donjunio

Well done Odradek for remembering Thin White Rope, who not only had one of the best repertoires of the 80s but often applied their distorted lens to many pages of the past, with a series of phenomenal covers (from Dylan to Can).

Today marks the beginning of the era of C'è, the despot of DeBaser.

Undoubtedly, "Down on the upside" was panned when it was released, with spiteful tones that went beyond its content. Grunge had started to wear thin after years of media exposure, and the misstep of a symbol of that era was obviously shot down mercilessly. It will certainly be interesting to see if, as you say, the judgment can change with time. For my part, unfortunately, it remains the same.

But I was talking more in musical terms, not so much in attitude (although as a grunge fan back in '96 it did irritate me a bit to see them turned into icy standard-bearers of the MTV/Lollapalooza duarchy). But that’s not the point. Soundgarden were certainly never true innovators apart from their very early work (and we agree on that). But until "Superunknown," they were able to masterfully blend all their influences, creating something original, fresh, and exciting, in albums that still rock today. I saw them perform brilliantly in '95 alongside Kyuss and thought they still had a lot to say. Then came the big disappointment right after purchasing "Down on the Upside." Even based on what can be gleaned from your account, although diplomatically you didn’t give it a rating, it certainly doesn’t seem memorable. For heaven’s sake, an album like that, which could kindly be termed as tentative, does not diminish such a career, and it is always interesting to dissect its contents. Maximum respect also for those like the good Blackdog who assert its merits with the flair of Perrotta in reverse (offside by a meter, by the way), but it doesn’t seem that there are the premises for a reevaluation of this Sound Garden.

"Blow up the outside world" is certainly not a masterpiece and it has a draining duration as well. But its melodic progression seems to me frankly the only thing that sticks in your mind from the album. Not at all the marble-like staticity of "Rhinosaur" (name omen on the mutation into dinosaurs), "Never the machine forever" or "Never named", the rarefied seriousness without spark of "Zero chance", "Applebite" or "Switch opens", while "Pretty noose" and "Burden in my hand" are relentless shortcuts for the MTV audience. This may not be a flaw, as demonstrated by the previous "Superunknown", as long as the anthemic momentum emerges within a stylistic dialectic of a much greater depth.
<< “In my opinion, this continues the discourse started with Superunknown, with tracks that are definitely less direct compared to the early days, (by the way, my favorites are Ultramega OK and indeed Superunknown) but with much more care in production and arrangement and a bit more research.” >> I would rather say that "Down on the upside" is the ugly copy of "Superunknown". The fact that it is produced and arranged with care is simply due to the fact that it is a polished major production, a perfect example of what grunge had become in 1996: a hard-rock radio pop for forty-year-olds devoid of pathos. And I don't think one can be indulgent towards those like Cornell and company, who had shown they could take their artistic discourse to its extreme consequences. The stylistic research, I believe, is completely absent, just a few aspirations from Ben here and there, but they pale in comparison to the bassist's pieces from previous albums. I find it symptomatic that the band disbanded right after releasing an album so blatantly below their standards: they themselves understood that only the shell of their music remained, and the dissolution was the right act of coherence toward their fans. If you like it, then good for you: as for me, the works of Kim and company that I put back on the table are quite different. Bye!

I was indeed referring to the solo, which is no small detail. However, far be it from me to engage in the debates of "X did this before Y," "Z copied from P," or "Hendrix had a longer one than Page." It’s clear that at the time everyone drew inspiration from one another (Lee himself was accused of plagiarism by the Stones for "Revelations," not understanding that it was a Coltranean expansion of the theme from "Smokestack Lightning" and not a plagiarism of their "Goin' Home," just to name one). It seemed only right and proper to remember a name missing from this page, namely Arthur Lee, who was the first to bring Hendrix into a recording studio ("My Diary," in 1963). Moreover, the esteem and respect between Lee and Jimi were mutual, given that after "Forever Changes," Arthur fired the rest of his band and hired a guitarist like Jay Donnellan, who was Hendrix through and through, to confront the amazing progress of his disciple and reinterpret it through his own sensibility (the results are evident on "Four Sail").

It should be noted, however, that Jimi's version of "Hey Joe" was indebted to the one that appeared on the first album by Love, as Lee was the first to speed it up... but it is well known that the good Arthur had taught something to the immense Jimi...

The only piece that stands out for me is "blow the outside world," the rest seems like an AOR version of Bad Company...

Alright, the vote has started anyway.. it seems it was meant to be :)!

A classic example to pass on to future generations about what it means to witness the artistic vein of a band completely drained. I don't vote for it because at the time it was a tremendous disappointment; fortunately, they broke up soon after.