[ShamanO]

only a grammar nazi would care!

I hope the world holds down the fort and prevails with "I could care less if you hold down the fort" just to piss off the grammar nazi's :confettistars:/>

[cleric]

lol :happy:/>

[Deleted User Account]

ShamanO, on 17 February 2012 - 11:08 AM, said:

only a grammar nazi would care!

I hope the world holds down the fort and prevails with "I could care less if you hold down the fort" just to piss off the grammar nazi's :confettistars:/>

It's that what you're saying negates what you're actually trying to say. :nope:/> Don't try to brush it off that only "grammar nazis" would care.

[ShamanO]

ArticulateEric, on 17 February 2012 - 11:33 AM, said:

It's that what you're saying negates what you're actually trying to say. :nope:/> Don't try to brush it off that only "grammar nazis" would care.

I dont think you are understanding what I'm trying to say :clovis:/> basically I'm saying no one is perfect and no one is going to run their mouth, make youtubes, or type up something to try and change another person. some people care and some people don't. so what! life...it goes on!

[Deleted User Account]

Um.

[ShamanO]

just zip it! back to the topic mr derail!

[TwoHeadedBoy]

LostSoul, on 16 February 2012 - 07:49 PM, said:

Go listen to your Missy Elliott and can it. :lol:/>

Nothing wrong with a little Missy :thumbsup:/>

[frednirv632]

ShamanO, on 17 February 2012 - 11:44 AM, said:

I dont think you are understanding what I'm trying to say :clovis:/> basically I'm saying no one is perfect and no one is going to run their mouth, make youtubes, or type up something to try and change another person. some people care and some people don't. so what! life...it goes on!

:eyebrow:/>

[Ruby Ring]

As the initiator of this thread, one thing I want to add, even if it is off topic, is that I think it is absolutely vital for Corgan to make better fashion and press decisions than he has in the past 15 years. Let's face it, half the time he steps out in public as the face of SP, he looks like a mental patient escapee. I mean that half joking. If his objective is to mass market the SP brand again, he is going to have to do a better job of selling it. Dressing as a cross between bozo the clown and Frank the window washer with 1986 Nike basketball high tops is not the answer; it actually repels people from him and his fantastic music. Wear cooler clothes and take better pictures. If he wants in the game, he is going to have to play the game.

This post has been edited by Ruby Ring: 17 February 2012 - 05:36 PM

[Inertia]

Ruby Ring, on 17 February 2012 - 05:28 PM, said:

As the initiator of this thread, one thing I want to add, even if it is off topic, is that I think it is absolutely vital for Corgan to make better fashion and press decisions than he has in the past 15 years. Let's face it, half the time he steps out in public as the face of SP, he looks like a mental patient escapee. I mean that half joking. If his objective is to mass market the SP brand again, he is going to have to do a better job of selling it. Dressing as a cross between bozo the clown and Frank the window washer with 1986 Nike basketball high tops is not the answer; it actually repels people from him and his fantastic music. Wear cooler clothes and take better pictures. If he wants in the game, he is going to have to play the game.

Since when did people ever reject Billy's sense of fashion? :eyebrow:/>

[frednirv632]

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_YFnWd2Cqs3A/S__8oqCE56I/AAAAAAAAA9k/vdiUW-4u9WM/s640/lady-gaga-435.jpg
lolwut

[Parksey]

Ruby Ring, on 17 February 2012 - 05:28 PM, said:

As the initiator of this thread, one thing I want to add, even if it is off topic, is that I think it is absolutely vital for Corgan to make better fashion and press decisions than he has in the past 15 years. Let's face it, half the time he steps out in public as the face of SP, he looks like a mental patient escapee. I mean that half joking. If his objective is to mass market the SP brand again, he is going to have to do a better job of selling it. Dressing as a cross between bozo the clown and Frank the window washer with 1986 Nike basketball high tops is not the answer; it actually repels people from him and his fantastic music. Wear cooler clothes and take better pictures. If he wants in the game, he is going to have to play the game.

I have to agree. Everytime I see a recent picture of him, away from the stage, I cringe; he looks like a flat out tool. Comparing him to Lady Gaga is pretty stupid as her strange fashion is all part of her schtick, whereas Corgan just dresses like the new age hippy that he is. I guess he's being true to his new mantra in that sense.

I'm not saying that BC changing up his style will help album sales, but it sure as hell can't hurt his public image.

[LostSoul]

Well, at least he dropped the hi-tops last tour in exchange for combat boots. It made him seem more normal. :lol:/>

[ShamanO]

ok people. what do you want to see Billy wearing now?

[Sophie]

The thing is what Billy wears will have absolutely no influence on my listening to his songs. So perhaps the question is what do potential future fans and/or older fans that haven't gotten back to the band would NOT want to see Billy wearing because it would prevent them from fully enjoying the music?

I hate to say this but if you want to take people to a musical journey, maybe the shuttle has to look apppealing to indecisive persons or at least not repulsive.

[Ruby Ring]

Sophie, on 18 February 2012 - 01:23 AM, said:

The thing is what Billy wears will have absolutely no influence on my listening to his songs. So perhaps the question is what do potential future fans and/or older fans that haven't gotten back to the band would NOT want to see Billy wearing because it would prevent them from fully enjoying the music?

I hate to say this but if you want to take people to a musical journey, maybe the shuttle has to look apppealing to indecisive persons or at least not repulsive.

Exactly my point. I don't give a damn what he wears. But if his objective is winning over new fans, he isn't going to do it dressed ridiculously. There are some pictures and fashion choices from the Yelena days where he truly looked like a "hip", magnetic rock star. Long gone are those days.

[Bulletproofmask]

http://i481.photobucket.com/albums/rr172/karlgoran86/billy-corgan-dress.jpg

You mean people don't find this look very accessible?

[Ruby Ring]

Bulletproofmask, on 18 February 2012 - 06:58 AM, said:

http://i481.photobucket.com/albums/rr172/karlgoran86/billy-corgan-dress.jpg

You mean people don't find this look very accessible?

Absolutely ludicrous.

[ShamanO]

Pretty sure he was being a smartass when he put this on. you all should be able to see that at least.

[Ruby Ring]

ShamanO, on 18 February 2012 - 11:15 AM, said:

Pretty sure he was being a smartass when he put this on. you all should be able to see that at least.

Maybe so. The reality though is that the mass public doesn't get it, never did and never will. Again, I don't care what he looks like, as long as his music is good. That is the most important thing to me. BC has indicated however in so many ways that he would prefer to be accepted again on a mass level the way he was in 1995-96. Wearing ridiculous peacock/good witch of the North costumes isn't going to help him do that.

If you don't count the long hair Gish era, I think Corgan looked his best onstage in 1998. Everything since then has been ridiculous.

This post has been edited by Ruby Ring: 18 February 2012 - 01:29 PM

[ShamanO]

and yet everyone wanted silver pants and a zero shirt before 1998

[frednirv632]

Parksey, on 17 February 2012 - 07:17 PM, said:

Comparing him to Lady Gaga is pretty stupid...

NO. What's stupid is giving a damn what the guy wears.

[Sophie]

ShamanO, on 18 February 2012 - 11:15 AM, said:

Pretty sure he was being a smartass when he put this on. you all should be able to see that at least.

I've already said plenty of things on this forum concerning this costume and first of all that this was certainly not his worst because it is pretty obvious that it was intentionally offbeat.

Ruby Ring, on 18 February 2012 - 04:52 AM, said:

There are some pictures and fashion choices from the Yelena days where he truly looked like a "hip", magnetic rock star.

I'm also a big fan of the band's wardrobe at the time...

ShamanO, on 18 February 2012 - 01:48 PM, said:

and yet everyone wanted silver pants and a zero shirt before 1998

...and yet I have a zero shirt and still wear it frequently. :happy:/>

[Parksey]

frednirv632, on 18 February 2012 - 02:53 PM, said:

NO. What's stupid is giving a damn what the guy wears.

It's stupid that I'm bothered about how he dresses like a cross between a 1850s paper boy and a gypsy?

[ItsSoPringles]

Ruby Ring, on 16 February 2012 - 07:47 PM, said:

That's the Way was the only memorable song on Zeitgeist.

oh come on stellar, that song was great

[frednirv632]

Parksey, on 18 February 2012 - 04:50 PM, said:

It's stupid that I'm bothered about how he dresses like a cross between a 1850s paper boy and a gypsy?

yes.

[Parksey]

frednirv632, on 18 February 2012 - 10:15 PM, said:

yes.

I take it that he's your style icon.

[AndyToe]

Parksey, on 18 February 2012 - 04:50 PM, said:

It's stupid that I'm bothered about how he dresses like a cross between a 1850s paper boy and a gypsy?

Aay guv'na, you wanna buy me new album? Apples 'n pears!

[stellar.]

Ruby Ring, on 15 February 2012 - 01:20 PM, said:

I have been a fan since practically the beginning and I have lurked this board and every other SP board for years without posting much.

As I watched the Grammys the other night, I got to thinking. It was odd looking at the rock category; I don't recall exactly who was nominated (Coldplay, Radiohead, Bon Iver maybe, etc). The distinct point is there wasn't anyone represented in the Grammys, besides Foo Fighters and Kings of Leon, I suppose, that resembles anything close to what I might call a rock band.

Obviously rock's popularity in our culture is declining, yet it still important enough to carve a category out of Grammy night to recognize.

So here is my point: what band does Oceania compete with for best rock album of the year this year? Where are the rock bands? What albums are being released this year? The lack of other rock bands doing anything noteworthy enough or on a scale large enough to be considered for a Grammy, has created a situation, in my opinion, where a revivial of Corgan's career is like ducks on the pond. It is right there to be had. If Oceania is halfway decent and promoted the right way by a record label, I would be stunned if they aren't at the very least a Grammy nominee next year, and at the most, Grmmy winners at the beginning of a massive revival of interest in SP. Obviously I don't think winning Grammy makes a band, but imagine the level of visibility BC would have if he is even in the audience at the Grammys next year. I do believe it will happen, because there just isn't any other competition out there. It is all right there to be had, and I think BC knows it. The timing of Oceania and this chapter of SP couldn't be happening at a better time.

Discuss.

Grammy nominations are based solely on album sales. They have nothing to do with any artistic achievement. The only SP album that was ever nominated for album of the year was MCIS, and that's because it sold so well. Grammy exposure would be nice, but the album would already have to be a hit to even get nominated. Oceania could be the best album SP has ever released, but if it doesn't go platinum, it will never get nominated.

[Parksey]

stellar., on 20 February 2012 - 12:17 AM, said:

Grammy nominations are based solely on album sales. They have nothing to do with any artistic achievement. The only SP album that was ever nominated for album of the year was MCIS, and that's because it sold so well. Grammy exposure would be nice, but the album would already have to be a hit to even get nominated. Oceania could be the best album SP has ever released, but if it doesn't go platinum, it will never get nominated.

incorrect. i don't really see why people are hung up about o a s h being nominated in the first place, but i doubt bon iver's album went platinum and he won 2 grammys.

[Ruby Ring]

stellar., on 20 February 2012 - 12:17 AM, said:

Grammy nominations are based solely on album sales. They have nothing to do with any artistic achievement. The only SP album that was ever nominated for album of the year was MCIS, and that's because it sold so well. Grammy exposure would be nice, but the album would already have to be a hit to even get nominated. Oceania could be the best album SP has ever released, but if it doesn't go platinum, it will never get nominated.

I don't know if that is the case anymore. There aren't ANY albums that sell that well anymore, let alone rock albums. I hear where you are coming from, but I kindly submit that perhaps things are a bit different nowadays.

[eyeboogers]

stellar., on 20 February 2012 - 12:17 AM, said:

Grammy nominations are based solely on album sales. They have nothing to do with any artistic achievement. The only SP album that was ever nominated for album of the year was MCIS, and that's because it sold so well. Grammy exposure would be nice, but the album would already have to be a hit to even get nominated. Oceania could be the best album SP has ever released, but if it doesn't go platinum, it will never get nominated.

I think you sort of proved the point through your example. Bon Ivers selftitled record was a commercial hit but, in my opion at least, a huge artistic failure. Sales = Grammys.

[LostSoul]

Ruby Ring, on 20 February 2012 - 04:27 AM, said:

I don't know if that is the case anymore. There aren't ANY albums that sell that well anymore, let alone rock albums. I hear where you are coming from, but I kindly submit that perhaps things are a bit different nowadays.

You haven't been watching the Grammys then, have you? Kanye and Adele were the big winners, as far as I heard. And whats that? They sold how many albums?

I rest my case, or rather...his case. I dunno.

[Dusty]

Adele was the big winner by far, and she did sell 17 million copies, making it the best selling release of 2012. But I don't think that anyone was arguing that Oceania would win anything. The argument was that it would get nominated. Bon Iver sold 357,811 copies as of the end of January; Zeitgeist had sold 500,000 copies by the same date. So if it were all about album sales, either the big Z would have been nominated, or Bon Iver wouldn't have been. The Grammies are all about buzz. Yes, the biggest winners will have to have sold more albums, because those are the albums that everyone will agree upon. But if Oceania is met with psoitive reviews and decent sales, I think that a nomination could happen.

[Arachnea]

Not necessarily. Album sales have been plummeting every year, hence comparing the sales of Zeitgeist to Bon Iver's album might be misleading. Nevertheless, these kind of award shows have a lot more to do with industry politics than the quality or longevity of the work. Generally, you have to know the right people and go to the right parties...or sell a shit load of records like Adele, which makes the industry folks look good and more popular with the public.

[dudehitscar]

Arachnea, on 20 February 2012 - 08:30 AM, said:

Not necessarily. Album sales have been plummeting every year, hence comparing the sales of Zeitgeist to Bon Iver's album might be misleading. Nevertheless, these kind of award shows have a lot more to do with industry politics than the quality or longevity of the work. Generally, you have to know the right people and go to the right parties...or sell a shit load of records like Adele, which makes the industry folks look good and more popular with the public.

also it's completely geared to baby boomers. Boomer nostalgia acts and current acts that boomers can dig. Once the teens/twenty somethings of the early 90s are the ruling generation we will see the corgan and others nominated for tons of shit.. I mean look at Robert Plant.. in led zeppelin he was ignored by the grammies now he's winning grammies for forgettable folk projects. Led Zeppelin IV gets nothing but Raising Sand wins ALBUM OF THE YEAR. It's pretty clear that the Grammy's are skewed to industry politics and boomer tastes.

[frednirv632]

Parksey, on 19 February 2012 - 02:33 AM, said:

I take it that he's your style icon.

:rolleyes:/>

[DandyJon]

:popcorn:/> I love this thread

[Ruby Ring]

LostSoul, on 20 February 2012 - 05:23 AM, said:

You haven't been watching the Grammys then, have you? Kanye and Adele were the big winners, as far as I heard. And whats that? They sold how many albums?

I rest my case, or rather...his case. I dunno.

I am talking about the rock category. I am under no delusions that Billy Corgan will ever be in the running for the whole thing, i.e. Kanye, Adele, etc, ever again.

[stellar.]

Parksey, on 20 February 2012 - 01:03 AM, said:

incorrect. i don't really see why people are hung up about o a s h being nominated in the first place, but i doubt bon iver's album went platinum and he won 2 grammys.

Congratulations, you found the exception. But the dude from Bon Iver also works with Kanye West, who sells millions of albums, and is a grammy favorite. The grammys are a shame, and the only way Oceania will get a meaningless nomination is if it sells REALLY well.

[Dusty]

2011 Best Rock Album Nominees and Sales
Wasting Light (Foo Fighters)-663,000 copies
The Whole Love (Wilco)-approximatly 300,000 copies
Come Around Sundown (Kings of Leon)-694,300 copies
I'm With You (Red Hot Chili Peppers)-800,000 copies worldwide, 500,000 US
Rock N' Roll Party Honoring Les Paul (Jeff Beck)--500,000

So Oceania could sell comparably well to The Whole Love or Rock N' Roll Party. So purely in terms of sales, it is not out of the picture.

In terms of buzz, I think the Pumpkins have enough of a brand name to compare to RHCP, or definatly Wilco. They aren't adored by critics the same way Wilco is, but they aren't hated either. Nor do I tend to think of RHCP as a critics band.

[Ruby Ring]

Dusty, on 21 February 2012 - 02:45 PM, said:

2011 Best Rock Album Nominees and Sales
Wasting Light (Foo Fighters)-663,000 copies
The Whole Love (Wilco)-approximatly 300,000 copies
Come Around Sundown (Kings of Leon)-694,300 copies
I'm With You (Red Hot Chili Peppers)-800,000 copies worldwide, 500,000 US
Rock N' Roll Party Honoring Les Paul (Jeff Beck)--500,000

So Oceania could sell comparably well to The Whole Love or Rock N' Roll Party. So purely in terms of sales, it is not out of the picture.

In terms of buzz, I think the Pumpkins have enough of a brand name to compare to RHCP, or definatly Wilco. They aren't adored by critics the same way Wilco is, but they aren't hated either. Nor do I tend to think of RHCP as a critics band.

Excellent post and right on.

[Arachnea]

Half of those bands are based in LA and are industry darlings (and make their rounds) and the other half are critic darlings. The problem with SP is that they do not fit into either category. It might be Billy's ability to piss people off, and that a lot of industry folks do not like him, but not a lot of people are willing to give them the credit they deserve.

[AndyToe]

Dusty, on 21 February 2012 - 02:45 PM, said:

2011 Best Rock Album Nominees and Sales
Wasting Light (Foo Fighters)-663,000 copies
The Whole Love (Wilco)-approximatly 300,000 copies
Come Around Sundown (Kings of Leon)-694,300 copies
I'm With You (Red Hot Chili Peppers)-800,000 copies worldwide, 500,000 US
Rock N' Roll Party Honoring Les Paul (Jeff Beck)--500,000

So Oceania could sell comparably well to The Whole Love or Rock N' Roll Party. So purely in terms of sales, it is not out of the picture.

In terms of buzz, I think the Pumpkins have enough of a brand name to compare to RHCP, or definatly Wilco. They aren't adored by critics the same way Wilco is, but they aren't hated either. Nor do I tend to think of RHCP as a critics band.

RHCP are a huge band worlwide, advertising is easy.
SP is a band people see as a 90s group. If advertising is well done, at best they will consider Oceania a comeback album. I would be surprised if it sold more than 100k