jhh4321 Posted June 25, 2007 Share Posted June 25, 2007 I said this in another thread...I CAN'T BELIEVE PEOPLE BITCH ABOUT THIS WHEN THE BONUS TRACKS AND, EVEN MORE SO, THE ENTIRE ALBUM WILL LEAK ANYHOW. This isn't a new practice, they've been doing 'special' versions of albums for deifferent reatilers for several years now. Oh, the humanity. Pffft. pretty much true (IMHO, of course) ... i think the main travesty here is the disservice to independent retailers... but the pumpkins are a major label band who are not that good and i would be surprised if zeitgest sold more than 777 copies anyway Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MrRain422 Posted June 25, 2007 Share Posted June 25, 2007 This is the very thing that soulseek exists for. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
EL the Famous Posted June 25, 2007 Share Posted June 25, 2007 i think the main travesty here is the disservice to independent retailers yeah, but i think i've seen other (albeit more indie) bands do special releases on vinyl or w/ bonus stuff that bigger retailers can't and won't take. besides...how many people who shop at independently owned record shops are going there the latest smashing pumpkins?! c'mon. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jhh4321 Posted June 25, 2007 Share Posted June 25, 2007 yeah, but i think i've seen other (albeit more indie) bands do special releases on vinyl or w/ bonus stuff that bigger retailers can't and won't take. besides...how many people who shop at independently owned record shops are going there the latest smashing pumpkins?! c'mon. i mean, if i liked smashing pumpkins enough to buy zeitgest (i do not) and knew i could get some bonus tracks at an indie store for a few bucks more than, say, Best Buy (who was only offering the regular version) i would go to the indie store and i think most music fans would too. the logic in this case is just backwards. also, i revoke my previous statement of saying the biggest travesty is the disservice to indpendent retailers and change that statement to say the biggest travesty here is the fact that the smashing pumpkins (or should i say "the smashing pumpkins") are releasing a record, albeit, on a fucking saturday...bastards Quote Link to post Share on other sites
EL the Famous Posted June 25, 2007 Share Posted June 25, 2007 i don't think the logic is backwards at all. they are going for the largest common denominator...the denominator that buys CDs at big box retailers. the ones that actually buy them at indie stores are also the ones savvy enough to know they can get the bonus tracks somehwere online anyhow. having X amout of different versions ofthe same release = SKU management issues = less margin $. the record companies are going to make sure they are getting their $ worth out of issuing a different version AND another thing being left out, is the pressure from the major retialers for a unique release just to carry it. music business. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jhh4321 Posted June 25, 2007 Share Posted June 25, 2007 i don't think the logic is backwards at all. they are going for the largest common denominator...the denominator that buys CDs at big box retailers. the ones that actually buy them at indie stores are also the ones savvy enough to know they can get the bonus tracks somehwere online anyhow. having X amout of different versions ofthe same release = SKU management issues = less margin $. the record companies are going to make sure they are getting their $ worth out of issuing a different version AND another thing being left out, is the pressure from the major retialers for a unique release just to carry it. music business. obviously i realize that this is the most profitiable way to go about things, i just think its bordering on being tasteless and unethical. and since i doubt there will be any SP records after this one i guess they dont have to worry about burning any bridges behind them or maybe SP fans dont really care (i mean, they are buying a new record from the smashing pumpkins). Quote Link to post Share on other sites
EL the Famous Posted June 25, 2007 Share Posted June 25, 2007 i just think its bordering on being tasteless and unethical i just think it's realistic...mostly for the 'it'll be out there for free anyway' rationale i mentioned before. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jhh4321 Posted June 25, 2007 Share Posted June 25, 2007 i just think it's realistic...mostly for the 'it'll be out there for free anyway' rationale i mentioned before. alright, EL Chinese, conversation over. i agree with most of what you are saying i just kind of think this whole thing, including SP in general, is lame. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
imsjry Posted June 25, 2007 Share Posted June 25, 2007 Changing the subject a bit, I cannot believe the bile spewed on here from the Non-Pumpkins fans. I guess I never realized what a polerizing band they are. A band that causes such passionate responces for and against must be doing something right in my book... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
EL the Famous Posted June 25, 2007 Share Posted June 25, 2007 sounds good. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
redjim Posted June 25, 2007 Share Posted June 25, 2007 yeah, simply saying you're not a fan of their music or, better yet, not posting in the particular thread at all would be way too polite ya know? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
EL the Famous Posted June 25, 2007 Share Posted June 25, 2007 A band that causes such passionate responces for and against must be doing something right in my book... I actually dig the earlier stuff a lot and then they kind of lost me after the double album. I reaaly liked the Zwan album, actually...wish that would have taken off. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jhh4321 Posted June 25, 2007 Share Posted June 25, 2007 I reaaly liked the Zwan album, actually...wish that would have taken off. i actually quite enjoyed a number of those songs as well... i think the reason that they are so polarizing isnt because they are "doing something right" but rather Billy Corgan is a rediculous person who has really presented himself as a bit of a prick and a real whack job, most notably with his full page ad in the sun or whatever. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
brianjeremy Posted June 25, 2007 Share Posted June 25, 2007 It's okay to say mean things about other bands around here, just not Wilco. They are really talented, experimental (omg nels cline is awe!1some!11!!!), never sold a million records and have never done anything lame (vw commercials). They are superior because of this. We've heard the opinions of the naysayers. So enough is enough. You guys don't like the smashing pumpkins. We get it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
EL the Famous Posted June 25, 2007 Share Posted June 25, 2007 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Eli Cash Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 I actually dig the earlier stuff a lot and then they kind of lost me after the double album. I reaaly liked the Zwan album, actually...wish that would have taken off. It sucks, because there were some great songs on Mellon Collie, but it was way too bloated with filler and lacked focus. Obviously should have been one disc. 1979 is one of my favorite tracks of all time. I know this probably makes me uncool on this board. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 Smashing Pumpkins Sue Virgin Over PromoSmashing Pumpkins frontman Billy CorganMarch 25, 2008, 10:00 AM ET The Smashing Pumpkins are suing Virgin Records, saying the record label has illegally used their name and music in promotional deals that hurt the band's credibility with fans. In a breach-of-contract lawsuit filed in Los Angeles Superior Court yesterday (March 24), the group said it has "worked hard for over two decades to accumulate a considerable amount of goodwill in the eyes of the public," and that Virgin's use of the band in a "Pepsi Stuff" promotion with Amazon.com and Pepsi Co. threatens their reputation for "artistic integrity." Virgin released the Smashing Pumpkins' music for more than 17 years, but the only active agreement between the two parties, the lawsuit claims, is a deal granting Virgin permission to sell digital downloads of the band's songs. The agreement does not give Virgin the right to use the band in promotional campaigns to sell outside products, the lawsuit said. The band members said they would "never grant such authority to Virgin, or any other entity." An after-hours call to the label wasn't immediately returned. The lawsuit demands that Virgin pay with the profits earned in the promotion and asks for an injunction against using the Pumpkins' name or music in the future. The Pumpkins reunited in recent years to tour and record an album for Warner Bros., "Zeitgeist," released in 2007. Jackie Coogan could not reached for comment. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mountain bed Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 Did that really just say Jackie Coogan? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jesusetc84 Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 Siamese Dream was one of the absolute best albums of the 90s...in my top 10 or 15. that being said that was 15 years ago... My sister didn't exist then...she has her learner's permit now... It's a shame Billy couldn't stop while he was ahead, he just had to get more and more ridiculous, while simultaneously sucking out all of the fun that made the early work (Gish, Siamese Dream and the rarities disc Pisces Iscariot) so damn compelling. Zwan made a good record but it was missing something. And Billy stopped using his Fender Strat > First Issue Big Muff > Marshall rig. That guitar tone was heavenly. Now his guitar sounds almost nu metalish. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted March 26, 2008 Share Posted March 26, 2008 Exclusive: Corgan Speaks Out On Pumpkins SuitSmashing Pumpkins frontman Billy CorganMarch 26, 2008, 12:30 AM ET Jonathan Cohen, N.Y.Smashing Pumpkins frontman Billy Corgan has spoken exclusively to Billboard about the lawsuit the band filed this week against Virgin Records for using the Pumpkins in a promotional campaign with Amazon.com and Pepsi. "I'm sure they indicated to Pepsi that they had a right to do this, full well knowing they do not have the right," he said by phone from Australia, where the band is touring. The suit says Virgin breached its contract with the band by using the Pumpkins in a "Pepsi Stuff" promotion without its permission. Corgan insists the group has veto power over such deals and has turned them down several times in the past. A Virgin spokesperson said the company does not comment on pending litigation. Corgan says he has been feuding for years with Virgin over the handling of the Pumpkins' back catalog, but that the Pepsi/Amazon.com promotion "crosses the Rubicon. You're going to see more of this playing fast and loose with the rules, hoping they don't get caught. At face value, it's not a huge deal. But in terms of precedent, it is, because there will be much more of this coming." In the suit, the Pumpkins claim Virgin has "irreparably harmed the group, their reputation and goodwill with their fans," dovetailing with what Corgan perceives as a lack of respect for the body of work the band has created. The problem is that according to the contract the Pumpkins renegotiated with Virgin in the late '90s, both parties are partners where the catalog is concerned. Corgan claims he's made frequent overtures to Virgin about repositioning the back catalog, offering expanded editions of vintage albums and releasing archival material, but has been met with resistance at every step of the way. "We've made offers to buy it all," he says. "Look, you have no interest. Let us just buy it. But they won't put a number on it. They've atrophied the catalog down so low that they probably hope we'll crawl back and ask for cash." That won't stop the band from offering unreleased music to fans before the year is out. Potentially in the pipeline are ultra-rare early Smashing Pumpkins shows, studio tracks that have never seen the light of day or alternate versions of songs from sessions that spawned classic albums like "Siamese Dream" and "Mellon Collie and the Infinite Sadness." The group, which is now a free agent after the expiration of its one-album deal with Warner Bros., is also conceptualizing the gradual release of new music in bundles, culminating in an eventual album project. "We may start to release pieces as we go along, and the album comes out over two to three years," says Corgan, who labels this period as both "fun" and "exciting." After a summer break, look for the Pumpkins to return to the road in September for shows in New York, Los Angeles and its Chicago hometown. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
evol79 Posted March 30, 2008 Share Posted March 30, 2008 The Smashing Pumkins released an album after Siamese Dream? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.