The Official Xiola.org review

[JOEinPHX]

[sonny]

Again, you're being a closed minded self righteous ass. So you are saying anybody who likes the new record isn't a real Jane's fan and can't grasp what Jane's is? Get off your high horse, we all listen to the records and no fan is better than any other fan. These guys are in their 40's and 50's, they're never going to make music that sounds like Ritual/Nothing's Shocking, even if Eric had made a new record with them. I have no problem with some pop influences coming, I think Perry has some killer melodies on the album, I don't give a fuck if they're pop or whatever. I like The Great Escape Artist, like I said it's fine that you don't like it, I disagree with some people here about their favorite/least favorite tracks, but you need to get over the fact that there are actually people who like the record. You aren't going to change anyone's mind, give it a rest.

Also Sonny, I'm not into many of the bands or records you listed (outside of the Chili Peppers, I prefer old Radiohead).

it's not about better or real fans. i wouldn't consider myself a real fan anymore. i always have to say i'm a fan of the original line up. which is a pain.

i'm saying how can you like ritual/shocking albums, and also say you like this album? forget all the excuses about it not being the original jane's or perry is 52 now, blah, blah, blah.

i'm not going to change anyone's mind, not trying. i'm only saying, do you really think this is a good album? or is it "good enough, considering the alternative is the panic channel and satellite party" or is it good enough compared to "applause for you"?

it's ok to not like this record. it doesn't make you bitter or a hater. it's just a matter of taste.

[sonny]

I'm fairly disappointed that Sonny seems to be implying that people here don't "get" what made JA great, or that he alone possesses a special insight. Some of us are accomplished musicians who have been with JA since the beginning, so to claim that we're not tuned into their original greatness is frankly insulting. When Sonny nuked his site, vaporizing years of conversation and lively debate, most of us accepted that it was his choice. Much like it is our choice whether or not to enjoy the new record.

i'm only saying, i don't see how you can like ritual/shocking and also say you like this new album. i find it hard to understand.

who made me the judge on fandom?

[sonny]

perry and eric and now sonny have all been stricken with the disease of blurting. it happens for a lot of reasons, i guess, but most often it seems to occur when people who are very emotional about something or someone decide to air it all out in a manner they perceive to be brutally honest and no holds barred. my guess is that anyone in that situation is likely to later rethink what they said and how they said it, insofar as even if they stand behind the message, they regret some of the tone. i posted that clip of john lennon commenting, years later, on having sung 'how do you sleep at night you cunt' to paul, and he said words to the effect that as he thought about it year later he was talking to and about himself as much as to and about paul and anyway, after all the intervening years, all that really matters is how he and paul feel about each other. i think that in the long haul that well describes how perry and eric may look at each other and may look back at some of the things they blurted. and from his review, i sense that sonny feels that he somehow is part of that equation. and in a way he is, i guess, but he's also not at all. but i'll always appreciate you a lot, sonny. i've been a music freak for 35 years and your site (and now its progeny) is the only one that i've ever visited repeatedly and posted on. you became the moderator and flame tender for one of the greatest rock and roll bands of all time. so everyone has the right to vent, or blurt, and anyone can go overboard from emotion or anger or bitterness or any other emotion. And while i don't really embrace that much of your assessment (which isnt to say that i love TGEA--i don't -- its just that the place you're coming from as a reviewer is far from where i sit) i enjoyed reading this thread of your bash and subsequent defense of it.

everything i do is based on emotion and feel. i'm not sure where yr opinions are suppose to come from other than emotion and feel?

i don't apologize for my review and i think it's completely accurate and fair. i stand by it.

[JOEinPHX]

[sonny]

Again, Sonny makes a few points I agree with but his personal issues just cloud and undermine his opinion.

I dunno, what exactly in the band or the individual members past 20 years worth of music made anything think they'd come even close to matching the quality of XXX, NS and Ritual? Good as P4P was and bits of other non-Janes projects have been as well as parts of Strays, none of 'em ever came close to the original trilogy. Just the last 10 years worth of individual projects (especially Perrys'), the fact they brought in Sitek to do song doctor duties and the previews of IF and ETTL made it pretty clear this wasn't going to be Jane's stylistically successful "Achtung Baby" reinvention of their trademark sound that would hold any ground to their original albums (like that record did).

I guess that's why this release for better or worse isn't a big deal to me. It's what I expected under the circumstances. I don't hate it, there *are* a few songs and bits n' pieces that I like and I'll even buy the cd next week because I'm an OCD completest when it comes to artists I've followed for a long time.

i'll repeat myself, and i always end up doing this. i'm not comparing or expecting ritual/shocking. but if it's gonna be called jane's addiction, then there should be some resemblance.

lets take radiohead or wilco for example, 1993 radiohead doesn't sound like 2011 radiohead, nor does wilco in that same way, but it's still good music. they are still making good songs and there are preface to it. it's not good, but... blah, blah, blah. it's just good. obviously you can find other examples.

all i'm expecting is jane's addiction 2011 to sound good and they don't. we all have in common that we think ritual/shocking are masterpieces. so it's crazy to me that those same group of people can be so way off on this record.

lets take strays for example. most liked it, when it came out and gradually have found their favorite 3 or 4 songs, but don't like the whole album. a consistent opinion among similar fans.

as i read around here people were real quick to say JA is good again. and that is simply not the case. as a matter of fact, they've fallen below even the lowest standards for JA.

[sonny]

i didn't write this.

[Pillar Girl]

well nobody did Sonny, you just ran a site, as Eric did before you on 1%. we appreciate everything you have done for the JA
community, and its good to see your face back on this new home. i hope you respect the people here and their opinions on
weather a person likes a musical record from a band in 2011 and how it does or doesn't relate from 1988.

i think all music is subjective to an point, there's alot of bands i follow that have disappointed me in the past with weak releases,
i'll make one example...

Peter Murphy

as he continues to put out records, alot of the material isnt very good, and alot of his fanbase still adores him, and follows all
his works weather those records get good reviews or not, as for myself, i don't tie him back to Bauhaus anymore because that
was just a few years with him and that particular band. it works the same with Jane's 1.0, that band from 85-91 is just that,
it will never be repeated with the brilliance it was, and what it gave us. Bauhaus was brilliant, more than what i can express in words
really, same with the first version of JA.

as a fan, i am allowed to be in the present, and also appreciate the past, that's the funny thing about music/art, its all subjective,
take what you want from it, make it for yourself, enjoy it, hate it, loathe it, forget it. because i can promise you the band today
is having a blast, you can see it on their faces, maybe it doesn't totally reflect on how good the music should or can be, but as i said
in another post yesterday, i will take a 3/4 Jane's effort anytime and not wait 8 years, and if there's one decent song out of 10,
thats fine by me, but again, im just one fan, with one opinion.

[CaseyContrarian]

I'm fairly disappointed that Sonny seems to be implying that people here don't "get" what made JA great, or that he alone possesses a special insight. Some of us are accomplished musicians who have been with JA since the beginning, so to claim that we're not tuned into their original greatness is frankly insulting. When Sonny nuked his site, vaporizing years of conversation and lively debate, most of us accepted that it was his choice. Much like it is our choice whether or not to enjoy the new record.

i'm only saying, i don't see how you can like ritual/shocking and also say you like this new album. i find it hard to understand.

who made me the judge on fandom?

You did. And you definitely said more than that. You said pretty clearly that we don't get it.

And for the record, what many of us have been saying is simply that we like (or don't loathe) aspects of the record. If you think that takes some kind of cognitive gymnastics, I assure you it doesn't. You're reminding me of certain political persuasions with the black-and-white, all-or-nothing thinking.

We all appreciate what you've done over the years to keep the flame lit by nurturing a dwindling community, but it's not particularly interesting or useful to denigrate others for their mild accommodation of a middling record by an act we all once loved.

You have the right to our opinion, and there's nothing wrong with you stating it in your review. There's also nothing wrong with us pointing out where your objectivity as a listener may be compromised.

Cool?

[Essence_Smith]

it's not even past standards. it's just not good by any measure. and most here can't say they like it without following it with some excuse.

can any of you sit here and say this album is 2011 jane's addiction? this is right where 2011 jane's addiction should be?

This is your opinion, which you're entitled to & I respect, but I can honestly say that there are a couple of songs I like on this that are as listenable as anything I heard on Strays...and I can say that without making any excuses...as you said a matter of taste...

Lets deal with facts...this IS indeed a 2011 release with the name Jane's Addiction and regardless of how any of us feels, this IS where they're at...

As a musician who's been strongly influenced/inspired by Jane's for 20 odd years I have accepted that most if not all the bands I grew up on that are still around are a shadow of their former selves in some ways, but I have enough respect for their output in the past to not let what they currently do ruin my enjoyment of the classic stuff...some can do it some can't but either way I think its fine...how you look at it can change what it is completely...

[sonny]

I'm fairly disappointed that Sonny seems to be implying that people here don't "get" what made JA great, or that he alone possesses a special insight. Some of us are accomplished musicians who have been with JA since the beginning, so to claim that we're not tuned into their original greatness is frankly insulting. When Sonny nuked his site, vaporizing years of conversation and lively debate, most of us accepted that it was his choice. Much like it is our choice whether or not to enjoy the new record.

i'm only saying, i don't see how you can like ritual/shocking and also say you like this new album. i find it hard to understand.

who made me the judge on fandom?

You did. And you definitely said more than that. You said pretty clearly that we don't get it.

And for the record, what many of us have been saying is simply that we like (or don't loathe) aspects of the record. If you think that takes some kind of cognitive gymnastics, I assure you it doesn't. You're reminding me of certain political persuasions with the black-and-white, all-or-nothing thinking.

We all appreciate what you've done over the years to keep the flame lit by nurturing a dwindling community, but it's not particularly interesting or useful to denigrate others for their mild accommodation of a middling record by an act we all onceloved.

You have the right to our opinion, and there's nothing wrong with you stating it in your review. There's also nothing wrong with us pointing out where your objectivity as a listener may be compromised.

Cool?

what is funny to me, is i should just "respect yr opinion" but somehow my opinion being different from yr own is compromised?

i never made me the judge. i just don't understand how you can like ritual/shocking and also say you like this new record?

the line drawn from ritual/shocking does not in anyway lead to the great escape artist for me personally. so it makes it hard for me to understand how a person who owns ritual/shocking, could also own this new one.

if you feel i'm restricting yr opinion, you've given me too much power over you.

[CaseyContrarian]

Again, Sonny makes a few points I agree with but his personal issues just cloud and undermine his opinion.

I dunno, what exactly in the band or the individual members past 20 years worth of music made anything think they'd come even close to matching the quality of XXX, NS and Ritual? Good as P4P was and bits of other non-Janes projects have been as well as parts of Strays, none of 'em ever came close to the original trilogy. Just the last 10 years worth of individual projects (especially Perrys'), the fact they brought in Sitek to do song doctor duties and the previews of IF and ETTL made it pretty clear this wasn't going to be Jane's stylistically successful "Achtung Baby" reinvention of their trademark sound that would hold any ground to their original albums (like that record did).

I guess that's why this release for better or worse isn't a big deal to me. It's what I expected under the circumstances. I don't hate it, there *are* a few songs and bits n' pieces that I like and I'll even buy the cd next week because I'm an OCD completest when it comes to artists I've followed for a long time.

i'll repeat myself, and i always end up doing this. i'm not comparing or expecting ritual/shocking. but if it's gonna be called jane's addiction, then there should be some resemblance.

lets take radiohead or wilco for example, 1993 radiohead doesn't sound like 2011 radiohead, nor does wilco in that same way, but it's still good music. they are still making good songs and there are preface to it. it's not good, but... blah, blah, blah. it's just good. obviously you can find other examples.

all i'm expecting is jane's addiction 2011 to sound good and they don't. we all have in common that we think ritual/shocking are masterpieces. so it's crazy to me that those same group of people can be so way off on this record.

lets take strays for example. most liked it, when it came out and gradually have found their favorite 3 or 4 songs, but don't like the whole album. a consistent opinion among similar fans.

as i read around here people were real quick to say JA is good again. and that is simply not the case. as a matter of fact, they've fallen below even the lowest standards for JA.

By the way, Wilco the Album is not good. The new one is merely OK. I've been a fan since A.M., and I love experimental music and Nels Cline. But in my opinion, they've put out some shitty stuff. So has Radiohead. And King of Limbs is way less adventurous than TGEA, if you grade on the curve, which you don't seem willing to do. Which is fine, but don't pretend these other bands are made of magic.

[Essence_Smith]

you've given me too much power over you

[sonny]

it's not even past standards. it's just not good by any measure. and most here can't say they like it without following it with some excuse.

can any of you sit here and say this album is 2011 jane's addiction? this is right where 2011 jane's addiction should be?

This is your opinion, which you're entitled to & I respect, but I can honestly say that there are a couple of songs I like on this that are as listenable as anything I heard on Strays...and I can say that without making any excuses...as you said a matter of taste...

Lets deal with facts...this IS indeed a 2011 release with the name Jane's Addiction and regardless of how any of us feels, this IS where they're at...

As a musician who's been strongly influenced/inspired by Jane's for 20 odd years I have accepted that most if not all the bands I grew up on that are still around are a shadow of their former selves in some ways, but I have enough respect for their output in the past to not let what they currently do ruin my enjoyment of the classic stuff...some can do it some can't but either way I think its fine...how you look at it can change what it is completely...

it's all opinions, my man.

i don't need to start every post with "my opinion is".

the problem is people don't accept my opinion, they label it, they dismiss it as bitter or compromised -- it's hard for me reconcile that we all use to share similar opinions and yet i think this album sucks, but most those here like it, and treat it as the second coming.

saying things like eric avery was wrong and should stuck around, is idiotic to me. you really think it's that good that somehow eric made a mistake by leaving. when in reality this shitty music seems like exactly the reason to leave. it makes me think EA was so much smarter then the 3 left.

the pixies tried to make a new record, when it didn't live up or work, they realized it and abandoned it.

[CaseyContrarian]

I'm fairly disappointed that Sonny seems to be implying that people here don't "get" what made JA great, or that he alone possesses a special insight. Some of us are accomplished musicians who have been with JA since the beginning, so to claim that we're not tuned into their original greatness is frankly insulting. When Sonny nuked his site, vaporizing years of conversation and lively debate, most of us accepted that it was his choice. Much like it is our choice whether or not to enjoy the new record.

i'm only saying, i don't see how you can like ritual/shocking and also say you like this new album. i find it hard to understand.

who made me the judge on fandom?

You did. And you definitely said more than that. You said pretty clearly that we don't get it.

And for the record, what many of us have been saying is simply that we like (or don't loathe) aspects of the record. If you think that takes some kind of cognitive gymnastics, I assure you it doesn't. You're reminding me of certain political persuasions with the black-and-white, all-or-nothing thinking.

We all appreciate what you've done over the years to keep the flame lit by nurturing a dwindling community, but it's not particularly interesting or useful to denigrate others for their mild accommodation of a middling record by an act we all onceloved.

You have the right to our opinion, and there's nothing wrong with you stating it in your review. There's also nothing wrong with us pointing out where your objectivity as a listener may be compromised.

Cool?

what is funny to me, is i should just "respect yr opinion" but somehow my opinion being different from yr own is compromised?

i never made me the judge. i just don't understand how you can like ritual/shocking and also say you like this new record?

the line drawn from ritual/shocking does not in anyway lead to the great escape artist for me personally. so it makes it hard for me to understand how a person who owns ritual/shocking, could also own this new one.

if you feel i'm restricting yr opinion, you've given me too much power over you.

Sonny, in no known or quantum dimension could you restrict my opinion. I'm not even asking you to respect it. But when you are analyzing records, it doesn't really strengthen your case when you make it personal. If you don't like what you're hearing, be specific and tell us why. You've done that to a degree, but you also indulged in broadsides that can only be read as vitriol at the band failing to match whatever standard you, and only you, have chosen to apply. That's not criticism, it's whining.

For the record, I don't own TGEA. I won't buy it, because I live in a Jetsons world where I stream through subscription services on my Sonos system and mobile devices. It's all the catalog in the world for ten bucks a month. If I get the hankering to hear TGEA, or Debbie Fucking Gibson, I can, without feeling like a tool for buying the CD.

And I can like the parts I like (only a few) without it somehow tainting my experience of NS and Ritual. What's so hard to understand about that?

[sonny]

Again, Sonny makes a few points I agree with but his personal issues just cloud and undermine his opinion.

I dunno, what exactly in the band or the individual members past 20 years worth of music made anything think they'd come even close to matching the quality of XXX, NS and Ritual? Good as P4P was and bits of other non-Janes projects have been as well as parts of Strays, none of 'em ever came close to the original trilogy. Just the last 10 years worth of individual projects (especially Perrys'), the fact they brought in Sitek to do song doctor duties and the previews of IF and ETTL made it pretty clear this wasn't going to be Jane's stylistically successful "Achtung Baby" reinvention of their trademark sound that would hold any ground to their original albums (like that record did).

I guess that's why this release for better or worse isn't a big deal to me. It's what I expected under the circumstances. I don't hate it, there *are* a few songs and bits n' pieces that I like and I'll even buy the cd next week because I'm an OCD completest when it comes to artists I've followed for a long time.

i'll repeat myself, and i always end up doing this. i'm not comparing or expecting ritual/shocking. but if it's gonna be called jane's addiction, then there should be some resemblance.

lets take radiohead or wilco for example, 1993 radiohead doesn't sound like 2011 radiohead, nor does wilco in that same way, but it's still good music. they are still making good songs and there are preface to it. it's not good, but... blah, blah, blah. it's just good. obviously you can find other examples.

all i'm expecting is jane's addiction 2011 to sound good and they don't. we all have in common that we think ritual/shocking are masterpieces. so it's crazy to me that those same group of people can be so way off on this record.

lets take strays for example. most liked it, when it came out and gradually have found their favorite 3 or 4 songs, but don't like the whole album. a consistent opinion among similar fans.

as i read around here people were real quick to say JA is good again. and that is simply not the case. as a matter of fact, they've fallen below even the lowest standards for JA.

By the way, Wilco the Album is not good. The new one is merely OK. I've been a fan since A.M., and I love experimental music and Nels Cline. But in my opinion, they've put out some shitty stuff. So has Radiohead. And King of Limbs is way less adventurous than TGEA, if you grade on the curve, which you don't seem willing to do. Which is fine, but don't pretend these other bands are made of magic.

wilco has missed, but there are some great songs on wilco the album and i'm loving the new one. i mean damn 'art of almost' is brilliant.

king of limbs was created with the same concept as the new JA. they took pieces created by each member and put them together, thinking they couldn't get an album out of it. the result was 8 great songs. i'm not sure what you consider groundbreaking or adventurous, but i know the king of limbs is a great album and this new JA one is not. so one succeeded and the other did not.

the curve is exactly what every band or artist is graded on. there are peeks and valleys. wilco aren't peaking, but they are staying close. JA is in a valley for real. radiohead is peaking by some people's standards or at least staying close.

how easy would it be for radiohead to make another bends album? yet you don't consider that adventurous? maybe we have different meanings.

[CaseyContrarian]

King of Limbs is not a great Radiohead record. OK Computer and Kid A are great Radiohead records. The reason I'm saying that KOL isn't adventurous, is because they've already done the electro-organic deconstruction thing before, to far more compelling effect. In this respect,MIT is lazier than TGEA, because at least JA are failing at something new (for them).

[sonny]

I'm fairly disappointed that Sonny seems to be implying that people here don't "get" what made JA great, or that he alone possesses a special insight. Some of us are accomplished musicians who have been with JA since the beginning, so to claim that we're not tuned into their original greatness is frankly insulting. When Sonny nuked his site, vaporizing years of conversation and lively debate, most of us accepted that it was his choice. Much like it is our choice whether or not to enjoy the new record.

i'm only saying, i don't see how you can like ritual/shocking and also say you like this new album. i find it hard to understand.

who made me the judge on fandom?

You did. And you definitely said more than that. You said pretty clearly that we don't get it.

And for the record, what many of us have been saying is simply that we like (or don't loathe) aspects of the record. If you think that takes some kind of cognitive gymnastics, I assure you it doesn't. You're reminding me of certain political persuasions with the black-and-white, all-or-nothing thinking.

We all appreciate what you've done over the years to keep the flame lit by nurturing a dwindling community, but it's not particularly interesting or useful to denigrate others for their mild accommodation of a middling record by an act we all onceloved.

You have the right to our opinion, and there's nothing wrong with you stating it in your review. There's also nothing wrong with us pointing out where your objectivity as a listener may be compromised.

Cool?

what is funny to me, is i should just "respect yr opinion" but somehow my opinion being different from yr own is compromised?

i never made me the judge. i just don't understand how you can like ritual/shocking and also say you like this new record?

the line drawn from ritual/shocking does not in anyway lead to the great escape artist for me personally. so it makes it hard for me to understand how a person who owns ritual/shocking, could also own this new one.

if you feel i'm restricting yr opinion, you've given me too much power over you.

Sonny, in no known or quantum dimension could you restrict my opinion. I'm not even asking you to respect it. But when you are analyzing records, it doesn't really strengthen your case when you make it personal. If you don't like what you're hearing, be specific and tell us why. You've did that to a degree, but you also indulged in broadsides that can only be read as vitriol at the band failing to match whatever standard you, and only you, have chosen to apply. That's not criticism, it's whining.

For the record, I don't own TGEA. I won't buy it, because I live in a Jetsons world where I stream through subscription services on my Sonos system and mobile devices. It's all the catalog in the world for ten bucks a month. If I get the hankering to hear TGEA, or Debbie Fucking Gibson, I can, without feeling like a tool for buying the CD.

And I can like the parts I like (only a few) without it somehow tainting my experience of NS and Ritual. What's so hard to understand about that?

sounds like you don't like the record either?

i like parts, i said so in my review. i realize it was long, but i did list those likes.

of course the review is personal. it's my review. i'm not writing for the collective or some entity. it's my opinion. if my friends ask, i'm gonna give opinion which is based on the parts i like and dislike and i'm also gonna give opinion as to why i think it sounds like shit or sounds good or possibly ways it could've been done better.

i'm not fucking reviewing this record to win opinions or change minds. it's my own opinion and my view of things. nothing more. don't make it anymore than it is, just because it's so fucking long.


some people say "JA's new album sucks" i chose to go into a little more detail. i could've just said "the new album sucks and the band is dead", but i didn't.

don't let it affect you so much. it has no affect on other's opinions, nor the success of the album. if it does, again i've clearly got more power than i realized.

[Essence_Smith]

i don't need to start every post with "my opinion is".

the problem is people don't accept my opinion, they label it, they dismiss it as bitter or compromised -- it's hard for me reconcile that we all use to share similar opinions and yet i think this album sucks, but most those here like it, and treat it as the second coming.

saying things like eric avery was wrong and should stuck around, is idiotic to me. you really think it's that good that somehow eric made a mistake by leaving. when in reality this shitty music seems like exactly the reason to leave. it makes me think EA was so much smarter then the 3 left.

the pixies tried to make a new record, when it didn't live up or work, they realized it and abandoned it.

The same way you can't accept people liking the album is ironically similar to people not accepting that your having run xiola for so long, etc is not influencing your opinion...that place meant a lot to us all, and the way it ended left a bad taste in people's mouths...so you gotta accept that people are going to judge anything you say related to Jane's with all that in mind. I'm not sure that's fair or reasonable, but I definitely understand it...

I think people expected a train wreck and got something they can listen to on the short term...even people who have been bashing everything Perry's done for years have said they dug a few songs...it might be poppy, they may have sold out every single thing we once loved em for, but there are a few decent things going on in this music and they definitely could have done worse...so even if people are looking at it thru rose colored glasses because its new, imo its very understandable...and at some point we can't ALL be wrong...

Sometimes its ok to be that one guy...

[sonny]

King of Limbs is not a great Radiohead record. OK Computer and Kid A are great Radiohead records. The reason I'm saying that KOL isn't adventurous, is because they've already done the electro-organic deconstruction thing before, to far more compelling effect. In this respect,MIT is lazier than TGEA, because at least JA are failing at something new (for them).

on the surface it may not appear so, but the approach to songwriting for the songs on there is different. "Almost every tune is like a collage - things we'd pre-recorded, each of us, and then were flying at each other." thom yorke

and i think it's different from anything radiohead has done before. maybe not new ground for thom and his solo stuff, but defintely new for radiohead.

the end result is all that matters though and radiohead ended up with a great album, JA got maybe 2 good songs. underground being the highlight of the whole album and the end of that song still gets on my nerves.

[ThenSheDid]

He's right...although, banyan put out some quality records.

[sonny]

i don't need to start every post with "my opinion is".

the problem is people don't accept my opinion, they label it, they dismiss it as bitter or compromised -- it's hard for me reconcile that we all use to share similar opinions and yet i think this album sucks, but most those here like it, and treat it as the second coming.

saying things like eric avery was wrong and should stuck around, is idiotic to me. you really think it's that good that somehow eric made a mistake by leaving. when in reality this shitty music seems like exactly the reason to leave. it makes me think EA was so much smarter then the 3 left.

the pixies tried to make a new record, when it didn't live up or work, they realized it and abandoned it.

The same way you can't accept people liking the album is ironically similar to people not accepting that your having run xiola for so long, etc is not influencing your opinion...that place meant a lot to us all, and the way it ended left a bad taste in people's mouths...so you gotta accept that people are going to judge anything you say related to Jane's with all that in mind. I'm not sure that's fair or reasonable, but I definitely understand it...

I think people expected a train wreck and got something they can listen to on the short term...even people who have been bashing everything Perry's done for years have said they dug a few songs...it might be poppy, they may have sold out every single thing we once loved em for, but there are a few decent things going on in this music and they definitely could have done worse...so even if people are looking at it thru rose colored glasses because its new, imo its very understandable...and at some point we can't ALL be wrong...

Sometimes its ok to be that one guy...

i don't have a problem with people's opinions. i think they are mistaking greatness for, as you say, the newness. it's just new. i predict the the turn around in opinions will be fast. some have already started to admit, they don't like it as much as 3 days ago!!! that's what is hilarious. 3 days ago, jane's addiction is back! now, maybe i don't like this song or that one.

new ears for a band you like is sometimes deceiving. so keep listening folks. i might not be so unpopular in the coming weeks.

i definitely get that people are pissed about xiola.org going away and 'deconstruction' in particular hasn't been able to get off my balls since it happened, but she'll get it eventually and move on.

[sonny]

He's right...although, banyan put out some quality records.

anytime at all is a great collection of songs. great contributions.

[CaseyContrarian]

I'm fairly disappointed that Sonny seems to be implying that people here don't "get" what made JA great, or that he alone possesses a special insight. Some of us are accomplished musicians who have been with JA since the beginning, so to claim that we're not tuned into their original greatness is frankly insulting. When Sonny nuked his site, vaporizing years of conversation and lively debate, most of us accepted that it was his choice. Much like it is our choice whether or not to enjoy the new record.

i'm only saying, i don't see how you can like ritual/shocking and also say you like this new album. i find it hard to understand.

who made me the judge on fandom?

You did. And you definitely said more than that. You said pretty clearly that we don't get it.

And for the record, what many of us have been saying is simply that we like (or don't loathe) aspects of the record. If you think that takes some kind of cognitive gymnastics, I assure you it doesn't. You're reminding me of certain political persuasions with the black-and-white, all-or-nothing thinking.

We all appreciate what you've done over the years to keep the flame lit by nurturing a dwindling community, but it's not particularly interesting or useful to denigrate others for their mild accommodation of a middling record by an act we all onceloved.

You have the right to our opinion, and there's nothing wrong with you stating it in your review. There's also nothing wrong with us pointing out where your objectivity as a listener may be compromised.

Cool?

what is funny to me, is i should just "respect yr opinion" but somehow my opinion being different from yr own is compromised?

i never made me the judge. i just don't understand how you can like ritual/shocking and also say you like this new record?

the line drawn from ritual/shocking does not in anyway lead to the great escape artist for me personally. so it makes it hard for me to understand how a person who owns ritual/shocking, could also own this new one.

if you feel i'm restricting yr opinion, you've given me too much power over you.

Sonny, in no known or quantum dimension could you restrict my opinion. I'm not even asking you to respect it. But when you are analyzing records, it doesn't really strengthen your case when you make it personal. If you don't like what you're hearing, be specific and tell us why. You've did that to a degree, but you also indulged in broadsides that can only be read as vitriol at the band failing to match whatever standard you, and only you, have chosen to apply. That's not criticism, it's whining.

For the record, I don't own TGEA. I won't buy it, because I live in a Jetsons world where I stream through subscription services on my Sonos system and mobile devices. It's all the catalog in the world for ten bucks a month. If I get the hankering to hear TGEA, or Debbie Fucking Gibson, I can, without feeling like a tool for buying the CD.

And I can like the parts I like (only a few) without it somehow tainting my experience of NS and Ritual. What's so hard to understand about that?

sounds like you don't like the record either?

i like parts, i said so in my review. i realize it was long, but i did list those likes.

of course the review is personal. it's my review. i'm not writing for the collective or some entity. it's my opinion. if my friends ask, i'm gonna give opinion which is based on the parts i like and dislike and i'm also gonna give opinion as to why i think it sounds like shit or sounds good or possibly ways it could've been done better.

i'm not fucking reviewing this record to win opinions or change minds. it's my own opinion and my view of things. nothing more. don't make it anymore than it is, just because it's so fucking long.


some people say "JA's new album sucks" i chose to go into a little more detail. i could've just said "the new album sucks and the band is dead", but i didn't.

don't let it affect you so much. it has no affect on other's opinions, nor the success of the album. if it does, again i've clearly got more power than i realized.

It's not affecting me; I just like talking about records and the craft of critique. You're the one that came here and started questioning our ability to discern what's good or bad. I spent the majority of my adult life professionally writing about music. As in, it paid my rent and bills. So I think I have some understanding of what opinion means in the context of a record review. And to me, it sounded like you were doing a lot of venting. Which is fine, but it doesn't really add credence to your argument. And by the way, we have nearly a dozen threads here that are going into considerable detail on TGEA, so you're hardly alone there.

None of us are really disagreeing with many of your points, we're just responding to the way in which you framed them. And yes, some hackles may have gone up when you insinuated that we have no taste or comprehension of quality in music. That's just kind of rude and ignorant, and I'm sure you don't really believe that.

[Essence_Smith]

Well said CC