think an album of songs that are consistently average to good (TFE) can be a better listen than one that's all over the place from really good to really bad (Adore). I don't think anyone says consistency is a virtue in itself. Something that's consistently bad doesn't become good because its got a consistent feel.
I get what you're saying. But I disagree with Adore, it's like 90% awesome. For some reason I never listen to it though.

In terms of atmosphere and feeling, I don't think consistency is important unless you're in a depressed mood for example, and you don't want an upbeat pop song to come up. This is what mix CDs or playlists are for I guess. I like an album with varying styles, such as MCIS.

yeah, i hear ya. what i'm trying to say is that adore got this nocturnal vibe going on....i only listen to adore at night. i drive over the autobahn quite a lot at night, from berlin to munich and vice versa, listening to adore and that's great

Originally posted by MMBKG

I thought consistency was in reference to the quality of the music itself, not in terms of the 'sound'.
In this situation I would defenitely think TFE is least consistent when compared with any SP album. I think half the songs on TFE are not great, and some of those are just plain yuck. Songs I really like are MOH and A100. Next level down are CameraEye and Walking Shade. The rest are average to lame, with a couple being sucky. I'm still glad to have it, for the songs that I really like. MOH is up there with some of the best stuff, it reminds me of Machina.

Of course this is all just personal opinion and we shouldn't even be arguing it I guess because there is no true answer.

Originally posted by Dead

I don't think of Adore this way. The songs are so different from each other. For example, To Sheila, Perfect, Pug. I felt like the weirdo distortion sound in TFE carries through the whole album pretty much. SD is also like this but not 100%.

seems like your idea of consistency is simply about limiting the usage of studio production to one or two scales and not about the actual songs.
adore was consistent simply because the songs were brilliant, and although they represent different styles of music and feelings many would agree that they are all glued together quite well .
id rather listen to a "challenging" (for a lack of better word) record that doesnt stick the same sound to all the songs on it than to a "consistent" (at least the way you see it) record any day of the week.

Originally posted by teh b0lly!!1


seems like your idea of consistency is simply about limiting the usage of studio production to one or two scales and not about the actual songs.
adore was consistent simply because the songs were brilliant, and although they represent different styles of music and feelings many would agree that they are all glued together quite well .
id rather listen to a "challenging" (for a lack of better word) record that doesnt stick the same sound to all the songs on it than to a "consistent" (at least the way you see it) record any day of the week. You're crazy, I just described adore as having songs that sound completely different from each other, not ones that sound the same. I also then said I prefer albums with different sounds such as MCIS.

I'm not really sure what you mean by limiting usage of production to one or two scales.

Originally posted by Dead
You're crazy, I just described adore as having songs that sound completely different from each other, not ones that sound the same. I also then said I prefer albums with different sounds such as MCIS.

I'm not really sure what you mean by limiting usage of production to one or two scales.

wait wait.. im confused (and tireed)
on one hand, you say you like the fact that TFE is consistent because its got the strange sound on all throughout the album?
but then you say adore isnt as good because the songs are all over the place , but you like mcis for the exact same reason..

Originally posted by Dead



Of course this is all just personal opinion and we shouldn't even be arguing it I guess because there is no true answer.

Sticky?

Originally posted by teh b0lly!!1


wait wait.. im confused (and tireed)
on one hand, you say you like the fact that TFE is consistent because its got the strange sound on all throughout the album?
but then you say adore isnt as good because the songs are all over the place , but you like mcis for the exact same reason..
No, I said that I think TFE has a consistent sound, but not that I like it because of that. Then I said that Adore doesn't have a consistent sound, but I never said that was bad or that it wasn't as good. Then I said I like albums that have different sounds, for example MCIS.

TFE is corgans most consistent album, one day people will come to realize how great it is just as they did adore, you heard it here first.

its funny, this is his first album he's been involved with that has not been made into a vinyl record as well. Just sayin is all. I would buy it if it was in vinyl.