[JOHNO]

After listening to Billys latest interview ive got the general impression that Oceania is not being sent out to music mags etc to be reviewed before the official release date, dunno bout you lot but im slightly confused by this if its true but after the shit press Billy had over Zeitgeist (especially over here in the uk, you know who you are...NME!!) if this album is as good (and by god i hope it is) as Billy says it is then surely this is his perfect chance of sticking his fingers up at his harsh critics. Plus the added bonus of more publicity the better the review (ie. album sales, ticket sales etc....)

just wanted to know everyone elses general opinion on this really.


cheers x

[GracefulSwan]

Even if it's good they will call it shit. Radiohead can make an album full of R2D2 bleeps, and vaginas and anuses are offered up as sacrificial gifts to them. If TFE had been released by Radiohead it would've been hailed a classic, you know how this shit works by now. Billy knows how this shit works by now. He can't do anything right.

[CZR]

GracefulSwan, on 19 April 2012 - 12:35 AM, said:

Even if it's good they will call it shit. Radiohead can make an album full of R2D2 bleeps, and vaginas and anuses are offered up as sacrificial gifts to them. If TFE had been released by Radiohead it would've been hailed a classic, you know how this shit works by now. Billy knows how this shit works by now. He can't do anything right.

Lol. That's right

[Parksey]

yeah, but radiohead don't put out bad albums so...

[GracefulSwan]

Parksey, on 19 April 2012 - 04:16 AM, said:

yeah, but radiohead don't put out bad albums so...

http://i40.tinypic.com/3506xoj.jpg

[Fernando]

GracefulSwan, on 19 April 2012 - 12:35 AM, said:

Even if it's good they will call it shit. Radiohead can make an album full of R2D2 bleeps, and vaginas and anuses are offered up as sacrificial gifts to them. If TFE had been released by Radiohead it would've been hailed a classic, you know how this shit works by now. Billy knows how this shit works by now. He can't do anything right.

Exactly. I think Billy want people (fans and casual fans) listen to this before someone else says it's good or not. So nobody need to follow the trend.

[LostSoul]

That actually is quite a smart move on his part. Nothing but purity. People have nothing to go on. Thus, are forced to listen to the record without any preconceived ideas to base their listening session on.

It won't catch all of those bandwagon jumpers, though. There are still those who will judge Oceania before listening merely based on the band who recorded it. There are plenty of fans who shit on everything he puts out because the past few records have been sub-par. And there are the Mellon Collie/SD droppers who left the band after Adore threw them off. Many of them linger, and will cause a stink.

I do agree with the album not being sent to mags before release. They'll say whatever they think will get them ratings and more readers.

One thing I would like to point out, though...

Its not that Billy "can't do anything right", its that nobody around him can. :rolleyes:/>

He alone is responsible for his own actions, and whatever tracks are laid down by him are a product of himself. People dislike the 2007-2011 output because it is largely agreed that it doesn't stack up. Zeitgeist had bad production, and the vocals sucked, lacking any emotional value. The song dynamics, however, remained intact. Great songwriting. Then we get Teargarden. Arguably much better vocal delivery, and lyrics. Also, the production smoothed over by the end of the second EP. Excellent. Yet the dynamics were gone. All we got were predictable, mundane and repetitive pop songs (save for A Song For A Son). While I do enjoy a large portion of the Teargarden track to an EXTENT, I do not by any means praise it as his best work. I do not put it on a pedestal it does not deserve, or hail it as an intelligent business decision.

As I've stated countless times, the album will speak for itself. The production is indeed a factor still, but I am very impressed with 4 of the 6 songs we've heard so far, and the other two are decent. The dynamics have returned, and no true pop song is to be seen. Billy has stated many times that this record is devoid of singles, and is in a more prog approach. The title track certainly demonstrates this. As our lovely Bimbly has pointed out, there are no clear singles out of the bunch we have heard. Possibly My Love Is Winter, but certainly not as a lead. Not enough of a hook. Panopticon would make for a nice follow-through single, but BC has already stated there aren't any clear singles in mind.

I feel confident that this record will be good. I hated Zeitgeist, and dislike a good 1/3 of Teargarden. His business & musical decisions, often baffle me. The whole "visual experience" thing is, in my eyes, unnecessary. Other than that, I like the steps he is taking. No singles, no advance reviews, nothing. This album will be tested completely by its ability to stand up on its own. Will it? I don't know. What I do admire is the fact that he will risk it. It is refreshing to see the man finally focus on the music again as a whole, rather than shitting out another pop-rock abortion like G.L.O.W., FOL, (Come On) Let's Go!, or Widow.

[ItsSoPringles]

smart move, i can see the less than 2 star review from rolling stone already, pitchfork giving it less than a 5 also seems possible

[United States]

GracefulSwan, on 19 April 2012 - 12:35 AM, said:

Even if it's good they will call it shit. Radiohead can make an album full of R2D2 bleeps, and vaginas and anuses are offered up as sacrificial gifts to them. If TFE had been released by Radiohead it would've been hailed a classic, you know how this shit works by now. Billy knows how this shit works by now. He can't do anything right.

Lmao. That's so true.

[crepe]

Parksey, on 19 April 2012 - 04:16 AM, said:

yeah, but radiohead don't put out bad albums so...

THE KING OF LIMB is just as bad as zeitgeist was.

[Deleted User Account]

crepe, on 19 April 2012 - 08:15 AM, said:

THE KING OF LIMB is just as bad as zeitgeist was.

No. Zeitgeist was a lame attempt at appealing to some commercial demographic that doesn't exist save for in Bill's mind. King was an artistic statement in line with SP's Adores, Machina's, Mellon Collie's. Not liking either is of course fine, but those two albums are *not* comparable.

[Bountiful_Wasteland]

ArticulateEric, on 19 April 2012 - 08:29 AM, said:

No. Zeitgeist was a lame attempt at appealing to some commercial demographic that doesn't exist save for in Bill's mind. King was an artistic statement in line with SP's Adores, Machina's, Mellon Collie's. Not liking either is of course fine, but those two albums are *not* comparable.

Yeah, I remember KoL getting quite mixed reviews, and a lot of the outcome seemed to hinge on how much a particular outlet liked Radiohead

[LostSoul]

ArticulateEric, on 19 April 2012 - 08:29 AM, said:

No. Zeitgeist was a lame attempt at appealing to some commercial demographic that doesn't exist save for in Bill's mind. King was an artistic statement in line with SP's Adores, Machina's, Mellon Collie's. Not liking either is of course fine, but those two albums are *not* comparable.

This. I honestly liked KoL quite a lot. Not their best, but yeah.

Essentially, you are comparing this:





So many comparisons to draw here.

[TwoHeadedBoy]

GracefulSwan, on 19 April 2012 - 12:35 AM, said:

If TFE had been released by Radiohead it would've been hailed a classic

I really, really doubt it...

I think Billy's just playing it safe. He's no dummy. He knows what kind of pre-release reactions TFE and Zeitgeist got, and if he got similar reviews for Oceania before it even came out, then it could be devastating. I don't think it'll get poor reviews, but I think I know where he's coming from. Ideally, I wish he would screen it for critics so they can confirm it's his strongest release in 17 years, but it's a big gamble.

[nasalscarecrow]

I reckon there'll be many critics who will slag off Oceania regardless, because it's so easy to take shots at Corgan now. I've seen reviews in which they claim completely incorrect stuff and use that as a basis to slag them off (for example reviews of gigs at which they played several tracks from the first three albums and then were slagged off for not playing anything old). I can see the same thing happening again. Critics will use his behaviour in 2008 and new lineup as a way to slag them off even if the album's good.

[JOHNO]

LostSoul, on 19 April 2012 - 06:28 AM, said:

That actually is quite a smart move on his part. Nothing but purity. People have nothing to go on. Thus, are forced to listen to the record without any preconceived ideas to base their listening session on.

It won't catch all of those bandwagon jumpers, though. There are still those who will judge Oceania before listening merely based on the band who recorded it. There are plenty of fans who shit on everything he puts out because the past few records have been sub-par. And there are the Mellon Collie/SD droppers who left the band after Adore threw them off. Many of them linger, and will cause a stink.

I do agree with the album not being sent to mags before release. They'll say whatever they think will get them ratings and more readers.

One thing I would like to point out, though...

Its not that Billy "can't do anything right", its that nobody around him can. :rolleyes:/>

He alone is responsible for his own actions, and whatever tracks are laid down by him are a product of himself. People dislike the 2007-2011 output because it is largely agreed that it doesn't stack up. Zeitgeist had bad production, and the vocals sucked, lacking any emotional value. The song dynamics, however, remained intact. Great songwriting. Then we get Teargarden. Arguably much better vocal delivery, and lyrics. Also, the production smoothed over by the end of the second EP. Excellent. Yet the dynamics were gone. All we got were predictable, mundane and repetitive pop songs (save for A Song For A Son). While I do enjoy a large portion of the Teargarden track to an EXTENT, I do not by any means praise it as his best work. I do not put it on a pedestal it does not deserve, or hail it as an intelligent business decision.

As I've stated countless times, the album will speak for itself. The production is indeed a factor still, but I am very impressed with 4 of the 6 songs we've heard so far, and the other two are decent. The dynamics have returned, and no true pop song is to be seen. Billy has stated many times that this record is devoid of singles, and is in a more prog approach. The title track certainly demonstrates this. As our lovely Bimbly has pointed out, there are no clear singles out of the bunch we have heard. Possibly My Love Is Winter, but certainly not as a lead. Not enough of a hook. Panopticon would make for a nice follow-through single, but BC has already stated there aren't any clear singles in mind.

I feel confident that this record will be good. I hated Zeitgeist, and dislike a good 1/3 of Teargarden. His business & musical decisions, often baffle me. The whole "visual experience" thing is, in my eyes, unnecessary. Other than that, I like the steps he is taking. No singles, no advance reviews, nothing. This album will be tested completely by its ability to stand up on its own. Will it? I don't know. What I do admire is the fact that he will risk it. It is refreshing to see the man finally focus on the music again as a whole, rather than shitting out another pop-rock abortion like G.L.O.W., FOL, (Come On) Let's Go!, or Widow.

I see you highly rate 4/6 songs we've heard so far, care to share.... just curious




cheers

[Fernando]

ArticulateEric, on 19 April 2012 - 08:29 AM, said:

No. Zeitgeist was a lame attempt at appealing to some commercial demographic that doesn't exist save for in Bill's mind. King was an artistic statement in line with SP's Adores, Machina's, Mellon Collie's. Not liking either is of course fine, but those two albums are *not* comparable.

Hey, GracefulSwan, we need to repost your gif here.

[Deleted User Account]

This "Radiohead suck but suck critics dicks and vice versa and that explains everything" vs. "Billy Corgan is infallible and yet the critics can't see this past Radiohead's dicks in their mouths" dichotomy is so embarrassing. Yes, Smashing Pumpkins/Billy Corgan are at times unfairly maligned in the press. Not all of the time, mind you. What does that have to do with Radiohead?

[andrewface]

Parksey, on 19 April 2012 - 04:16 AM, said:

yeah, but radiohead don't put out bad albums so...

amnesiac? King of Limbs? hail to the thief?

take your pick....

[Gr3g3]

andrewface, on 19 April 2012 - 02:32 PM, said:

amnesiac? King of Limbs? hail to the thief?

take your pick....

Pablo Honey

[astralweeks]

Between the universally positive reviews for the reissues, the young guitar bands name/riff checking them, last yrs indie darling M83 citing MCIS as a major inspiration for his own double album... 90's Pumpkins is finally getting its due as a classic band of their era..

I actually think the press would be listening to the new material with a favorable ear if it's as good as Corgan has hyped it to be in his own interviews..

the people who are still on board with this band obviously aren't going to be swayed by a 1 star review in RS or 2.0 from Pitchfork. and if the album happens to get a positive reaction from critics it might persuade people who had given up on the band to give the new album a chance...

Reviews could only help. even if they're horrible it at least acts as free advertisement that the band has a new album out...

[JSapp]

Gr3g3, on 19 April 2012 - 02:43 PM, said:

Pablo Honey

Don't fuck with Pablo Honey

[Gr3g3]

JSapp, on 19 April 2012 - 02:49 PM, said:

Don't fuck with Pablo Honey

Hahaha. Sorry bud. I fucking hate it.

[JSapp]

Gr3g3, on 19 April 2012 - 02:52 PM, said:

Hahaha. Sorry bud. I fucking hate it.

It's pure 90's nostalgia for me.

[Arachnea]

astralweeks, on 19 April 2012 - 02:44 PM, said:

Between the universally positive reviews for the reissues, the young guitar bands name/riff checking them, last yrs indie darling M83 citing MCIS as a major inspiration for his own double album... 90's Pumpkins is finally getting its due as a classic band of their era..

I actually think the press would be listening to the new material with a favorable ear if it's as good as Corgan has hyped it to be in his own interviews..

the people who are still on board with this band obviously aren't going to be swayed by a 1 star review in RS or 2.0 from Pitchfork. and if the album happens to get a positive reaction from critics it might persuade people who had given up on the band to give the new album a chance...

Reviews could only help. even if they're horrible it at least acts as free advertisement that the band has a new album out...

I agree. It seemed to me that the band was finally getting positive praise and acknowledgement by the mainstream press and several popular indie bands. Now seems like the best time to unleash the album to the sharks, even more so if the album is as good as Billy says it is. If nothing else, it at least gives them the press they need to let people know that they still exist. Not releasing a single, video, or opening it to reviews is an interesting move yet it also seems counterintuitive. I am not certain what the expectation is from here on out. I assume he is banking on word of mouth carrying this album through.

[Bulletproofmask]

andrewface, on 19 April 2012 - 02:32 PM, said:

amnesiac? King of Limbs? hail to the thief?

take your pick....

Two of their best albums in bold.

KOL was arguably their worst.

[MonteLDS]

couldn't anyone write a review on an album even if it has hit the public hands?

i am sure the album will be reviewed, but at least people would be able to take a listen for themselves rather than just having to take the word of a writer.

[mayday27]

GracefulSwan, on 19 April 2012 - 12:35 AM, said:

Even if it's good they will call it shit. Radiohead can make an album full of R2D2 bleeps, and vaginas and anuses are offered up as sacrificial gifts to them. If TFE had been released by Radiohead it would've been hailed a classic, you know how this shit works by now. Billy knows how this shit works by now. He can't do anything right.

That's not true, and it's just mean. :nope:/>

[Arachnea]

MonteLDS, on 19 April 2012 - 04:43 PM, said:

couldn't anyone write a review on an album even if it has hit the public hands?

i am sure the album will be reviewed, but at least people would be able to take a listen for themselves rather than just having to take the word of a writer.

After the fact, yes. However, I think most of us were thinking along the lines of international press reviews (i.e. Rolling Stone, NME, and so on) and the advantage they can often have of listening to the album earlier and before the general public. More people would be exposed to the fact that they even released an album via those major international outlets over an independent music blog. Pitchfork would be one of the only major independent blog outlets that people might look into, yet that also caters to a certain group of people that might not necessarily like or care about the band. The biggest advantage to allowing its release to be critiqued by major outlets is the marketing benefits that would come with positive reviews and exposure to an international audience. Whether we like it or not, critics do play a significant role in building and maintaining an artist's legacy.

[Parksey]

andrewface, on 19 April 2012 - 02:32 PM, said:

amnesiac? King of Limbs? hail to the thief?

take your pick....

they're all good, man. i'll give you guys pablo honey, though.

I agree with bimbly in regards to SP fans randomly bringing Radiohead into these conversations. What they fuck do Radiohead have to do with Billy not putting O@sh up for review? There's a clear jealousy on show from certain people within this fanbase.

[Deleted User Account]

MonteLDS, on 19 April 2012 - 04:43 PM, said:

couldn't anyone write a review on an album even if it has hit the public hands?

i am sure the album will be reviewed, but at least people would be able to take a listen for themselves rather than just having to take the word of a writer.

Who does this? Nobody does this. Most blue collar/mainstream music fans hear word of mouth from friends, not pitchfork, nme or rolling stone writers.

[MachinesOfLight]

andrewface, on 19 April 2012 - 02:32 PM, said:

hail to the thief?

:eyebrow:/>

[astralweeks]

ArticulateEric, on 19 April 2012 - 05:32 PM, said:

Who does this? Nobody does this. Most blue collar/mainstream music fans hear word of mouth from friends, not pitchfork, nme or rolling stone writers.

there's not a collective consensus when it comes "word of mouth" though.

if you want to reach a large group of people in a small amount of time media outlets are obviously the best way to go (rollingstone, spin, pitchfork, nme, etc)

[TwoHeadedBoy]

ItsSoPringles, on 19 April 2012 - 06:56 AM, said:

smart move, i can see the less than 2 star review from rolling stone already

Rolling Stone gave TbK volume II a 3.5, I think they'll be as positive as they can be towards oceania.

[astralweeks]

MonteLDS, on 19 April 2012 - 04:43 PM, said:

couldn't anyone write a review on an album even if it has hit the public hands?

i am sure the album will be reviewed, but at least people would be able to take a listen for themselves rather than just having to take the word of a writer.

If I understood your interview correctly Corgan said the album wasn't being sent out for review. could individual publicatons decide to review Oceania on their own? yes... but will they review it? when will they review it?

for the general purposes of marketing the album I think it would have been best for all the reviews to coincide with the release date.

[dudehitscar]

Radioheads studio output has been light years ahead of corgans since 2000.. That's just reality... I remember zwan being on entertainment weeklys top 10 of the year".. It hadn't been all bad reviews... In fact I think most zeitgeist reviews I read were too generous. Pitchfork is unfair to corgan... Other than that I'd say the press has been as fair as they have ever been.



That being said this is a good move by bc.

This post has been edited by dudehitscar: 19 April 2012 - 07:09 PM

[snail33]

Parksey, on 19 April 2012 - 04:16 AM, said:

yeah, but radiohead don't put out bad albums so...

except for pablo honey, half of kid a, most of amnesiac, half of in rainbows and most of the king of limbs...sure.

ArticulateEric, on 19 April 2012 - 08:29 AM, said:

No. Zeitgeist was a lame attempt at appealing to some commercial demographic that doesn't exist save for in Bill's mind. King was an artistic statement in line with SP's Adores, Machina's, Mellon Collie's. Not liking either is of course fine, but those two albums are *not* comparable.

king of limbs isn't zeitgeist, but it can't hold the balls of any of the bc records you just named. it's another year of radiohead twiddling knobs instead of writing songs and--shudder--ROCKING.

andrewface, on 19 April 2012 - 02:32 PM, said:

amnesiac? King of Limbs? hail to the thief?

take your pick....

hail to the thief is brilliant.

JSapp, on 19 April 2012 - 02:56 PM, said:

It's pure 90's nostalgia for me.

it's pretty bad.

Parksey, on 19 April 2012 - 05:10 PM, said:

they're all good, man. i'll give you guys pablo honey, though.

I agree with bimbly in regards to SP fans randomly bringing Radiohead into these conversations. What they fuck do Radiohead have to do with Billy not putting O@sh up for review? There's a clear jealousy on show from certain people within this fanbase.

the point they're making is very simple--that some artists (like bc/sp) get ripped and assessed based on their persona and supposed pretentiousness as opposed to purely based on the music, whereas others (like radiohead, who used to be one of my favorite bands, by the way) get praised from jump for everything they do based on supposed genius (even though i would argue they are MORE pretentious than bc).

[the_farewell_party]

dudehitscar, on 19 April 2012 - 07:08 PM, said:

Radioheads studio output has been light years ahead of corgans since 2000..

This. The Smashing Pumpkins are my favorite band when I consider their catalog as a whole, no doubt.

But if we're just looking at material from the mid-'00s to now, Radiohead slaughters The Pumpkins with a rusty cleaver infected with salmonella. Nothing since Machina has come anywhere near the quality of In Rainbows or King of Limbs.

If we are looking at both the bands' entire careers, Pumpkins win for me by far. I mean, the Pumpkins' first album was Gish, which still stands as a great album today. Pablo Honey... I don't think most Radiohead fans still revisit that album very often.

Difference, though, is Radiohead has only released things miles better than Pablo Honey since. The Pumpkins weren't able to make Zeitgeist or Teargarden better than Gish.

[dudehitscar]

the_farewell_party, on 19 April 2012 - 08:24 PM, said:

This. The Smashing Pumpkins are my favorite band when I consider their catalog as a whole, no doubt.

But if we're just looking at material from the mid-'00s to now, Radiohead slaughters The Pumpkins with a rusty cleaver infected with salmonella. Nothing since Machina has come anywhere near the quality of In Rainbows or King of Limbs.

If we are looking at both the bands' entire careers, Pumpkins win for me by far. I mean, the Pumpkins' first album was Gish, which still stands as a great album today. Pablo Honey... I don't think most Radiohead fans still revisit that album very often.

Difference, though, is Radiohead has only released things miles better than Pablo Honey since. The Pumpkins weren't able to make Zeitgeist or Teargarden better than Gish.

I agree. Sp is my favorite band and corgan has done great things in the past 12 years but I think radiohead deserves all the attention they get.

[the_farewell_party]

Parksey, on 19 April 2012 - 05:10 PM, said:

I agree with bimbly in regards to SP fans randomly bringing Radiohead into these conversations. What they fuck do Radiohead have to do with Billy not putting O@sh up for review? There's a clear jealousy on show from certain people within this fanbase.

I agree, as well. It seems that there is almost a resentment that another band that is somewhat SP's contemporary is enjoying more critical success that SP is, and some SP fans like to take every opportunity to pit the two bands in some sort of contest, despite the fact that neither band probably spends much time thinking about the other.

I don't know. I'm not the kind to give a shit about whether my favorite band gets favorable critical reviews. I don't need to feel validated by seeing some magazine like SP as much as I do. And I don't see why other people have this urge to see SP regain the popularity they had in their critical height. Billy's still making music, we're still listening to it, so obviously that means things are fine.

[dudehitscar]

For the record I think siamese dream, mcis, and adore are better than anything radiohead ever put out...

[the_farewell_party]

dudehitscar, on 19 April 2012 - 08:32 PM, said:

For the record I think siamese dream, mcis, and adore are better than anything radiohead ever put out...

I agree.

[StarsAtHome]

It's just Murphy's law

[nasalscarecrow]

I haven't been impressed by a Radiohead album since Kid A. In Rainbows was alright but the rest can cock off. The Bends, OK Computer, and Kid A are their classics.