and in my opinion, the earth revolves around the sun, and not the other way around

Okay.

idioteque link=topic=836.msg12840#msg12840 date=1165013060]

As for the Gish argument... I have always thought and always will (unless the new album completely blows, which I doubt) that it is the Pumpkins weakest work. Corgan's song crafting is still very much in fetus form on that album. It sounds like great ideas were simply thrown together to try and make an album. The result is very reflective of that problem. I won't say it sucks... but it is by far the least impressive work the Smashing Pumpkins (and even Corgan) has done.

In my opinion, even if the album was re-produced, the album would still be sub-par. It's not just the production that lacks in the album, but the overall quality of the songs and instruments that make that album a dim light in comparison to the glowing radiance that is the rest of the Pumpkins work.



i disagree

Any particular reason?

And further... What makes Machina a soulless album? I think it has some of Corgan's most intimate and personal songs. It shows him at his most revealed. Yes, you could argue that the production masks this intimacy, but I disagree. Think of all the added instrumentation and synthesizers that make the album focus on the words and emotions. Unlike in any other of the Pumpkins albums (Save Adore I suppose) the emotions are hidden behind walls and walls of sonic distortion and guitars. However, here that isn't always the case. In some songs the guitar isn't the main focus of the song, Corgan's voice is. It is very easy to hide behind walls of guitars.... exposing your voice at the forefront of a song is not. Corgan often uses simple guitar parts to compliment the song structure, not the other way around. But I understand that you may not feel the same, and that's ok too.

dudehitscar link=topic=836.msg12780#msg12780 date=1164961286]
evando link=topic=836.msg12769#msg12769 date=1164952610]
dudehitscar link=topic=836.msg12737#msg12737 date=1164941707]

7. Gish - Production robs the rocking songs of their natural power but the slow songs are great. Whole album suffers lyrically due to Corgan's inexperienced writing ability at the time. Better than most bands debuts but still their worst. I hardly ever listen to it. I listen to live versions of these songs usually and they are almost always better.


I'm curious how you formulated this opinion... I'd say this of Machina (Heavy Metal Machine...). The production on Gish tends to be pretty clean (it is Butch Vig, after all), which I think would strengthen a rock song, or at least not weaken it...


Yes you could make the same argument for Machina. I would disagree with you but I can see that perspective. The thing with Gish is mainly with the guitars. Especially on Siva they are simply not loud enough and too clean sounding. Corgan's "Yeah!" is just not powerful enough as well. The rock songs lack that extra kick that was displayed on later albums.

Seriously compare www.thepumpkins.net/mp3/mashed_potatoes/...ing_Pumpkins_-_Siva_(live_92).mp3
with the one of the album. It's not even close.

that being said you could probably point to comparisions between Machina and live renditions but really it's not quite the same because Machina songs aren't basic sounding rock songs. Gish was.

Gish is a still a pretty good album. Pumpkins don't have any bad albums.


I see your point there... I tend to listen to Siva very, very loud, so I didn't really notice.
And yeah... there are no bad pumpkins albums.

MCIS for me.

idioteque link=topic=836.msg12840#msg12840 date=1165013060]
I never understood why so many people have a problem with Machina's production. I think it is one of the best sounding albums Flood ever produced. The flow of the album is pristine, and each of the songs carry different feelings because of the production. Take that album and remove the "excessive" production work, and it would have just been another alternative album. The production is what set it apart from the other albums at the time.

As for the Gish argument... I have always thought and always will (unless the new album completely blows, which I doubt) that it is the Pumpkins weakest work. Corgan's song crafting is still very much in fetus form on that album. It sounds like great ideas were simply thrown together to try and make an album. The result is very reflective of that problem. I won't say it sucks... but it is by far the least impressive work the Smashing Pumpkins (and even Corgan) has done.

In my opinion, even if the album was re-produced, the album would still be sub-par. It's not just the production that lacks in the album, but the overall quality of the songs and instruments that make that album a dim light in comparison to the glowing radiance that is the rest of the Pumpkins work.


i agree with what your saying with machina..the producation gives it a different kind of quality from the rest of the albums but the feeling is still there, (its almost like a cleanliness is next to godliness sort of purity) i love being able to listen to a song and pick out the different sounds and instruments and listen to them for a whole song clearly, sounds weird but machina is a good one for it, as some are so vibrant and others not so, but still clean enough to be completely recognisable--- its great to do in adore too, but alot harder to follow sometimes....ok im a freak

i go through stages of what i like to hear IN A SONG haha and sometimes my brain will only concentrate or like one bit better and then the next week im concentrating on a whole other part, they can be complex or soso simple....for instance im listening to Queen alot at the moment and all im concentrating on is the lead guitar, and sometimes it only comes in little clean and seperate intervals, and its just brian and its so so great, very pure guitar...like the lead guitar in another one bites the dust, so obsesssed with that at the mo, and of course we will rock you, i love the guitar at the end..ha.....and then take for example again all ill hear in a song is freddies voice (he was an amazing tenor)....

billys voice.. is great to listen to in adore (and all i guess) my friend once said of the pumpkins (after just hearing adore and loving it..she teaches singing and piano) that although billy hasnt got a traditionally 'good' singing voice the pumpkins wouldnt be the same without it....like try and imagine trent reznor or eddie vedder doing the same thing....gaaay


with the gish thing....i think its been in my cd player twice this year, i havent really given it too much time of day, it always felt like there were better things by the pumpkins to listen too, but then maybe ill give it more time of day in a few years and fall in love....always happens like that

idioteque link=topic=836.msg12851#msg12851 date=1165018117]
Think of all the added instrumentation and synthesizers that make the album focus on the words and emotions.

this doesnt make sense to me


it's like "put more crap in your room in order to clean it up"

i thought it was like, put on a black backdrop to make the performers stand out more...

idioteque link=topic=836.msg12851#msg12851 date=1165018117]
Think of all the added instrumentation and synthesizers that make the album focus on the words and emotions.
thats the reason i havent really warmed to machina- to me its sounds a bit plastic, some of the songs give me headaches. i couldnt say that about gish, which is the ultimate chillout CD because of the lack of extra and (what i think is) unnecessary sound. IMO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Gish doesnt need the extra isntruments, billy pulls off amazing dynamics and everything in gish.

Snail is my favorite song off of Gish. It's just great.

Well over I still think the mix was pretty good, but on songs like "Wound", they drowned the drums in the mix, toned them down. They same hard drive drum beat that I loved from the Arising! tour recordings is their, but down played in the mix. On the other end of the spectrum, there is songs like "This Time" where the multitude of layers in the sound work well. "This Time" is my favorite song on the album.

And I know I am going to get hear for this but I really like "Raindrops and Sunshowers", and "Appels and Oranjes" off Adore. They are not my absolute favorite songs, but they are pretty damn good. I have read on other message boards, where people have been convinced that they are sequels to eachother, but they don't even sound the same. They are both sort of more electronically minded, and mention the word 'rain' in them, but that's about it.

But getting back to the noise factor of Machina. I think the one song that truly deserves criticism for too much noise from the Machina recording sessions is "Real Love". It's a great song, and its good that it has layers, but I feel they could have cleaned up the mix a little more, as there are just too many sounds colliding with eachother if you know what I mean.

And this is slightly off topic, but if you are going to knock an album for noise problems, we should be talking about Zwan's "Mary Star of the Sea". And I don't mean to bring up whether people liked it or not, I am sure we will be split on that subject (so please no 'Zwan sucked' comments). But the whole 'loud at any level' excuse or posturing, what ever you want to call it, was a bad move.

Machina is a lot better produced album. I am willing to admit Machina had some problems as I did earlier, but it wasn't a souless noisy piece of crap as some of you are portraying it as. It is still my favorite SP album.

As for Gish, I like it a lot, but I will admit that it is my least favorite regular studio album that was released in stores. Their sound and the songwriting was still in its infancy. That is not to say it sucks. I think it's a good thing if a band is capable, at least for some people, of making you love every album more than the last

Billy has remarked in an interview before that his songwriting hit a turning point with Adore. Here is what I wrote on my website, perhaps someone can find the original article (I think it might still be in Siva's news archives): In an interview with the Chicago Sun Times, Billy said
the breakthrough song for writing lyrics was "Annie Dog". He went on to say, " If you read the lyrics, it's sort of like how it comes out on the page. It's hard to explain. I can't even remember how I
used to write lyrics. It's sort of like I used to sit down and say, "Now I've got to write lyrics."

I also recall Greg Kot from the Chicago Tribune remarking during a panel discussion about the end of the band (it was on a show called Chicago Tonight, I might have mentioned it in another post), that Adore and Machina, that SP's songs and songwriting were taken to the next level, that it was some of their best work. It may have also been him that was reflecting Billy's comments in the past, that one day people will look at an album like Adore in the future, and realize how good an album it really was.

Eye link=topic=836.msg12969#msg12969 date=1165125722]
But getting back to the noise factor of Machina. I think the one song that truly deserves criticism for too much noise from the Machina recording sessions is "Real Love".

ah yes- ill have to say...i dont really like this song...

Rivers Cuomo link=topic=836.msg12957#msg12957 date=1165115161]
idioteque link=topic=836.msg12851#msg12851 date=1165018117]
Think of all the added instrumentation and synthesizers that make the album focus on the words and emotions.

this doesnt make sense to me


it's like "put more crap in your room in order to clean it up"


organised chaos...it exists...lke my bedroom floor..if i clean i cant find anything hahahaha (sorry off topic)

[It may have also been him that was reflecting Billy's comments in the past,] that one day people will look at an album like Adore in the future, and realize how good an album it really was.

I hope that will happen one day. Billy has said before that what they did (killing theirselves commercially in order to go a new direction) will make more sense overtime than just going on and doing the same things over and over again. I think it's the same with TheFutureEmbrace. It is, just like every album Billy's put out, quite unique and nothing like his previous releases. It was a commercial blunder and the reviews weren't fantastic (they were ok though), but it only contributes to Billy's status as a unique songwriter. It made us keep our faith in him, because he once again did something DIFFERENT. He proved once again that he's not like anybody else, he stands out. That is the only thing that matters (to me).

Thats why its difficult to comparre pumpkins albums: they're all really different and represent different sides to peoples musical tastes. So the best pumpkin album is going to be according to your personal tastes in music. For example, I like to have plenty of melody in music and thats why the solos in siamese dream stand out for me more than those of gish. And all too often, they are hidden in machina behind the fuzzy production. Also the vocals are important to me and thats why I love how billy sings on adore and SD more than say MCIS (at least the first cd), where he is less agressive.