Billy Corgan: The Fact That So Many Living Rock Legends Are Not Making New Music Is Just Wrong

[Tom2112]

11 hours ago, Len Cnut said:

Please...if Glen Matlock can put out albums then Stevie Nicks and Pete Townshend can   They have enough clout to self finance as well if they wanted to, a lot lesser people do.  Its just...perhaps they don't want to, perhaps its a lot of work.

Didn't Stevie just put an album out last year.

I agree with your point though, at that level, with or without a label they have enough power to make and release the music they want IF they want to.

[DieselDaisy]

I completely agree with Billy Corgan. 

[Bigtater]

Billy just really doesn't give a shit about his fans. He plays solo shows and smashing pumpkins shows and doesn't remotely care about playing old nostalgic 90s songs. We need new bands to come out with stuff but until people buy the music they won't ever break it big like it was in the 60s and 70s. Rock could get bigger again if it had a larger mainstream media prescence again but pop and country have a wider audience that doesn't offend many people so advertisers like it so it gets played. 

There are some good new rock bands out there. I really like Greta Van Fleet on the national level and there is a band in Nashville that I really like called "The Tip" that rocks pretty good. Their main problem is with their name and some of their songs they have already set themselves up to not ever get mainstream success but they rock hard and loud and are a fun show. 

Old bands don't give a shit about making new music anymore because they have broken the code. They have figured out that selling 5000-20000 seats a night at 100 bucks a pop makes way more money than recording an album and selling it to their old fans. They won't sell 10 million copies anymore because they won't have the mainstream people buying the latest  biggest new  thing and their loyal fan bases aren't nearly as big and dwindle with age. Obviously there are some, but a lot of 18 year olds  aren't going to buy a new Fleetwood Mac Album if they don't already have the old Fleet wood Mac albums.

 

[Nicklord]

10 minutes ago, Bigtater said:

Billy just really doesn't give a shit about his fans. He plays solo shows and smashing pumpkins shows and doesn't remotely care about playing old nostalgic 90s songs. We need new bands to come out with stuff but until people buy the music they won't ever break it big like it was in the 60s and 70s. Rock could get bigger again if it had a larger mainstream media prescence again but pop and country have a wider audience that doesn't offend many people so advertisers like it so it gets played. 

There are some good new rock bands out there. I really like Greta Van Fleet on the national level and there is a band in Nashville that I really like called "The Tip" that rocks pretty good. Their main problem is with their name and some of their songs they have already set themselves up to not ever get mainstream success but they rock hard and loud and are a fun show. 

Old bands don't give a shit about making new music anymore because they have broken the code. They have figured out that selling 5000-20000 seats a night at 100 bucks a pop makes way more money than recording an album and selling it to their old fans. They won't sell 10 million copies anymore because they won't have the mainstream people buying the latest  biggest new  thing and their loyal fan bases aren't nearly as big and dwindle with age. Obviously there are some, but a lot of 18 year olds  aren't going to buy a new Fleetwood Mac Album if they don't already have the old Fleet wood Mac albums.

 

There are way more old bands that release records than the ones that don't. Just look at the Graspop festival poster for 2018 for example. From all "logo" bands only GnR doesn't have an album in the last 5 years and almost all of them are old/er. 

Edited November 17, 2017 by Nicklord

[Bigtater]

Ok cool. I will say that those bands may play up to 3 songs per show max from new album but that throws billy Corgan s statement out as bs pretty much. Billy has a lot of issues with pumpkins fans because when he comes out with new music he wants to play it all.

[RONIN]

It's hard to blame the guy really. Imagine playing the same shit over and over again night after night - and your fans don't want to hear anything new, just the hits. No matter what awesome new song you wrote, they don't care - just more of the same old thing.

It's like fans constantly asking washed up movie stars like Mickey Rourke about 9.5 weeks or Stallone about Rambo from 30 years ago instead of whatever new movie they're making. A daily reminder of their irrelevance.

That to me, is the death of art. I mean look at Axl - playing the same AFD songs he wrote as a 22 year old guy all the way into his 50's while fans groan at any Chinese Democracy song on the setlist. The irony of course being that Axl wants to sing CD songs because they seem fresh in his mind compared to AFD/Illusions even if CD songs are literally 18-20 years old at this point. Christ, what a weird position to be in. Repeating yourself over and over again has got to be a slow death for any creative unless they're just revelling in being a one-hit wonder and resting on their laurels. The dude is so bored, he even gets excited about singing cookie cutter butt rock songs from 30 years ago by AC/DC. 

 

Edited November 17, 2017 by RONIN

[dalsh327]

 

[downzy]

Corgan trying to drop some meta thinking on Rogan makes me laugh.  You can tell Rogan isn't really getting what Corgan is trying to say.  

Interesting take on Axl and GNR by Corgan.  I'd argue that it's a perspective that was lost with many GNR fans over the last fifteen years.  In the end, it didn't matter how many iterations of the band or false starts the band took, the GNR brand was always building and never really in any danger.  The strength of the music and what GNR represented during the late 80s and early 90s has persevered and people's appreciation has grown with time.  The fact that the NITL tour will likely gross just short of a billion dollars should remind everyone that the day-to-day isn't all that important.  I would argue that releasing Chinese Democracy, even though it's arguable that the rollout wasn't all that great, furthered Axl and GNR's legacy regardless of how you and I and the general public evaluate the album.   The fact that it exists is a trump of sorts.  I'm not sure where we are today would be all that different than had the UYI band not broke up and released a couple more albums.  

Anyway, interesting perspective offered by Corgan on Axl/GNR.  

[Top-Hatted One]

On 11/16/2017 at 9:10 PM, Oldest Goat said:

Conspiracy Theory; Axl and the others are raping us with their ticket prices because they are gathering funds to start an independent label.

Multiple albums and live recordings, confirmed.

That would be great and would help people cope with the idea of not wanting to share the loot with Izzy but let's be real. They are lining their wallets because they enjoy their lavish lifestyle, flying their own Jets, BBQs and partying with the Hollywood elite. They blew thru so many millions of dollars in their prime with their bad habits and it probably kills them inside. Rightfully so. Now they have are making the most of this 2nd chance. 

I agree with Corgan but this view is a little narrow minded and simplistic. Many bands only do it for the money so they are not interested in investing time and money on new music. They know the masses want to hear the hits. Some are just lazy, insecure etc. 

One of the many reasons why Guns are great is because they've never been afraid to fill their live sets with new songs. Whether it's Lies, UYI, CD, VR or SMKC.  Most bands that tour off new releases will only introduce 1-2 new songs to their set. Not these guys. They don't hold anything back. 

Eventually we will learn what their current intentions are. I know Slash  lives for writing and creating new music especially while on the road. If in a year or 2 they are still trotting around doing the same shows with no new music in sight then you can add Guns to the long list of bands cashing in on their past greatness. 

[Top-Hatted One]

On 11/17/2017 at 2:15 PM, Bigtater said:

Ok cool. I will say that those bands may play up to 3 songs per show max from new album but that throws billy Corgan s statement out as bs pretty much. Billy has a lot of issues with pumpkins fans because when he comes out with new music he wants to play it all.

Yea that is a sure fire way to alienate your entire fanbase with your selfishness. It's a 2way street between artists and buying public

[Top-Hatted One]

Aside from the inflated ticket and merch prices these nostalgic acts now charge some charge $300-500 extra a pop for a "meet & greet"

[downzy]

8 minutes ago, Top-Hatted One said:

Aside from the inflated ticket and merch prices these nostalgic acts now charge some charge $300-500 extra a pop for a "meet & greet"

I don't see the problem of artists charging what the general public are willing to pay.  For years artists undervalued their worth by setting ticket prices too low with respect to overall demand and supply because they didn't want to be seen as greedy.  But since enough people are willing to pay a lot more to see their favourite artists, it created an opportunity for third-parties to make an insane amount of money off of this discrepancy.  Personally, I'd rather the artist make the money than scalpers and ticket brokers.  

Only alternative is to go with paperless ticketing but that's a whole other ball of wax.

[Guitto]

Why Does METALLICA Keep Making New Albums?

 

"Asked what inspires METALLICA to keep making new records even though they could have easily spent the last couple of decades touring on the back of the "Black Album," Ulrich said: "Without giving you too much of the 'we're artists' and all that crap, it's a lot of fun to write songs, it's a lot of fun to create songs, it's a lot of fun to record them, it's a lot of fun to make records. And you've gotta allow yourself both sides of that coin.

"Being out on the road is obviously beyond incredible, but playing five or six new songs that we do every night and having new material, that's really cool," he continued. "We do a lot of meet-and-greets and meet all different kinds of folks.

"I've gotta tell you: Three or four days ago in Texas, there was a kid in one of the meet-and-greets; he couldn't have been more than six or eight," Lars said. "And I said, 'Blah blah blah. How're you doing? What's your favorite song?', expecting him to say 'Enter Sandman' or whatever. And he goes 'Atlas, Rise!' I'm not making that up. Six or seven year sold. I said, 'What's your favorite METALLICA song?' He didn't skip a beat — [he] just [said], 'Atlas, Rise!' So that's the reason we make records still. That's amazing — that that still happens."

The Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame band is touring in support of its tenth studio album, "Hardwired... To Self-Destruct", which features the current single "Now That We're Dead".

The North American leg of METALLICA's "WorldWired" trek will hit stadiums in fifteen more cities before ending in mid-August.

The next stop on the tour is Orlando, Florida on July 5."

http://www.blabbermouth.net/news/why-does-metallica-keep-making-new-albums.html#blCU5oMzgDI8CuRA.99

 

Edited November 21, 2017 by Guitto

[DieselDaisy]

Corgan is completely correct in what he says. Rock music is now one big parody. All old rock bands do now are impressions of their former self. Squint and ignore line-up aberrations, shot vocals, fluffed guitar lines, flab and wrinkles, and they might even look and sound like they did in 1987 or 1973 or whatever time period they are trying to enact for you. And I do not actually fully blame the bands here, who are obviously lazier, have lost their muse and are greedier than they were as young men. I actually partially blame the fans. There is a sort of laziness and attention deficit disorder that has seeped into crowds, a sort of casualness also which seems to be connected somehow with having too much excess cash. Fans go to these shows like one would go to a West End play, or the circus. When one goes to the circus, one desires to see all the recognisable tropes, whitefaced clown, some acrobatics, spot of juggling etc. You'd feel rather let down if you didn't see a clown at a circus. It is the same with rock bands, ''play Sweet child of mine'', ''play Satisfaction'', ''play Enter the Sandman''. Crowds now repudiate change, artistry, novelty.

Consequentially, they stand there, their phones out relaying the concert onto social media, with loads of over-priced tat to bring home as display items. There is almost a sense that the most important thing for modern crowds is, not so much seeing the band , but, being seen seeing the band. The band merely becomes an accessory with which to socially preen on facebook, 

[Aussiegun]

When was the last band/singer that started decades ago released something that was very positive critically and/or commercially? 

ACDC with Black Ice?

You can see why they don't bother. More likely to miss, so it's seen as a waste of time and money.

 

[Nicklord]

12 minutes ago, Aussiegun said:

When was the last band/singer that started decades ago released something that was very positive critically and/or commercially? 

ACDC with Black Ice?

You can see why they don't bother. More likely to miss, so it's seen as a waste of time and money.

 

If you wanna count last 5 years: Radiohead, Metallica, RHCP, Pearl Jam, Soundgarden, Green Day, Blur... all had successful and positive received albums. From bands older than GnR both Gilmour and Waters from PF had nicely received albums

[MyPrettyTiedUpMichelle]

15 hours ago, DieselDaisy said:

Corgan is completely correct in what he says. Rock music is now one big parody. All old rock bands do now are impressions of their former self. Squint and ignore line-up aberrations, shot vocals, fluffed guitar lines, flab and wrinkles, and they might even look and sound like they did in 1987 or 1973 or whatever time period they are trying to enact for you. And I do not actually fully blame the bands here, who are obviously lazier, have lost their muse and are greedier than they were as young men. I actually partially blame the fans. There is a sort of laziness and attention deficit disorder that has seeped into crowds, a sort of casualness also which seems to be connected somehow with having too much excess cash. Fans go to these shows like one would go to a West End play, or the circus. When one goes to the circus, one desires to see all the recognisable tropes, whitefaced clown, some acrobatics, spot of juggling etc. You'd feel rather let down if you didn't see a clown at a circus. It is the same with rock bands, ''play Sweet child of mine'', ''play Satisfaction'', ''play Enter the Sandman''. Crowds now repudiate change, artistry, novelty.

Consequentially, they stand there, their phones out relaying the concert onto social media, with loads of over-priced tat to bring home as display items. There is almost a sense that the most important thing for modern crowds is, not so much seeing the band , but, being seen seeing the band. The band merely becomes an accessory with which to socially preen on facebook, 

Well, it might please you to know that there are still some authentic old school style bands trying to stake their small claim in the far reaches of Rock land.  I saw Royal Blood last night.  Hardly a band shirt to be seen, which mystified me for a while (I suppose it was a Monday night but still, if Guns were playing on a Monday night it'd be band shirts galore).  Small, but quality march stand.  Not much filming.  Seriously, the phone brigade was small and sporadic.  I got some huffing and puffing from a few behind me when I attempted to film a 30 sec keepsake.  Smallish crowd, smallish venue (in comparison to GNR, think it was pretty big for Royal Blood!). 

The crowd did, however, demand the radio hits, or rather the YouTube hits. lol  Guess that's never going to change.

Another thing, it was quite refreshing to go see a band with virtually no history and I had no idea what to expect from the setlist.  They don't even have their own forum. lol  

Saying all that, and as good as those guys were, I found myself longing to see GNR again afterwards.  

[PatrickS77]

8 hours ago, Nicklord said:

If you wanna count last 5 years: Radiohead, Metallica, RHCP, Pearl Jam, Soundgarden, Green Day, Blur... all had successful and positive received albums. From bands older than GnR both Gilmour and Waters from PF had nicely received albums

Europe. Every album since their reunion gets great reviews and the band exists since over 30 years. They are clearly not resting on their laurels.

[Aussiegun]

13 hours ago, Nicklord said:

If you wanna count last 5 years: Radiohead, Metallica, RHCP, Pearl Jam, Soundgarden, Green Day, Blur... all had successful and positive received albums. From bands older than GnR both Gilmour and Waters from PF had nicely received albums

I don't think any of them come close to their most successful albums in terms of sales or ingraining itself in the broader music public. Green Day did well with American Idiot and ok with 21st Century breakdown but average since. Metallicas latest album is platinum x 1, whereas the black album is around platinum x 16. Radiohead, RHCP, Pearl Jam haven't had great sales with any of their last few albums

Sales ain't everything I know, but I think at least double platinum (these days) should be the minimum for an album that critics, fans, and casuals would say is a return to some sort of form

[DieselDaisy]

Neil Young, every few years, releases a masterpiece. 

[Nicklord]

9 hours ago, Aussiegun said:

I don't think any of them come close to their most successful albums in terms of sales or ingraining itself in the broader music public. Green Day did well with American Idiot and ok with 21st Century breakdown but average since. Metallicas latest album is platinum x 1, whereas the black album is around platinum x 16. Radiohead, RHCP, Pearl Jam haven't had great sales with any of their last few albums

Sales ain't everything I know, but I think at least double platinum (these days) should be the minimum for an album that critics, fans, and casuals would say is a return to some sort of form

Exactly 11 albums went to double platinum in the last 5 years in one year. It's almost impossible to have one of those these days  If GnR had double platinum today that would be on par with the success of UYI.

 

Look at this: http://www.mediatraffic.de/year-end-albums.htm. Bowie, Metallica, Rolling Stones, RHCP, Radiohead and Prince all in top 20 top sellers of the year

Edited November 22, 2017 by Nicklord

[Aussiegun]

47 minutes ago, Nicklord said:

Exactly 11 albums went to double platinum in the last 5 years in one year. It's almost impossible to have one of those these days  If GnR had double platinum today that would be on par with the success of UYI.

 

Look at this: http://www.mediatraffic.de/year-end-albums.htm. Bowie, Metallica, Rolling Stones, RHCP, Radiohead and Prince all in top 20 top sellers of the year

Not sure it's impossible. For example if Metallica came up with Enter Sandman for Hardwired.. it would probably double sales, and they are nearly double platinum selling on name alone.

More so it's impossible to come up with some music that is going to be a classic, or it's just not worth the trying. And generally something that does get released is either a lame rehash, or a new direction that falls flat.

[EvanG]

On 17-11-2017 at 7:56 PM, Bigtater said:

Billy just really doesn't give a shit about his fans. He plays solo shows and smashing pumpkins shows and doesn't remotely care about playing old nostalgic 90s songs.

He always made a point of not wanting to do the greatest hits thing, but at the same time he always kept on playing the big hits, so I don't get what you're saying. Even now while he's out doing solo shows promoting his new solo album, he plays most of the new record and a lot of the Smashing Pumpkins stuff, including the hits from the 90s, just like he always has.

[EvanG]

12 hours ago, Aussiegun said:

I don't think any of them come close to their most successful albums in terms of sales or ingraining itself in the broader music public

You do realize it's 2017 and people download music now, right?

[Aussiegun]

9 hours ago, EvanG said:

You do realize it's 2017 and people download music now, right?

Doesn"t stop Ed Sheeran selling 7 million of his latest (extreme example i know)

 

Also getting back to what Billy is saying, apart from not wanting to waste their time/money recording something, maybe the artist doesn't want to waste their time promoting it too.