Viewing 24 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #117

      BleedingTheOrchid
      Spectator

      We all thought Smashing Pumpkins existed from 1988 till 2000, and then disbanded, right? Wrong. The earliest known recording under the Pumpkins flag is from December 1987, as confirmed by Billy Corgan himself! Just follow the next clues:

      Demotape Gish/Moon with Dec. 1987 recorded I Fall
      =======================================
      http://www.spfreaks.com/?page=COLLDETAILS&item=547

      The track I Fall on this tape is with Billy Corgan, James Iha and a drummachine. Though Ron Roesing (ex-The Marked) was around to play drums here and there (see for example the updated information on the Nothing Ever Changes tape http://www.spfreaks.com/?page=COLLDETAILS&item=502 ) he didn’t play the drums on this track. And while James Iha was still playing in his band Snake Train, he also played and recorded with Billy Corgan. Billy Corgan confirmed to 2 of our sources that this I Fall track was recorded in the basement of his father’s house in December 1987.

      So we had to update the early history likewise, based on this and other information.

      1987
      http://www.spfreaks.com/?page=TOURHISTORY&year=1987

      1988
      http://www.spfreaks.com/?page=TOURHISTORY&year=1988

      By clicking on dates marked with a * (star) you can see the known tracks per venue/studio. As a service to you researchers we will also mention the minutes/seconds per individual track. When you click on the track itself you will be going to a page with info about this track and where it was released (if available). Clicking on this release will give you all the info about this release. Have fun!

      Again very pleased to bring you this cool news,
      Arthur

      PS We are working on 1989 and 1990 still, so not all info is available there yet.

    • #2685

      oh that is awesome!
      we are actually important to the pumpkins fan-base on a global scale :lol:
      shame that it won’t be leaked :( i would love to hear it…

    • #2686

      Tree_Spirit
      Spectator

      Well,you learn something new everyday.. :lol:
      Also thought pumpkins was from 1988 to 2000

    • #2687

      shame that it won’t be leaked :( i would love to hear it…[/quote:3oqiw00w]
      you mean i fall? because if so, this track has been out for a while now.

    • #2688

      Arthur
      Spectator

      shame that it won’t be leaked :( i would love to hear it…[/quote:3c48ieg1]
      you mean i fall? because if so, this track has been out for a while now.[/quote:3c48ieg1]
      Somehow this is correct yes. The unpolished version from this recording date is out, however a much better, polished up version from that recording date that was listened at & date-wise approved by Billy Corgan is not out and will not be out either. I had the privilige to listen to it from it’s source.

    • #2689

      i’m happy with the way it sounds. how much different does the \"polished\" version sound?
      you’re not confusing it with the live recording from the avalon show, are you?

      ps: here’s a link to an mp3 of what is out: http://rspaa.niluje.net/data/Miscellaneous/

    • #2690

      i’m happy with the way it sounds. how much different does the "polished" version sound?
      you’re not confusing it with the live recording from the avalon show, are you?

      ps: here’s a link to an mp3 of what is out: http://rspaa.niluje.net/data/Miscellaneous/[/quote:1ln5dbi7]oh cool thanks :)
      i didnt know that *facepalm*

    • #2691

      Arthur
      Spectator

      you’re not confusing it with the live recording from the avalon show, are you?[/quote:35tfb8or]
      Certainly not. This is definately the studioversion! We could say it is version 3 of I Fall, as version 1 and 2 are the Avalon (thank you!-squeek) live version and the version you just linked. This 3rd version was given to Billy Corgan and he listened and said it’s indeed a better version of the one on the Gish/Moon tape. At the same time he said to 2 persons (including the "owner" of I Fall 3) that it was recorded in December 1987. Also he asked not to leak it. Which the "owner" is respecting of course. The main news here is actually that we have to set the startdate of the Pumpkins back to at least December 1987!

    • #2692

      you’re not confusing it with the live recording from the avalon show, are you?[/quote:vv7potl8]
      Certainly not. This is definately the studioversion! We could say it is version 3 of I Fall, as version 1 and 2 are the Avalon (thank you!-squeek) live version and the version you just linked. This 3rd version was given to Billy Corgan and he listened and said it’s indeed a better version of the one on the Gish/Moon tape. At the same time he said to 2 persons (including the "owner" of I Fall 3) that it was recorded in December 1987. Also he asked not to leak it. Which the "owner" is respecting of course. The main news here is actually that we have to set the startdate of the Pumpkins back to at least December 1987![/quote:vv7potl8]
      yeah i know those 2 versions also, whats different about this new 3rd version?

    • #2693

      We all thought Smashing Pumpkins existed from 1988 till 2000, and then disbanded, right? Wrong. The earliest known recording under the Pumpkins flag is from December 1987, as confirmed by Billy Corgan himself![/quote:cu9a2xym]
      pretty cool news btw!

    • #2694

      Arthur
      Spectator

      Today I found a pretty nicely set up discussion about this \"rewritten SP history\" on ThePumpkins.net. Let me post it here also, for your information. The next post below was the reply I gave.

      author=Smiley, date=2007-07-30

      I’m not trying to be mean, but your information is completely wrong.

      1. \"I Fall\" (demo and live) has been circulating for a couple of years now. Billy leaked the live recording himself, so it’s funny that you promised him you won’t leak the song. The home demo is available on this very site: http://www.thepumpkins.net/music/music_ … _tape.html

      2. You say your recording of \"I Fall\" is a better/alternate recording, and that it’s found on the Gish/Moon Tape tape. However, that tape is precisely the source of \"I Fall\" that has been circulating for years. I suspect your \"better\" version is from the same tape, but better sound quality than whatever you previously had. That doesn’t mean it’s anything new.

      3. Your site says: \"This tape includes 2 filler songs from the band’s early days which hadn’t been commercially released until now.\" …but these aren’t commercial releases. Your site also lists a \"concert\" at Billy’s dad’s house in 1987.

      4. Billy stated years ago (Machina listening party, Dec. 1999) that \"I Fall\" was a demo that James and he recorded at his dad’s house in 1987 – yet you make it sound like groundbreaking news when you post about it.

      5. Your site says: \"Those tracks are a (home-)studio version of \"I Fall\" (note the early date!) and a live version of \"Time Has Come Today\" from the Last Exit, Chicago gig on 1988/11/20. Technically we can say The Smashing Pumpkins exists since 1987 by the discovery of this tape.\" …okay – this argument is nonsense. Just look at the Marked songs on \"25 Songs O’ Pumpkins\" or \"Hope\" on Pisces+Friends/Still Becoming Apart. Billy also put pre-Marked songs on his Marked demo tapes. \"Jazzin’\" may or may not be a Starchildren song. The point is, just because it’s on a SP tape, that doesn’t mean it’s SP. Billy remembers so many details about the old days that I don’t see any reason to doubt him when he says the band started in 1988. I also believe him when he says \"I Fall\" was recorded in 1987. So this means:

      1987 home demo of \"I Fall\" = not the pumpkins
      1988 live performances of \"I Fall\" = the pumpkins

      It’s sort of like how Spiteface and Sun were both Marked songs originally, but the Pumpkins adopted them in 1988.

    • #2695

      Arthur
      Spectator

      And this was my reply.

      :D You have given it a good try to set up a critical story, Smiley! Cool! The only thing I could find however that is \"wrong information\" is that all the studio recordings are now in the Tour History section. This is for 2 reasons at the moment:

      -Our sources need to compare the older dates in a historical timeframe with the concerts, so we put the recording sessions there for the moment. Later on we will move this to an extra section Recording Sessions. For the moment it looks \"wrong\" yes, sorry for that.
      -Our website is always in progress. Sometimes we forget to change headers, titles, columns, fields, dates etc. We have to keep track of a lot of information, compare tons of things, discuss it with our teammembers, answer emails and so on. Little mistakes can be made. Please forgive us.

      Your point 1. Correct, those 2 versions are circulating. I never denied that. This 3rd version of I Fall however is not wanted by Billy Corgan to circulate, so our source respects that. Nothing wrong here.

      Your point 2. Just a matter of opinion. For example Kitty Kat exists in a Distorted version and a Non-Distorted version. Kitty Kat is not a new song indeed, but a remixed, a polished up, newly mastered or even an edited version is however called a \"new\" track. All collectors of new SP tracks and hardcore fans will agree with that. Nothing wrong here.

      Your point 3. So you agree they haven’t been commercially released till now, as you state. Nothing wrong here. The \"concert\" thingy is already discussed above. Again, sorry for the confusion caused at the moment.

      Your points 4&5. Might be true, yet it is news not known to many people. You cannot deny that. I see it from this point of view. Technically when Billy and James record a song called I Fall, a song without any historical background to other bands (Snake Train, The Marked, Hexen, & also no old bandmembers involved) and later on even perform that song under the name Smashing Pumpkins with the same people that recorded it, and put it (the Dec. ’87 recording) on a tape with the name Smashing Pumpkins on it, then it is a full Pumpkins song, agree? It cannot in any way be compared to Spiteface and Sun, which are indeed older tunes from The Marked, adopted and renewed by the early Pumpkins. Sorry, but I cannot follow you there when you make this comparison anyway.

      To cut a kinda long story short: it might be said by Billy Corgan the Pumpkins started in 1988, because the name comes from that year. But TECHNICALLY and technically alone the Smashing Pumpkins exists since Dec. 1987. At least! No other website I know lists something about this year 1987. Or it must be in the dark alleys of it somewhere. It’s even worse, everywhere you will find lies like \"1988 Billy Corgan meets James Iha through a friend\" (see for example this Virgin press release that was send to me today: http://www.spfreaks.com/?page=IMGVIEW&item=5407 ). It’s just not true, they knew each other already in 1987! And I think SPfreaks has the full right to blow a little horn about this. And we provide NO wrong information in this matter. Even though you gave it good try.

    • #2696

      And this was my reply.

      :D You have given it a good try to set up a critical story, Smiley! Cool! The only thing I could find however that is "wrong information" is that all the studio recordings are now in the Tour History section. This is for 2 reasons at the moment:

      -Our sources need to compare the older dates in a historical timeframe with the concerts, so we put the recording sessions there for the moment. Later on we will move this to an extra section Recording Sessions. For the moment it looks "wrong" yes, sorry for that.
      -Our website is always in progress. Sometimes we forget to change headers, titles, columns, fields, dates etc. We have to keep track of a lot of information, compare tons of things, discuss it with our teammembers, answer emails and so on. Little mistakes can be made. Please forgive us.

      Your point 1. Correct, those 2 versions are circulating. I never denied that. This 3rd version of I Fall however is not wanted by Billy Corgan to circulate, so our source respects that. Nothing wrong here.

      Your point 2. Just a matter of opinion. For example Kitty Kat exists in a Distorted version and a Non-Distorted version. Kitty Kat is not a new song indeed, but a remixed, a polished up, newly mastered or even an edited version is however called a "new" track. All collectors of new SP tracks and hardcore fans will agree with that. Nothing wrong here.

      Your point 3. So you agree they haven’t been commercially released till now, as you state. Nothing wrong here. The "concert" thingy is already discussed above. Again, sorry for the confusion caused at the moment.

      Your points 4&5. Might be true, yet it is news not known to many people. You cannot deny that. I see it from this point of view. Technically when Billy and James record a song called I Fall, a song without any historical background to other bands (Snake Train, The Marked, Hexen, & also no old bandmembers involved) and later on even perform that song under the name Smashing Pumpkins with the same people that recorded it, and put it (the Dec. ’87 recording) on a tape with the name Smashing Pumpkins on it, then it is a full Pumpkins song, agree? It cannot in any way be compared to Spiteface and Sun, which are indeed older tunes from The Marked, adopted and renewed by the early Pumpkins. Sorry, but I cannot follow you there when you make this comparison anyway.

      To cut a kinda long story short: it might be said by Billy Corgan the Pumpkins started in 1988, because the name comes from that year. But TECHNICALLY and technically alone the Smashing Pumpkins exists since Dec. 1987. At least! No other website I know lists something about this year 1987. Or it must be in the dark alleys of it somewhere. It’s even worse, everywhere you will find lies like "1988 Billy Corgan meets James Iha through a friend" (see for example this Virgin press release that was send to me today: http://www.spfreaks.com/?page=IMGVIEW&item=5407 ). It’s just not true, they knew each other already in 1987! And I think SPfreaks has the full right to blow a little horn about this. And we provide NO wrong information in this matter. Even though you gave it good try.[/quote:1pvvqift]woo he got told :P :lol: well done arthur!

    • #2697

      Arthur
      Spectator

      woo he got told :P :lol: well done arthur![/quote:3sadhdqs]
      8)

    • #2698

      manillascissor
      Keymaster

      Well done Arthur! Nice shades.

    • #2699

      I agree with Smiley.

    • #2700

      Arthur
      Spectator

      I agree with Smiley.[/quote:7vnj1gbi]
      Interesting. What part? That we provide totally wrong information in this matter? Or that we shouldn’t call it Smashing Pumpkins in December 1987, not even technically? Please explain a bit further Cool As Ice Cream! I’m very curious.

    • #2701

      i agree with points 4 and 5.

      there’s no reason to conclude that this early song is the smashing pumpkins. saying the pumpkins started in 1987 is just a matter of taste, i guess. but if even billy/the band consider 1988 to be the birthyear of the smashing pumpkins, why should we disagree with that?
      you can discuss this, but i think it’s pointless. hope was recorded in 1986, but officially released on still becoming apart, clearly a smashing pumpkins release. should we change it to 1986-2000, then?

      and i agree that this is no breaking news, and that no history is rewritten.

    • #2702

      Arthur
      Spectator

      i agree with points 4 and 5.

      there’s no reason to conclude that this early song is the smashing pumpkins. saying the pumpkins started in 1987 is just a matter of taste, i guess. but if even billy/the band consider 1988 to be the birthyear of the smashing pumpkins, why should we disagree with that?
      you can discuss this, but i think it’s pointless. hope was recorded in 1986, but officially released on still becoming apart, clearly a smashing pumpkins release. should we change it to 1986-2000, then?

      and i agree that this is no breaking news, and that no history is rewritten.[/quote:bhsm5j16]
      Just a quick reply to this, because it’s a very interesting point of view. Which I still don’t agree, but that’s because I’m becoming a fundamentalist in this. :D Kidding, seriously now. I have just returned home from a long trip, so I’m tired and I wanna sleep. OK who cares. Here we go.

      1. There are 3 reasons to conclude this recorded song is part of the early history of the Smashing Pumpkins. I mentioned them before. For me (and not only me, several people agree on this, and it was not even me who brought this up, but I agreed immediately) the most important reason is: Billy puts it on a tape with the name Smashing Pumpkins on it. He wants it to be part of the early Pumpkins legacy, whatever he says about when the bandname came up. Technically the Smashing Pumpkins exist since December 1987, and I’m (almost) sure Billy would agree on that when being asked about it.

      2. Hope will indeed get a 1986 recording date in our database, and 1986 will be visible in the Tour & Recording History (yes I let it being renamed to stop confusion in that section which was called Tour History first) when we get to that Hope track which was released in 2000. We just started in 1987/1988, working on 1989 and 1990 now. Rest till 2000 to follow after that, might take a while. But it’s indeed an interesting thing you bring up here Cool As Ice Cream, far more interesting then the Spiteface & Sun comparison Smiley brought up. Is it Smashing Pumpkins part I 1986-2000 then in my opinion? No. Hope was a Billy solo track (if I’m right) in a period that The Marked still existed, James Iha was not around yet and it was never played by the band live as far I know. Spank me hard when I’m wrong here, I do this by head now. For sure Billy had good creative reasons to put it on this promo CD that came with Machina, and indeed he made it part of the Pumpkins legacy by doing so. But it’s too far away from the early days to my humble opinion. I Fall is not however.

      3. It is breaking news when some people have a clear opinion & want to start a discussion about it. And to create a bit of a fuzz, this is the way to play the game. Disagreeing doesn’t make it less breaking news. But that’s another discussion far from this one, so I leave it if you don’t mind.

      Besides, tons of people don’t have this I Fall 1987 recording and Billy’s confessions about it on top of their mind, instead they get no listings about I Fall or even misinformation everywhere about "1988" when "Billy met James Iha". Which sux. Another reason to call it breaking news.

      4. Which brings me to another, kinda philosophical, question. When was Smashing Pumpkins restarted? June 2005, when Billy announced he wants his dreams and band back? The day Jimmy Chamberlin said "I’m game Billy!"? 2006, when the Pumpkins website came back to live? When the rehearsels with the new bandmembers started, or when the recording sessions for Zeitgeist started? 22 May 2007 Paris, first time playing live?

      My first shot would be: Smashing Pumpkins is a band concept, and a band needs more than 1 person to exist (that’s another reason why Hope can never make the startdate of the Pumpkins). So when Jimmy said yes to Billy the Pumpkins were reborn, in my opinion. Who knows when this was exactly, by the way? Probably already in 2005 somewhere? And are there people with other opinions?

    • #2703

      Arthur
      Spectator

      Some extra info, Cool As Ice Cream.

      Hope was (re-)recorded in Spring 1992 @ Soundworks Studio Chicago (The Smashing Pumpkins Recording Sessions Version 3.2 – August 2000 (compiled and maintained by: Jesse Miller), this info can be found on SPFC.org also), and that version was put on the 2000 promo Still Becoming Apart (and on the Pisces Iscariot + Friends tape). So it won’t get a direct 1986 link on the SPfreaks website anyway. And SPFC.org states about Hope: \"Confirmed as an old (1985-86) pre-TSP demo, based on its presence on Marked demo tape.\". Though I have not seen that tape around (it’s probably only rumoured?), based on this information I would make Hope a Marked tune that was adopted by the Pumpkins just like Spiteface and Sun (Death Of A Mind).

      I Fall still stands out being a full Smashing Pumpkins song, recorded (1987), performed live (1988) & \"released\" (1989) by Smashing Pumpkins members alone, all flagged with the name Smashing Pumpkins. All this is confirmed by Billy Corgan himself, as we all know by now. In my opinion there is only 1 conclusion: technically speaking the Smashing Pumpkins exists since 1987.

    • #2704

      a little off topic, or is this argument beginning to sound a bit like the abortion and foetus debate again? is a foetus a ‘alive’ at conception, or when it’s heart starts beating etc.
      see the similarity?
      just a peculiar analogy i noticed :lol:

    • #2705

      a little off topic, or is this argument beginning to sound a bit like the abortion and foetus debate again? is a foetus a ‘alive’ at conception, or when it’s heart starts beating etc.
      see the similarity?
      just a peculiar analogy i noticed :lol:[/quote:1b97e9oj]
      whahahaha!!! :lol: get arthur down on the floor man! but anyhow i agree to me sp exists since 1987 also, so i’m with ya arthur

    • #2706

      Arthur
      Spectator

      Haha thanks guys, for being supportive and most of all being critical. Actually I learn the most from people like Smiley and Cool As Ice Cream, they keep me sharp and make me look into things once more. I really hope people like Smiley and Cool As Ice Cream are around to \"bug\" me with their opinions. I’m not afraid to make excuses when I made an obvious mistake. In this matter however, the more I think about it, the more fundamentalist I’m becoming. :P

      Little funny sidenote for you people: I have a framed page of the Chicago Reader December 8, 2000 (page 15) at home. It is a full page Metro ad saying \"On behalf of Chicago and your fans worldwide thanks for an incredible thirteen years, Metro\". Think of it, Dec. 1987 – Dec. 2000 is EXACTLY 13 years…

    • #2707

      I still think this is just a matter of taste. You consider I Fall the start of the Pumpkins because two members recorded a song together and later released it on a Pumpkins tape. Hope does not count, because Billy recorded it solo, and because they never played it live.

      This seems a bit arbitrary to me. A lot of Pumpkins songs were recorded by Billy Corgan alone, or were never played live. (Would you change your mind and consider the Pumpkins birthyear to be 1986 if they had played Hope live?)

      I could say I agree, or disagree, and that would be it. There isn’t much to discuss, in my opinion.

      Because I find it nothing more than a matter of taste, I don’t really care if people consider 1987 or 1988 to be the start of the Pumpkins. I think everyone says 1988 because that’s when the band was formed and when they started playing together as a 4-piece. If you want to take 1987 for all the reasons you mentioned, that is fine as well.

      I also get the feeling that Billy doesn’t feel like mentioning that the Pumpkins originally had another drummer, so he leaves that out of the band’s history on purpose. Letting the band start in 1988 with him and James and a drum machine, later adding D’arcy and Jimmy, is probably very convenient for him.
      And if you consider everything before 1988 not to be the Pumpkins, it isn’t even a lie.

      Either way, I agree with the fact that no website has correct recording info on I Fall: even spfc.org still says it was recorded in 1988. (They do mention that the early recording info is speculative, so I guess we can’t blame them.)
      Good job! Go spfreaks!

    • #2708

      Hope does not count, because Billy recorded it solo, and because they never played it live. This seems a bit arbitrary to me. A lot of Pumpkins songs were recorded by Billy Corgan alone, or were never played live. (Would you change your mind and consider the Pumpkins birthyear to be 1986 if they had played Hope live?)[/quote:2vxpw0e9]
      wasn’t hope a marked track anyway on some rumoured tape?

      And if you consider everything before 1988 not to be the Pumpkins, it isn’t even a lie.[/quote:2vxpw0e9]
      true cool. i never thought of billy telling us lies, only not to be too outspoken about some things like ron being in the band and so on. but he couldn’t deny it anyway anymore as i found pics on here from the never ever changing …uhmmm… wait, let me look that one up… nothing ever changes i mean, that tape. it’s gots ron name on it!

Viewing 24 reply threads

The forum ‘General’ is closed to new topics and replies.