New Jane's Addiction

User avatar
markpar
george martin
Posts: 1413
Joined: Fri May 02, 2003 10:52 pm
Location: Wokingham, Berkshire, UK
Contact:

New Jane's Addiction

Post by markpar » Wed Jul 23, 2003 3:17 pm

Anyone else grooving on this? Man, it's goooooooooooooooood. Just needs a little more peanut butter around 14k to be perfect. ;)

I think this is a great album. Sounds like they picked up where they left off.

-mark

User avatar
transmothra
gimme a little kick & snare
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2003 12:21 pm
Location: Dayton, OH
Contact:

Re: New Jane's Addiction

Post by transmothra » Wed Jul 23, 2003 3:52 pm

saw them on Letterman last night and was sorely disappointed. one of the most original rock bands of ten years ago sounds trite and, well, mediocre now. they weren't pushing anything. to top it all off, they had an acoustic guitar on a stand on stage, which they didn't even use. why? i suppose that that flake Navarro just wants to show that he's a "real" guitar player who can play an acoustic, too.

aw, i didn't mean to go off on Dave... it's just that he's been so very mediocre ever since Jane's split up.

i do want to hear the album, because they were one of my favourite bands back in the day, and i sure do hope that there's something good about it. i've only read so-so reviews so far, though.
...do you believe that?
Scarlett 212 1st Gen | Reaper | PreSonus Eris E5/A-T ATH-M20x
transmothra.com

User avatar
cassembler
suffering 'studio suck'
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 8:38 am
Location: control room
Contact:

Re: New Jane's Addiction

Post by cassembler » Wed Jul 23, 2003 4:09 pm

I heard from a consumer-grade listener buddy of mine that it was very tasty stuff... I might have to check it out, but I've never been a big Jane's fan... Great concert though.
http://www.dfwsound.com (production co)
http://www.dfwsoundvision.com (studio)
"Man is doomed to perpetually fluctuate between states of extreme boredom and extreme turbulence."

User avatar
wing
on a wing and a prayer
Posts: 5375
Joined: Fri May 02, 2003 12:00 pm
Location: brooklyn, ny
Contact:

Re: New Jane's Addiction

Post by wing » Wed Jul 23, 2003 8:03 pm

i saw them on letterman too... i think the performance was boring, and what was up with those stupid slut girls that couldn't even dance very good? what a pointless job to have...

User avatar
DUC
buyin' a studio
Posts: 866
Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 11:27 am

Re: New Jane's Addiction

Post by DUC » Thu Jul 24, 2003 2:07 am

bluepxl wrote:what was up with those stupid slut girls that couldn't even dance very good? what a pointless job to have...
Wow. I didn't see that particular show, but I wouldn't think that it would be a pointless job to have. I'm sure they have real careers as professional dancers. So, getting hired by CBS for a dumb band isn't pointless. It's survival. I mean, I rather take offense at Jane's Addiction for demeaning women in that way, but I can't judge the dancers for getting paid. But I might have taken you out of context. It's just that when I see shit like Girls Gone Wild on TV, I somehow see the life that they may have had that would make them do something like that. I'm no one to judge. But hey, who gives a fuck what I think? And if anyone is still reading, I just saw The Man Who Knew Too Little with Bill Murray. I can't see how I could've missed such a great movie!

User avatar
wing
on a wing and a prayer
Posts: 5375
Joined: Fri May 02, 2003 12:00 pm
Location: brooklyn, ny
Contact:

Re: New Jane's Addiction

Post by wing » Thu Jul 24, 2003 9:46 am

no i just mean, it's pointless-- they don't create music, they don't create anything... they just dance around and look "sexy" (and they weren't even very good at it)... it's a pointles job because they don't do anything that makes the music what it is. it's a pointless job because it is not needed in any sort of way to better the music or anything. it's not a big deal to me, of course lots of jobs like this exist, i was just saying there is no need or point for them to back there... i for one would be ashamed to be a dancer or model, because you're just paid to look good. no one cares what you think and your viewpoints on anything, and you don't create any art or music. you just wear what they tell and look the way you look.

User avatar
DUC
buyin' a studio
Posts: 866
Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 11:27 am

Re: New Jane's Addiction

Post by DUC » Thu Jul 24, 2003 10:58 am

"you don't create any art or music"

Dancing has always been a part of culture and religious heritage. There are certain kinds of dancing, however. There's lap dancing, and there's Psalm 149:3; 150:4.

Let them praise his name in the dance: let them sing praises unto him with the timbrel and harp.

Praise him with the timbrel and dance: praise him with stringed instruments and organs.

Agreeing to disagree. Dancing is an art form, just like music, IMO. And being a model, I guess, is also an artform, esp. for the photographer. I may not agree with everything they do and how they represent themselves, but one could say that Rock music is also pointless. I mean, it's just a bunch of dudes trying to get laid. Or is it art?

Well, my little cousin wants to be an ice-skater. It may be pointless, but I'm proud that she has a dream. God bless her h-zeart.

I think I made a mountain out of a molehill.

User avatar
DUC
buyin' a studio
Posts: 866
Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 11:27 am

Re: New Jane's Addiction

Post by DUC » Thu Jul 24, 2003 11:05 am

I'm just being fucking overly sensitive. Nevermind.

User avatar
eeldip
dead but not forgotten
Posts: 2139
Joined: Fri May 02, 2003 5:10 pm
Location: NoPo

Re: New Jane's Addiction

Post by eeldip » Thu Jul 24, 2003 11:47 am

i never really liked them, nor did i ever find them to be particularly "original". sounded like a lot of other bands at the time they came out.

did you ever read the trouser press summary of them... pretty funny.
http://www.trouserpress.com/entry.php?a=janes_addiction

User avatar
transmothra
gimme a little kick & snare
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2003 12:21 pm
Location: Dayton, OH
Contact:

Re: New Jane's Addiction

Post by transmothra » Thu Jul 24, 2003 11:57 am

eeldip wrote:i never really liked them, nor did i ever find them to be particularly "original". sounded like a lot of other bands at the time they came out.
now wait just a minute there! who else back then thought to put together metal, punk, and... reggae! maybe a couple other bands, but who really remembers the Beautiful? <strike>Fishhead</strike> FishBONE were in a similar vein, too, but they traded the heaviness for more funk. Jane's did a great job of forging their own sound!
Last edited by transmothra on Thu Jul 24, 2003 7:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
...do you believe that?
Scarlett 212 1st Gen | Reaper | PreSonus Eris E5/A-T ATH-M20x
transmothra.com

User avatar
DUC
buyin' a studio
Posts: 866
Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 11:27 am

Re: New Jane's Addiction

Post by DUC » Thu Jul 24, 2003 12:01 pm

What a scathing review! And I don't think I've ever used that word b'fore. Trouser Press seems too good to be true! A little harsh, but unabashed.

Reminds me of the kind that Patrick Bateman wrote in American Psycho.

User avatar
dubphaser
pushin' record
Posts: 233
Joined: Thu May 08, 2003 11:19 am
Location: Long Beach, CA
Contact:

Re: New Jane's Addiction

Post by dubphaser » Thu Jul 24, 2003 12:02 pm

I used to be really into them. I love the first Porno for Pyros album. Perry puts on a great show if you've ever been to a concert. TV makes everything look cheap. Haven't heard the new album yet. I'll check it out. - Peace y'all

User avatar
DUC
buyin' a studio
Posts: 866
Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 11:27 am

Re: New Jane's Addiction

Post by DUC » Thu Jul 24, 2003 12:05 pm

transmothra wrote:who else back then thought to put together metal, punk, and... reggae!
The Police! :rofl:

User avatar
eeldip
dead but not forgotten
Posts: 2139
Joined: Fri May 02, 2003 5:10 pm
Location: NoPo

Re: New Jane's Addiction

Post by eeldip » Thu Jul 24, 2003 12:25 pm

transmothra wrote: now wait just a minute there! who else back then thought to put together metal, punk, and... reggae! maybe a couple other bands, but who really remembers the Beautiful? Fishhead were in a similar vein, too, but they traded the heaviness for more funk. Jane's did a great job of forging their own sound!
i believe you mean fishbone. jane's addiction was basically playing in the LA "alternative" style of the time. a million forgotten bands were playing that shit all over LA clubs (the non-hair metal ones). the singing was sort of original, in a sense. but i always just considered it annoying. or as they say in the trouser press:

"Farrell sings in an aggressive womanly warble" that sounds like "the pathetic bleat of a spoiled rich asshole" and "[his] effete habit of interjecting the word 'motherfucker' merely frosts the [the music's] maggotry"

great stuff... great stuff...

User avatar
apropos of nothing
dead but not forgotten
Posts: 2193
Joined: Tue May 13, 2003 6:29 am
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Contact:

Re: New Jane's Addiction

Post by apropos of nothing » Thu Jul 24, 2003 2:25 pm

Herm. I really do like the first, live disc. Their versions of Rock and Roll and Sympathy for the Devil are top-line. Ofcourse, I'm sure they overdubbed all the hell over it, but... Eh. What's a little added riffage to a "live disc"? (Answer: par per course.)

Nothing's Shocking was a pretty decent album. Hasn't worn especially well. 'Specially freaking "Jane Says". *SHUT UP JANE! QUIT FREAKING TALKING, ALREADY!*

"Ritual..." was skippable, except for Three Days, which pretty well rules. I got the maxi-single of that. (My ex- said that the song was titled for its playing time. =%> ) I'm not really about censorship or anything, but it did strike me as a tad irresponsible for a man who has enough money to organize touring rock festivals to be advocating petty criminal behavior to mall-roving teenagers.

I'm quite sceptical about their future musical endeavors.

Re: their late-night TV appearance:
Acoustic guitar: Its quite possible that they played other material for the studio audience than what was broadcast. I believe this is fairly standard. The first (live) album had an electric and an acoustic side. (Remember album sides? Woah, there's a flashback.) I personally preferred the acoustic side, which had all the covers, with the exception of the aforementioned J.S.
Fre: GoGo dancers... Go-go dancing has been a part of rock and roll fer a long time. How's'about the Butthole Surfers who had a professional stripper touring with them? Egregious, extraneous, unprofessional? Hells yes! Gonna add excitement to a live show? You had better believe it. Rock and roll is the devil's music and serves to lure teenagers into a life of degenerate and depraved sex-acts with random strangers. And thank god for that. Otherwise, what'd've we done? (Yes, that sentiment somewhat contradicts the previous one re:Been Caught Stealing -- I'm inconsistent, get over it.)

Conclusion? Think I'll stick to the good old-style XXX Live recording and ignore the new release until someone absolutely raves at me about it and shoves it in my face. If that doesn't happen, the likelihood is that its probably pretty forgettable anyway. Perry's been pretty desperate for attention lately. He had an interview in Urb (raver magazine) about his DJing, which didn't sound like it was that good, either.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 32 guests