Download TGEA for free

[Hype]

I'm pretty sure you don't...

[creep]

No, i get it. Jane's is exactly like Stone Temple Pilots, but will never be as good as Bowie even at his worst.

Loud and clear.

stone temple pilots...that's an interesting subject we haven't discussed. do you guys think that scott ripped off his style from others?

[JOEinPHX]

Hey, you know what was a really good album?

That single PerryEtty released a few months ago. The one that's tearing up the dance charts right now.

[Matov]

how the hell did STP sneak their asses into this thread too?
was that my fault?

anyways i did get it hype, and i agree that ritual>bowie´s worst.

But my problem with the comparison is this.

Bowie records his gazillionth album, it sucks (i may disagree on that, but still) so the thing that comes to mind is "well evidently he's washed up, ran out of ideas".
Janes record their FOURTH album, it sucks (after having their THIRD! album suck) so the thing tha comes to mind is "well evidently they're washed up, ran out of ideas".

RAN OUT OF IDEAS!?!? on your THIRD ALBUM?!?!?! How many ideas did they have in the first place?

Also, after reinventing himself once and again, both failing and succeeding at redefining his own sound and contemporary musical landscape as a whole, once bowie realised that he had indeed ran out of ideas, he did the most sensible thing one can do, and he started making electronic karaoke versions of his own songs. I mean, he quit.

and no, joe, no matter how many christmas albums he makes to disgrace himself, weiland does not get to be compared either to perry, nor bowie.

[Matov]

also, i do understand you weren't specifically refering to each one's artistic output. but i did enjoy writing al this as opposed to "Agreed".

[Hype]

how the hell did STP sneak their asses into this thread too?
was that my fault?

anyways i did get it hype, and i agree that ritual>bowie´s worst.

But my problem with the comparison is this.

Bowie records his gazillionth album, it sucks (i may disagree on that, but still) so the thing that comes to mind is "well evidently he's washed up, ran out of ideas".
Janes record their FOURTH album, it sucks (after having their THIRD! album suck) so the thing tha comes to mind is "well evidently they're washed up, ran out of ideas".

RAN OUT OF IDEAS!?!? on your THIRD ALBUM?!?!?! How many ideas did they have in the first place?

Also, after reinventing himself once and again, both failing and succeeding at redefining his own sound and contemporary musical landscape as a whole, once bowie realised that he had indeed ran out of ideas, he did the most sensible thing one can do, and he started making electronic karaoke versions of his own songs. I mean, he quit.

and no, joe, no matter how many christmas albums he makes to disgrace himself, weiland does not get to be compared either to perry, nor bowie.

I totally agree with you that if the comparison were about number of good albums over a long period of time, then Bowie is in a different league (sort of). But actually I don't even consider Strays or TGEA to be Jane's Addiction albums... The gap between Ritual and Strays was too long, and the music being made in between changed too drastically (from JA throwaways on the first P4P album and Perk's work with RATM and others, and Dave's playing in RHCP, to whatever you want to call SYTBS, Banyan, and Trust No One). Of course you can't compare Bowie to that... Bowie is ONE guy controlling everything about his music... a band is a whole different thing. But the analogy I presented wasn't between JA and Bowie, but between early albums and later albums (with Bowie as an example). The fact that there were many albums in between for Bowie and ... none in between for JA, doesn't matter, because the issue was actually more about length of time passed, aging, changing personalities, and changing music scenes, etc.

Bowie couldn't make another Ziggy Stardust now because it's not the 60s/70s... Heathen SOUNDS like a 2000s album (it sounds like a bad version of NIN or something, with Bowie on vocals...) And so does Strays... and that fucking sucks... because neither artist's signature sound is contemporary sound... while we might describe Bowie (and JA's first two albums) as, in a way, "timeless", and this is somewhat true, it's not totally true... there's a distinctly drug-induced and strikingly original sound to both Bowie and JA's signature sound from the early albums, and they can't just keep making albums that sound like that... and they didn't. True, Bowie managed to do it more than once... but that's not the point... the point is just that music made by aging rockers is almost NEVER groundbreaking.

[Matov]

damn you hypersonic and your faultless logic throughout an internet argument.

i mean, had you said "the point is just that music made by aging rockers is almost NEVER as good as in their youth", i´d still be on your ass about it.

but no, you had to stick to your original fucking point.

damn you.

[Hokahey]

Well, it's not as if Jane's is a new band on their 4th album. You almost have to consider the P4P albums as part of the bigger picture, and you do have to if you're talking Perry's songwriting. He wrote great songs up until about 1997-98, which is when SYTBS was being written (as Gobalee at the time). By 2000-2001 Perry had lost the plot.

[Hype]

Well, it's not as if Jane's is a new band on their 4th album. You almost have to consider the P4P albums as part of the bigger picture, and you do have to if you're talking Perry's songwriting. He wrote great songs up until about 1997-98, which is when SYTBS was being written (as Gobalee at the time). By 2000-2001 Perry had lost the plot.

I think this is basically right... I think there were some real duds along the way, but I was one of the few who really liked SYTBS (and still do), in spite of it being totally different than JA (except SYTBS the song, which sounds a lot like how new JA sounds, or better...)

[Hokahey]

Well, it's not as if Jane's is a new band on their 4th album. You almost have to consider the P4P albums as part of the bigger picture, and you do have to if you're talking Perry's songwriting. He wrote great songs up until about 1997-98, which is when SYTBS was being written (as Gobalee at the time). By 2000-2001 Perry had lost the plot.

I think this is basically right... I think there were some real duds along the way, but I was one of the few who really liked SYTBS (and still do), in spite of it being totally different than JA (except SYTBS the song, which sounds a lot like how new JA sounds, or better...)

I liked it a lot too. Much of it was better than anything on the newer Jane's records. The title track is all around fantastic.

[Bandit72]

I listened to Strays the other day and it's shite. I like a couple of songs but even in The Riches you get that MONGALOID trippy ending.

I'm happy that the sky is blue
and that the earth is green etc...

FCUK OFF!!! TGEA is way better out of the two. Although I can't stick Perry talking like Speedy fucking Gonzalez on the live disc.

[Japhy]

I listened to Strays the other day and it's shite. I like a couple of songs but even in The Riches you get that MONGALOID trippy ending.

I'm happy that the sky is blue
and that the earth is green etc...

FCUK OFF!!! TGEA is way better out of the two. Although I can't stick Perry talking like Speedy fucking Gonzalez on the live disc.

Yeah, i prefer TGEA by miles. Apart from maybe the title track i skip Strays songs every time they come up on the ipod. Curiosity Kills came on last night and, maybe it was just the relaxed mood i was in, i thought it was fucking great.

[Bandit72]

I listened to Strays the other day and it's shite. I like a couple of songs but even in The Riches you get that MONGALOID trippy ending.

I'm happy that the sky is blue
and that the earth is green etc...

FCUK OFF!!! TGEA is way better out of the two. Although I can't stick Perry talking like Speedy fucking Gonzalez on the live disc.

Yeah, i prefer TGEA by miles. Apart from maybe the title track i skip Strays songs every time they come up on the ipod. Curiosity Kills came on last night and, maybe it was just the relaxed mood i was in, i thought it was fucking great.

Curiosity is brilliant. Still my favourite track on there. Although I only think you can hear the bass boost properly whilst wearing headphones.

[krakle]

downloaded leak. deleted leak....game over

same here.

I came over to this side of the forum (for the first time in many months) to see if any of the (former) members had anything interesting going on... only to find this thread.

[Kajicat]

I like both Strays and TGEA.

XXX - 8.5/10
NS - 10/10
Ritual - 9.5/10
Strays - 7.5/10
TGEA - 7.5/10

[Hype]

I like both Strays and TGEA.

XXX - 8.5/10
NS - 10/10
Ritual - 9.5/10
Strays - 7.5/10
TGEA - 7.5/10

I think you have tuna salad in your ears or something.
XXX - 7/10
NS - 10/10
Ritual - 9.85/10
Strays - 4/10
TGEA - 3.75/10

[JOEinPHX]

i give TGEA a 7/10

Because that is how many tracks I enjoyed. I only hated 3 (the ones written with Duff)

I still listen to the album on occasion too. Which is more than I can say for Strays.

[Hype]

Only someone who likes STP could give that schlock 7/10.

[JOEinPHX]

Or maybe I'm not a negative nancy who can accept things for what they are and not try to compare them to thinks that are incomparable.

For instance, a lot of people would give Pearl Jam's Ten a 10/10 score. And give The Beatles White Album a 10/10. Now are they on equal footing? Most would say no. Most would give the Beatles far more weight.

So it's context.

You hate the album so it's a 3. Because compared to their past work it's not as good.

Good for you. I am not going to compare Twisted Tales to Three Days. I am going to compared Twisted Tales to Words Right Out of My Mouth. One song is good, one is not. They get a point for the good one.

7/10

[Hype]

Or maybe I'm not a negative nancy who can accept things for what they are and not try to compare them to thinks that are incomparable.

For instance, a lot of people would give Pearl Jam's Ten a 10/10 score. And give The Beatles White Album a 10/10. Now are they on equal footing? Most would say no. Most would give the Beatles far more weight.

So it's context.

You hate the album so it's a 3. Because compared to their past work it's not as good.

Good for you. I am not going to compare Twisted Tales to Three Days. I am going to compared Twisted Tales to Words Right Out of My Mouth. One song is good, one is not. They get a point for the good one.

7/10

That negates the point of a numerical scale. The point of putting things in objective terms is to be able to compare things more generally... if you're not doing that, you're just not measuring things properly.

[JOEinPHX]

So what you're saying is that the greatest punk album ever, that receives a perfect score, is artistically equivalent to the greatest classical music ever written that also gets a perfect score?

You're retarded. Seriously.

Now you're trolling worse than I am when I bring up STP for no reason.

[Hype]

So what you're saying is that the greatest punk album ever, that receives a perfect score, is artistically equivalent to the greatest classical music ever written that also gets a perfect score?

You're retarded. Seriously.

Now you're trolling worse than I am when I bring up STP for no reason.

You've misunderstood me. There is no such thing as 'the greatest ____ ever' and scores don't represent anything universalizable. But the subjective application of a numerical score is designed to allow comparison. This doesn't mean it magically allows comparison of punk to classical. Where did I say anything about judgments across genres? Surely it's retarded (seriously) to impute meaning where none could possibly have been implied?

You tried to claim that your score for TGEA, 7/10, was based on comparing songs on the album to each other: "I am going to compared Twisted Tales to Words Right Out of My Mouth", you said. But *that* misses the point of giving the album a score. If you were scoring each song ON the album with respect to the other songs on THAT album, then it would make sense. But that doesn't generate a score for that album. Or rather, if you used that to generate a score for TWO albums, it tells you absolutely nothing about one album compared to another. Hence, it misses the point.

[JOEinPHX]

There were 10 songs. I gave 1 point to every song i liked.

7/10

I don't see how that is a bad way of doing it.

If the album only had 3 good songs, it would have been a 3/10

Would the greatest song ever written, on an album of 9 shitty songs warrant a higher score than 1/10?

Chances of any song being a masterpiece are slim in itself. Especially on a rock record. Most rock records are just rock records and will never change the world. So the context can only be how many songs on that particular album are worth listening to with regularity.

In this case, on TGEA, 7/10 songs are worth listening to.


So the album gets a 7/10.

I'm not going to give it a 4 just because Three Days, a song from a totally different album, might be better. That has to stand within it's own context and give value (or lack thereof) to it's own album.

[creep]

what if an album has 16 songs?

[Hype]

what if an album has 16 songs?

Exactly. Now who's retarded?!