Luke wrote:
Call a spade a spade. I'm always going to love classical music and appreciate it more than any pop tune, but I still think Taylor Swift, a fifteen year old Taylor Swift at that, could out write a thirty year something Corgan any day of the week.
Contrary to the music they represented, I believe the Smashing pumpkins was something you had to buy, and I was never into it. And I jammed out to the Cranberries.
I'm in the minority here, but TSPumpkins felt like forced alt-rock, to the m-a-x. Also thought their music sucked too, so that's my main point.
^ That's a bunch of insanity right there. Perhaps you should try writing music.
I don't know what about TSP was "forced alt rock". If anything, they were always well outside the established Seattle grunge sound that defined the era and much more cut from the goth/metal/prog tradition than the punk/pop/70s singer-songwriter traditions that defined the most popular "alt rock" acts of the era. I always thought of them as a bit of an alternative to "alt rock" in that sense, which of course made them a bit more of an alternative to what else was popular in much of the 90s. But there's nothing "forced" about them in that sense. Maybe this isn't what you mean?
In any case, Taylor Swift is good at singing (does she write?) poppy country music that hits a certain (wide) audience well and that, in the grand scheme of things, is pretty safely going to generate hits given her own talents and that of those marketing her. Corgan/TSP has always done their own thing both before and since they had their big records, they just happened to have some really good albums come out around a time where that kind of artistic approach to music was celebrated in sales and chart positions - so like Taylor they had some massive hits, too. The main difference is that they didn't continue to kowtow to the whims/wishes of their audience, they just did what they wanted and that won't always align with the charts.
Oh, and I have every Cranberries record. Great band.
