PDA

View Full Version : Alice in Chains- A Looking In View



kretz
06-29-2009, 07:41 PM
Edited out download link now that its on iTunes. Brand new Alice in Chains song, even without Layne, still amazing, definitely check it out.

TallGuyCM
06-29-2009, 10:05 PM
Don't think you're supposed to do that.

kretz
06-29-2009, 11:13 PM
K edited out the link now that it's on iTunes.

PassiveTheory
06-30-2009, 12:11 AM
No.

TallGuyCM
06-30-2009, 12:54 AM
No.

You realize you can admit that there was good music written before 2001, right? You won't lose all your cred, I promise.

PassiveTheory
06-30-2009, 01:14 AM
Oh I know. But as someone who loved Dirt while in middle school, it sickens me to see this bastardization of a band that should have remained dead.

dorkfish
06-30-2009, 01:15 AM
I wish they could have convinced Mark Lanegan to fill in for Layne.

TallGuyCM
06-30-2009, 01:17 AM
Oh I know. But as someone who loved Dirt while in middle school, it sickens me to see this bastardization of a band that should have remained dead.

In that case, we see eye to eye then. Although Jerry did sing a massive amount of vocals in the band, so it's nowhere near as bad as, say, SUBLIME GETTING READY TO TOUR WITH A NEW LEAD SINGER. :poo

superfiction
06-30-2009, 08:00 AM
did you guys actually listen to it? its not terrible. granted its not great. but its passible. ill probably check out the album out of curiosity but yeah no way im buying it

TallGuyCM
06-30-2009, 09:51 AM
Oh yeah they're playing the Avalon on 9/20 as well.

Drinkey McDrinkerstein
06-30-2009, 10:37 AM
In that case, we see eye to eye then. Although Jerry did sing a massive amount of vocals in the band, so it's nowhere near as bad as, say, SUBLIME GETTING READY TO TOUR WITH A NEW LEAD SINGER. :poo

this isn't Jerry on lead vocals though, it is new singer William Duvall

TallGuyCM
06-30-2009, 10:59 AM
True, but Jerry sang more harmonies and contributed more vocals than any other lead guitarist I can think of from that era. My main point is that yeah, it sucks that they continue as a band but no, it's not as blasphemous as if there was a Nirvana without Kurt or a Pearl Jam without Eddie.

Drinkey McDrinkerstein
06-30-2009, 11:30 AM
i'm actually willing to give it a chance...a buddy of mine went to one of their shows last year and said it was great. i'm also hearing good things about this song, but haven't had a chance to listen to it yet.

kretz
06-30-2009, 12:16 PM
You can all download it for free on aliceinchains.com. It's the most rocking song I've heard this year, I miss Layne, but DuVall is solid.

higgybaby23
06-30-2009, 12:28 PM
Why? WHy? WHY DO MUSICIANS HAVE TO BE SO FUCKING GREEDY?

It's so simple. If they care so much about music, then change the name of the fucking band!! The only reason they continue to use a band name after part of the band is dead is for MONEY. They want to put asses in those seats and milk the loyal fans that got them there.

Alice In Chains was my first concert ever. They were touring on Dirt. It was a night I will never forget. Without Layne, it is not Alice In Chains. I don't care how much of the music Jerry was responsible for. The Doors, Queen, Sublime, INX, the list goes on....c'mon people get a clue. It disgraces your musical legacy by being so greedy.

kretz
06-30-2009, 01:03 PM
Has anybody listened to the song?

TallGuyCM
06-30-2009, 01:09 PM
Why? WHy? WHY DO MUSICIANS HAVE TO BE SO FUCKING GREEDY?

It's so simple. If they care so much about music, then change the name of the fucking band!! The only reason they continue to use a band name after part of the band is dead is for MONEY. They want to put asses in those seats and milk the loyal fans that got them there.

Alice In Chains was my first concert ever. They were touring on Dirt. It was a night I will never forget. Without Layne, it is not Alice In Chains. I don't care how much of the music Jerry was responsible for. The Doors, Queen, Sublime, INX, the list goes on....c'mon people get a clue. It disgraces your musical legacy by being so greedy.

I agree 100%. But at the same time, look at what happened to AC/DC after Bon Scott died. They weren't the same, but they put out what many would argue is their finest album (Back in Black) after they hired a new singer.

I was too young to remember if there was any controversy surrounding Sammy Hagar filling David Lee Roth's shoes in Van Halen, but then again Sammy's a terrible douche so that's not really the same thing.

higgybaby23
06-30-2009, 01:18 PM
AC/DC are definitely exceptions to the rule, but I felt Van Halen was ruined by Hagar. Even my grade school mind cringed at the sound of 5150.

I would be willing or even eager to hear new music from the surviving members of some of these bands. I just don't understand why they insist on clinging to a bygone name.

The best example I can think of is New Order. They were smart enough and brave enough to change the Joy Division name. Some people who like and listen to New Order never realize that the band used to be Joy Division.

kretz
06-30-2009, 03:18 PM
Layne is one of my favorite singers EVER so obviously I miss him, but Jerry was the principle songwriter for Alice and wrote most of the lyrics, over half per album, up until Tripod where Layne wrote all of his own lyrics. Keeping the AIC name isn't nearly as bad as if say Soundgarden did a reunion tour/album without Chris Cornell (principle songwriter).

Also this song sounds amazing, DuVall does a great job on vocals, at the 5:52 and 4:30 marks he sounds just like Layne. I like that the Alice in Chains name/legacy is still alive.

kreutz2112
06-30-2009, 03:33 PM
Jerry should have handled all vocals and they should have toured as a 3 piece. Or better yet, Jerry should make another solo album, tour and play the handful of AIC songs he was playing when he toured for his first 2 solo albums. I have seen him 3 times and all were excellent shows. The third show he played "Whale and Wasp" FUCKING WHALE AND WASP.

psycobetabuckdown
06-30-2009, 03:52 PM
The best example I can think of is New Order. They were smart enough and brave enough to change the Joy Division name. Some people who like and listen to New Order never realize that the band used to be Joy Division.

Case in point: I didn't know that until you told me. I'm somewhat familiar with New Order's music but have only heard a song or two by Joy Division.

Do people think the remaining members of Pink Floyd should be able to tour as Pink Floyd if they decide to? What about Led Zeppelin?

I think most boardies would answer yes; it would seem people only seem to care when it's a dead or departed vocalist. Then again, Roger Waters was a departed vocalist back when they did that Pulse show, was that Pink Floyd? I still think most boardies would answer yes.

Where is the line? Would it be okay for Alice in Chains to simply tour as a nostalgia act like Journey, as long as they don't make any new music? Or is the outrage because they have proceeded to record with a new vocalist?

I think it should be taken on a case-by-case basis. Queen made numerous albums and was hugely successful under Freddie Mercury, so it's not Queen without him. However, Metallica without its original bassist is arguably still Metallica because the bassist wasn't the focus of the music.

In the case of AIC, I think it's okay because Jerry was a primary singer and songwriter in the band. Although I'd prefer he become lead singer and make Duvall a backup man.

sonnyboy11
06-30-2009, 06:44 PM
Case in point: I didn't know that until you told me. I'm somewhat familiar with New Order's music but have only heard a song or two by Joy Division.

Both bands have amazing material. Joy Division and New Order were more about a sound than a need to be indentified as unique bands.

Do people think the remaining members of Pink Floyd should be able to tour as Pink Floyd if they decide to? What about Led Zeppelin?

Artistically? Well... Pink Floyd if Waters/Gilmour were to kiss and make up I could maybe see it. But Zeppelin without Bonzo- it's hard for me to think of them as Led Zeppelin. I have found the answer to this particular question to be very subjective.

Where is the line? Would it be okay for Alice in Chains to simply tour as a nostalgia act like Journey, as long as they don't make any new music? Or is the outrage because they have proceeded to record with a new vocalist?

The line is when ELO goes on tour calling themselves ELO WITHOUT Jeff Lynne who wrote, sang and produced all their material. There's your line.

I think it should be taken on a case-by-case basis. Queen made numerous albums and was hugely successful under Freddie Mercury, so it's not Queen without him. However, Metallica without its original bassist is arguably still Metallica because the bassist wasn't the focus of the music.

Spot on.

In the case of AIC, I think it's okay because Jerry was a primary singer and songwriter in the band. Although I'd prefer he become lead singer and make Duvall a backup man.

Not sure that Jerry has the chops to sing lead anymore. He probably thought that people expected the Alice In Chains 'brand' to have a lead singer. But I mostly agree with you. Good post.

TallGuyCM
07-01-2009, 01:28 AM
^ Good post, just as good of a rebuttal as well. I really think the line is when the primary figure in the band is replaced by a nobody. Like Blind Melon did last year, Shannon Hoon was the heart and soul of that band and Trevor sounded similar but obviously didn't quite gel.

Then on the flip side, you have situations like the laughable reincarnation of Filter (who wasn't more than a product of their era, much like Silverchair), who I saw at the Roxy last summer. The only original member still intact was Richard Patrick who had a bunch of hacks playing with him. So if only 1/4 original members are present, can you still call them Filter? Another question arises...

higgybaby23
07-01-2009, 07:36 AM
I agree that each group should be judged on a case by case basis. You would think that common sense would prevail, but for some reason(MONEY) it doesn't.

I wonder what the deceased band members would say if they could see some of the bullshit that has been pulled.

I'm willing to give the new AIC a listen, but it will always bug me that they call themselves by that name.

djandrews25
07-01-2009, 08:29 AM
People need to open their minds and not be so quick to take a shit on someone's art. Just listen to something else.

paganman7
07-01-2009, 08:48 AM
This single is fantastic, and DuVall is a perfect...PERFECT replacement for Staley.

Have any of you assholes even seen them live with DuVall?

Fuck's sake, man.

djandrews25
07-01-2009, 09:25 AM
This single is fantastic, and DuVall is a perfect...PERFECT replacement for Staley.

Have any of you assholes even seen them live with DuVall?

Fuck's sake, man.

Agreed. The band still sounds good to me, and when they come around i will pay to see them.

psycobetabuckdown
07-01-2009, 09:48 AM
Then on the flip side, you have situations like the laughable reincarnation of Filter (who wasn't more than a product of their era, much like Silverchair), who I saw at the Roxy last summer. The only original member still intact was Richard Patrick who had a bunch of hacks playing with him. So if only 1/4 original members are present, can you still call them Filter? Another question arises...

I agree about Filter and Silverchair being a product of their era but I actually like the newer Silverchair stuff and I think they've escaped the 90s pretty handily. Filter, on the other hand, I wasted money on their reunion album, which was pretty awful. I thought they reformed all the original members for that though.

To most people, the 25% Smashing Pumpkins aren't really the Pumpkins, and I agree, but I also agree with Jimmy when he says Billy has the right to use the name. Having the right doesn't mean he should though...


This single is fantastic, and DuVall is a perfect...PERFECT replacement for Staley.

Have any of you assholes even seen them live with DuVall?

Fuck's sake, man.

I haven't heard the single or seen them live, but this will probably change at Epicenter, so I am looking forward to not being an asshole this August.

btw, I think if they had picked up Duvall in 2003 or something right after Staley died, and continued to tour and record as AIC, it wouldn't be as much of a problem for fans. But if I recall correctly they were going to drop the name and then in 2005 or -6 they suddenly said fuck it, let's get a new singer and use the name again.

psycobetabuckdown
09-29-2009, 08:02 PM
Legal stream of AIC's new album for one week:
http://music.aol.com/new-releases-full-cds/#/5

I'm really not an AIC fanboy but I do like this so far, I'm 4 songs into it. Much better than anything Pearl Jam has done in a while, for what it's worth.