Dean and Robert are Shameful

[STEAK]

Lots of fans do believe they know what's best for the band as they are saying, "The band should..." It doesn't make sense to admit they are disagreeing with the choices, but that the suggestions are not what they think is best. Of course people are suggesting what they think is best. That's what people do. Either the fans are making suggestions for what they think is best for the band, or are trying to sabotage the band with the suggestion, which is it? When people say, "They should not continue as STP," what is that sentiment based off of if not them thinking what is best for the band?

Fans disagreeing with these recent choices are in a sense disagreeing with the NEW changes and NEW direction of "STP" (despite STP being dead since 2013).

It's not about what fans think is best, it's more about fans not wanting to see something they loved for all these years be run into the ground by the leftover band mates who think they can do it all themselves.

How can the choice to move forward with STP ignore the music/legacy of STP? It actually is doing exactly the opposite. Continuing with something is not ignoring it.

Easy.  If they continued on like Queen, and played shows with talented singers, highlighting the STP catalog, that could be considered honoring the band and it's legacy to an extent.  But once they claim to want to continue making new "STP" records... that's where it falls apart.

Scott contributed more than any other single member of the band. He wrote practically every STP song, and was the voice of the band. He was a prolific singer/songwriter, and to think the others could duplicate that or do it themselves is absurd.  Just the same as Scott wouldn't be able to duplicate their instrumentals or write the music like they could.

If the DeLeos/Eric died in an accident, or Scott fired them, do you really think Scott would continue on with a lesser band still calling himself STP like nothing has changed? 

Their relationships with one another are irrelevant? Incorrect. It obviously takes a quality relationship between every member of the band to make quality music. How can their relationship be "irrelevant" when it was their bad relationship that cancelled tours, cancelled albums, and cancelled shows? Do you think Dean is saying the things he is now because their relationship was so good?

Their volatile relationship was part of who they are. Just like most relationships/partnerships, they all have their ups & downs... and in this case the end result was six STP albums. Sure, if things were better there could have been more, but the ups & downs made them who they were and contributed to the music. Hell, look at Scott's biography... plenty of ups & downs that contributed to his writing & singing (as well as the bad stuff too).

It's irrelevant in that you have to take the good with the bad.

You say, "Choices that entirely ignore the music & legacy of STP, in favor of money" And then you also say, "So rather than actually "moving on" and trying again on their own merits, they chose to live in STP's past." You cannot live in STP's past while also ignoring the music and legacy.

 They're living in the past by playing the same old greatest hits nostalgic set list. They aren't doing it because they're passionate about playing those songs for the millionth time. They're doing it purely because it will net them more money than attempting another 'Talk Show', 'AoA', 'CheSTP', or any other new band they'd try.

 They're selling out and going through the motions with whoever they can get to sing for them five nights a week.

[CoconutBackwards]

Lots of fans do believe they know what's best for the band as they are saying, "The band should..." It doesn't make sense to admit they are disagreeing with the choices, but that the suggestions are not what they think is best. Of course people are suggesting what they think is best. That's what people do. Either the fans are making suggestions for what they think is best for the band, or are trying to sabotage the band with the suggestion, which is it? When people say, "They should not continue as STP," what is that sentiment based off of if not them thinking what is best for the band?

Fans disagreeing with these recent choices are in a sense disagreeing with the NEW changes and NEW direction of "STP" (despite STP being dead since 2013).

It's not about what fans think is best, it's more about fans not wanting to see something they loved for all these years be run into the ground by the leftover band mates who think they can do it all themselves.

How can the choice to move forward with STP ignore the music/legacy of STP? It actually is doing exactly the opposite. Continuing with something is not ignoring it.

Easy.  If they continued on like Queen, and played shows with talented singers, highlighting the STP catalog, that could be considered honoring the band and it's legacy to an extent.  But once they claim to want to continue making new "STP" records... that's where it falls apart.

Scott contributed more than any other single member of the band. He wrote practically every STP song, and was the voice of the band. He was a prolific singer/songwriter, and to think the others could duplicate that or do it themselves is absurd.  Just the same as Scott wouldn't be able to duplicate their instrumentals or write the music like they could.

If the DeLeos/Eric died in an accident, or Scott fired them, do you really think Scott would continue on with a lesser band still calling himself STP like nothing has changed? 

Their relationships with one another are irrelevant? Incorrect. It obviously takes a quality relationship between every member of the band to make quality music. How can their relationship be "irrelevant" when it was their bad relationship that cancelled tours, cancelled albums, and cancelled shows? Do you think Dean is saying the things he is now because their relationship was so good?

Their volatile relationship was part of who they are. Just like most relationships/partnerships, they all have their ups & downs... and in this case the end result was six STP albums. Sure, if things were better there could have been more, but the ups & downs made them who they were and contributed to the music. Hell, look at Scott's biography... plenty of ups & downs that contributed to his writing & singing (as well as the bad stuff too).

It's irrelevant in that you have to take the good with the bad.

You say, "Choices that entirely ignore the music & legacy of STP, in favor of money" And then you also say, "So rather than actually "moving on" and trying again on their own merits, they chose to live in STP's past." You cannot live in STP's past while also ignoring the music and legacy.

 They're living in the past by playing the same old greatest hits nostalgic set list. They aren't doing it because they're passionate about playing those songs for the millionth time. They're doing it purely because it will net them more money than attempting another 'Talk Show', 'AoA', 'CheSTP', or any other new band they'd try.

 They're selling out and going through the motions with whoever they can get to sing for them five nights a week.

I'd like some proof of this.  I'm guessing "wrote every song" doesn't mean to you what it means to me? 

[loungefly90]

Who wrote the songs is a complicated argument. For most of the songs, Scott wrote the lyrics and the melodies. However, most music was written by Robert and Dean. Therefore, it was a team effort. I guess writing the songs in this case means only writing the lyrics? Scott has admitted over and over he sucks on guitar and most instruments. So, how could he have written their songs?

[nat]

Apparently if you're a musician, the term "songwriter" only refers to people who write the music for the instruments. You're not a songwriter if you just write lyrics, music for the melodies, do arrangements, etc. At least, that's what I learned from the people on this board.

To me, a "songwriter" is just the opposite-- the person who writes the lyics, melodies, and arranges the song is much more of a "songwriter" than someone who comes up with a riff. In this context, I've always considered the primary "songwriter" in STP who wrote most/all of the songs to be Scott Weiland.

To me, a "song" is something that is "sung." You can have a song without instruments. I'd consider the person who wrote those words to be the "songwriter." I don't refer to musical pieces without words as "songs," I refer to them as "instrumentals."

To bring it all home, I believe this is the spirit in which STEAK meant Scott wrote all the songs. And I completely agree.

But what do I know, I'm just a dumb music fan.

[Pingfah]

Well, boiling Robert Deleo's input into STP's songs down to "comes up with a riff" IS about the dumbest thing I've heard today.

[nat]

Well, boiling Robert Deleo's input into STP's songs down to "comes up with a riff" IS about the dumbest thing I've heard today.

Good. I'm making a point-- so many people marginalize Scott's contributions to the music. Glad you were able to see how ridiculous it is from the other side.

[STEAK]

Who wrote the songs is a complicated argument. For most of the songs, Scott wrote the lyrics and the melodies. However, most music was written by Robert and Dean. Therefore, it was a team effort. I guess writing the songs in this case means only writing the lyrics? Scott has admitted over and over he sucks on guitar and most instruments. So, how could he have written their songs?

It's not that complicated. 

The DeLeos & Eric wrote basically all the music for STP, where Scott wrote almost all the lyrics, then contributed to the melodies & arrangements.  There were a few songs where it wasn't as even of a split, but for the most part, three made the music, while the other wrote the lyrics AND sang it.

Like I alluded to earlier.... Scott contributed more than any one of them. After the songs are written, a very talented guitarist, bass player, or drummer could replicate those songs with little difference; but nobody could replicate Scott's voice.

Apparently if you're a musician, the term "songwriter" only refers to people who write the music for the instruments. You're not a songwriter if you just write lyrics, music for the melodies, do arrangements, etc. At least, that's what I learned from the people on this board.

To me, a "songwriter" is just the opposite-- the person who writes the lyics, melodies, and arranges the song is much more of a "songwriter" than someone who comes up with a riff. In this context, I've always considered the primary "songwriter" in STP who wrote most/all of the songs to be Scott Weiland.

To me, a "song" is something that is "sung." You can have a song without instruments. I'd consider the person who wrote those words to be the "songwriter." I don't refer to musical pieces without words as "songs," I refer to them as "instrumentals."

To bring it all home, I believe this is the spirit in which STEAK meant Scott wrote all the songs. And I completely agree.

But what do I know, I'm just a dumb music fan.

Well, I want to agree with you, but apparently to the DeLeos & some people on this board, "fans" aren't allowed to have opinions.

[loungefly90]

STEAK, who said you weren't allowed to have an opinion? Otherwise, what is the purpose of this forum?

[The Legacy]

i just think that stp had an zeppelin esque legacy and mystique about them at one point. They were pure artistry and after the firing it definitely became less about art and more about money and clinging to relevance. I can't criticize the guys for doing what they want but i will say i think its destructive to the legacy and taints the whole image of the art. The fact that these songs that were considered untouchable by me are being done karaoke style over and over and radio shows are making a game of it by having their crew members make submissions and playing them on the radio as a way to get laughs just rubs me the wrong way and feels like pissing on the mona lisa. For this i hold the deleos and kretz responsible which has made me lose respect for them. big time.

[foou33]

After the songs are written, a very talented guitarist, bass player, or drummer could replicate those songs with little difference; but nobody could replicate Scott's voice.

so I guess Hendrix wasn't that special after all then? I mean, lots of guitarists can play just like him, therefore what he created wasn't that special. Just because you can copy someone else's creation doesn't make you anything.

To me, a "songwriter" is just the opposite-- the person who writes the lyics, melodies, and arranges the song is much more of a "songwriter" than someone who comes up with a riff. In this context, I've always considered the primary "songwriter" in STP who wrote most/all of the songs to be Scott Weiland.

A lot of the songs without the other 3 would have just been vocal tracks, some even less than that. You're telling me ILS would sound the same with a simple chord progression behind it? That guitar riff is just as essential as the vocals.

[UnclePeppi]

It looks like many of you have missed the point of my post. But others have not, so thank you.


This thread is not about whether the rest of STP should move on as STP or not. I have an opinion on that but that's for a different thread. This is about the way they are composing themselves in the aftermath of Scott's death.


The Atlanta video they released as a tribute to Scott had a somber, respectful tone, which is how you would expect these guys to come across after Scott passed, having grown up together as a band of "brothers" for so many years.


Anyway it all just rubs me the wrong way. Especially Dean. Cracking a joke about killing their singer? Come on man. I've been following STP since the beginning and this is hard to see.

[loungefly90]

Let me guess: the people who did not miss the point of the post agreed with you, and the people who did miss the point (like myself) believe Dean and the rest of the guys can have any opinion they want?


God forbid the thread go in a different direction as most threads do in this forum, or if someone else pointed something out. I didn't see any guidelines in this forum that we are only allowed to discuss the points brought up at the very beginning. I addressed Dean's comments and then moved on. Dean's comments are certainly intertwined with their decision to move on as well. He feels righteous now in many ways as this is a fresh start for him, which is why he is saying stupid things. I am of the opinion that he could not be more glad that Scott is gone.


Dean's comments rubbed me the wrong way too and I also wish for more stuff like the somber tribute video, which we received. I agree that after 25 years of being with Scott that a seven minute video is beyond ridiculous. And I highly doubt at this point they are even going to release more original STP-era stuff, but will just continue with the new STP like nothing happened. That rubs me the wrong way too.  But, if you know anything about Dean's personality and with proof of old interviews he's done in the past, he has not only said bad things about Scott, but has made plenty of off color jokes. If you want him to be more sensitive like Robert or Eric, he does not seem to be built that way.

[Blue]

The context of the quote is dealing with mentally disturbed people applying for the job... It's got nothing to do with Scott.The joke is off color, and kind of tasteless, but seeing EVERYTHING they ever say as a veiled shot at Scott is pretty stupid.


If you want to see how they feel about Scott's passing, here's a video of Dean on the verge of tears talking about Scott's death:https://youtu.be/KNEiZaarfJM?t=12m17s

[UnclePeppi]

loungefly - I don't have time to go back and read the posts but you sound pretty reasonable so I doubt I was referring to you. Seems like we actually agree.

This is definitely not about Scott Weiland vs Robert/Dean to me. I'm an STP fan and equally admire each member of the (real) band. I could not get myself to ever enjoy Velvet Revolver because Scott was fronting another band. I'll give you another example. I remember around 2000 STP was on Howard Stern and somehow Dave Coutts' name was brought up. Howard mentioned that he thought Scott would have done a better job, etc. etc. Scott's reply was something along the lines of "yeah he blew". To me that was really disrespectful and rubbed me the wrong way.

Blue - You know perspectives can be interesting man. I actually saw that interview and unlike you, I came away with a different opinion of Dean's demeanor. It bothered me that when they were discussing Scott, Dean abruptly changed the subject, turning it into a joke that everyone laughed at. It all seemed very disrespectful.

1999-2002 were the golden days of STP. Go listen to the banter between Scott and Dean when they went out on that radio tour in 2000, particularly the one in Southern Studios. There was a lot of love back then. Just purely from a humanistic standpoint, forgetting about being a fan of the band, I am really put off by Dean and Robert's composure in the months after Scott passed. They definitely have a chip on their shoulder. Go back and look at the KROQ interview after STP played with Chester for the first time live. The host asked about Scott, and they behaved like giddy little school girls. That's not how professionals compose themselves.

[CagedTiger]

I enjoy Dean Deleo's music with STP but as a person he comes off as a complete douche... During CheSTP he took every opportunity he could to bash Scott in interviews like a bitter ex (sometimes with Chester himself joining in) despite the fact Scott didn't bad mouth them once in his interviews. When Scott passed I had hoped Dean would be more mature & respectful but clearly that isn't the case. I'm not expecting him to completely sugarcoat his experience of working with Scott but these jokes and distasteful comments in EVERY interview since 2013 are uncalled for, even more so now that Scott is dead. At this point I don't really see how there's any excuse for his behaviour.