Dean + Chester Fuse Interview - some pretty direct comments from Dean

[Chris Pepper]

I had no idea that "Stone Temple Pilots" was Dean's boy hood dream, or that he started the band himself, let alone the band is entirely HIS, and that he alone deserves it more than anyone else.

There's a big difference between "MINE" and "OURS", which he seems to have forgotten.  If his dream was to play music for a living then he should be thanking his brother for inviting him into the band, or Corey Hicock for leaving; without whom he'd be working a regular job.  But even despite all that, he's acting like Scott was holding him back from his childhood dream, which is ridiculous.  He was ONLY able to realize his dream in part due to Scott, so despite how things ended AFTER 20 YEARS, he should be thankful for that.  STP's success is the only thing that allowed him to continue his "dream".  But two attempts without Scott failed by comparison, and now he's back to milk the one thing that worked.  So this "fired up" sense of self-entitlement is bullshit.

The Deleos are so far removed from reality, it's ridiculous.  What has Dean ever done w/out Scott.  Nothing!  Even in this new incarnation, they perform songs that Scott wrote the lyrics/melodies too.  They'll never be anything w/out Scott, ever.  Must suck to realize what people are really thinking about you and no matter what you say or do you'll always be tied to S Weiland.  The Deleos will never detach from the S Weiland tit. 

[Chris Pepper]

Those who say Scott is the heart of STP would have a lot more credibility with me if they reacted similarly regarding any band member departure of a loved band. As I've said before, just because vocals are the most easily relatable and identifiable parts of a song don't make them the heart.

Too bad every song STP has written is credited to S Weiland.  Every single one.  It will never be his......ever.

Nope. Scott's only credit with "Words by", he's very RARELY been credited with the actual songwriting.

Songwriting credit is whatever the band wants it to be. Van Halen, for example, always gave credit to Alex Van Halen, Edward Van Halen, Michael Anthony, David Lee Roth/Sammy Hagar. Not sure royalties were split equally, but their attitude was that everyone contributed even if Sam/Dave and Ed were the driving force, so Ll got credit.


STP lists it individually by song. It's a band's prerogative.


For copyright purposes, though, lyrics are just as important as anything else.


To Blu'es point, it seems that solo Scott relies on a songwriting partnership. He got lots of help on 12B. Since then it's been Doug.

The point I was trying to make was that Scott is given credit in each song in STP's catalog.  100% of them.  Can't be said with any other member of the band.  Agreed that Scott does rely on a partnership, just like the Deleos do.  The difference, though, that Scott has found success outside STP and success has eluded the Deleos. 

[lovemachine97]

Those who say Scott is the heart of STP would have a lot more credibility with me if they reacted similarly regarding any band member departure of a loved band. As I've said before, just because vocals are the most easily relatable and identifiable parts of a song don't make them the heart.

Too bad every song STP has written is credited to S Weiland.  Every single one.  It will never be his......ever.

Nope. Scott's only credit with "Words by", he's very RARELY been credited with the actual songwriting.

Songwriting credit is whatever the band wants it to be. Van Halen, for example, always gave credit to Alex Van Halen, Edward Van Halen, Michael Anthony, David Lee Roth/Sammy Hagar. Not sure royalties were split equally, but their attitude was that everyone contributed even if Sam/Dave and Ed were the driving force, so Ll got credit.


STP lists it individually by song. It's a band's prerogative.


For copyright purposes, though, lyrics are just as important as anything else.


To Blu'es point, it seems that solo Scott relies on a songwriting partnership. He got lots of help on 12B. Since then it's been Doug.

The point I was trying to make was that Scott is given credit in each song in STP's catalog.  100% of them.  Can't be said with any other member of the band.  Agreed that Scott does rely on a partnership, just like the Deleos do.  The difference, though, that Scott has found success outside STP and success has eluded the Deleos. 

I get what you're trying to say. VR is a weird thing. Scott is very talented, but Slash is the "frontman" of that band, and the size of the GnR fan base ensured success. By contrast, Talk Show hired an unknown singer and Army of Anyone released a bad first single. Filter also isn't exactly at the same level as GnR.


Part of what you're saying, though, exists because Scott insisted on being the lyric writer. He said he couldn't maintain honesty if he was singing others' words. Dean, on the other hand, had no problem playing songs written by Kretz or his brother. At the end of the day, what was best won out. I wonder if any better melody or lyrical ideas were tossed by Scott because he wanted that to be his? Did the rest of the band, for example, have a better idea for the chorus to First Kiss On Mars that was rejected by Scott because he wanted it to be his (I know the DeLeos came up with some melodies, such as Interstate Love Song).

[ShaneC]

Those who say Scott is the heart of STP would have a lot more credibility with me if they reacted similarly regarding any band member departure of a loved band. As I've said before, just because vocals are the most easily relatable and identifiable parts of a song don't make them the heart.

Too bad every song STP has written is credited to S Weiland.  Every single one.  It will never be his......ever.

Nope. Scott's only credit with "Words by", he's very RARELY been credited with the actual songwriting.

Songwriting credit is whatever the band wants it to be. Van Halen, for example, always gave credit to Alex Van Halen, Edward Van Halen, Michael Anthony, David Lee Roth/Sammy Hagar. Not sure royalties were split equally, but their attitude was that everyone contributed even if Sam/Dave and Ed were the driving force, so Ll got credit.


STP lists it individually by song. It's a band's prerogative.


For copyright purposes, though, lyrics are just as important as anything else.


To Blu'es point, it seems that solo Scott relies on a songwriting partnership. He got lots of help on 12B. Since then it's been Doug.

The point I was trying to make was that Scott is given credit in each song in STP's catalog.  100% of them.  Can't be said with any other member of the band.  Agreed that Scott does rely on a partnership, just like the Deleos do.  The difference, though, that Scott has found success outside STP and success has eluded the Deleos. 

I hope he can find success again, without another big name in the band. I'm not so sure.

Obviously by big name, I don't mean Doug Grean.

[Chris Pepper]

Those who say Scott is the heart of STP would have a lot more credibility with me if they reacted similarly regarding any band member departure of a loved band. As I've said before, just because vocals are the most easily relatable and identifiable parts of a song don't make them the heart.

Too bad every song STP has written is credited to S Weiland.  Every single one.  It will never be his......ever.

Nope. Scott's only credit with "Words by", he's very RARELY been credited with the actual songwriting.

Songwriting credit is whatever the band wants it to be. Van Halen, for example, always gave credit to Alex Van Halen, Edward Van Halen, Michael Anthony, David Lee Roth/Sammy Hagar. Not sure royalties were split equally, but their attitude was that everyone contributed even if Sam/Dave and Ed were the driving force, so Ll got credit.


STP lists it individually by song. It's a band's prerogative.


For copyright purposes, though, lyrics are just as important as anything else.


To Blu'es point, it seems that solo Scott relies on a songwriting partnership. He got lots of help on 12B. Since then it's been Doug.

The point I was trying to make was that Scott is given credit in each song in STP's catalog.  100% of them.  Can't be said with any other member of the band.  Agreed that Scott does rely on a partnership, just like the Deleos do.  The difference, though, that Scott has found success outside STP and success has eluded the Deleos. 

I get what you're trying to say. VR is a weird thing. Scott is very talented, but Slash is the "frontman" of that band, and the size of the GnR fan base ensured success. By contrast, Talk Show hired an unknown singer and Army of Anyone released a bad first single. Filter also isn't exactly at the same level as GnR.


Part of what you're saying, though, exists because Scott insisted on being the lyric writer. He said he couldn't maintain honesty if he was singing others' words. Dean, on the other hand, had no problem playing songs written by Kretz or his brother. At the end of the day, what was best won out. I wonder if any better melody or lyrical ideas were tossed by Scott because he wanted that to be his? Did the rest of the band, for example, have a better idea for the chorus to First Kiss On Mars that was rejected by Scott because he wanted it to be his (I know the DeLeos came up with some melodies, such as Interstate Love Song).

It's the same argument for me w/ VR as it is with STP.  Scott made VR go.  There were other synergies going on including the Guitar Hero phenomena that was going on right then.  But at the end of the day Slither was an undeniably great rock tune and you had Slash/Duff and GnR and STP and they had a nice run.  Hence, my argument to get Chester, slap a name on it other than STP, and make a run with some great music.  Instead, the Deleos make a foolish decision IMO.  Because the discussion is not about the music or EP.  It's about Scott and STP legacy and everything else except the music.  It's a lose lose lose.  Sucks for Chester to have to be compared to Scott.  Sucks for the new music cause alot of fans will never accept it.  Sucks for the fans to have to hash out.  All so the Deleos can tour shitty casinos for the next few years??  Ugh.  Frustrating.

[VelvetLounngeFly]

Those who say Scott is the heart of STP would have a lot more credibility with me if they reacted similarly regarding any band member departure of a loved band. As I've said before, just because vocals are the most easily relatable and identifiable parts of a song don't make them the heart.

Too bad every song STP has written is credited to S Weiland.  Every single one.  It will never be his......ever.

Nope. Scott's only credit with "Words by", he's very RARELY been credited with the actual songwriting.

Songwriting credit is whatever the band wants it to be. Van Halen, for example, always gave credit to Alex Van Halen, Edward Van Halen, Michael Anthony, David Lee Roth/Sammy Hagar. Not sure royalties were split equally, but their attitude was that everyone contributed even if Sam/Dave and Ed were the driving force, so Ll got credit.


STP lists it individually by song. It's a band's prerogative.


For copyright purposes, though, lyrics are just as important as anything else.


To Blu'es point, it seems that solo Scott relies on a songwriting partnership. He got lots of help on 12B. Since then it's been Doug.

The point I was trying to make was that Scott is given credit in each song in STP's catalog.  100% of them.  Can't be said with any other member of the band.  Agreed that Scott does rely on a partnership, just like the Deleos do.  The difference, though, that Scott has found success outside STP and success has eluded the Deleos. 

I get what you're trying to say. VR is a weird thing. Scott is very talented, but Slash is the "frontman" of that band, and the size of the GnR fan base ensured success. By contrast, Talk Show hired an unknown singer and Army of Anyone released a bad first single. Filter also isn't exactly at the same level as GnR.


Part of what you're saying, though, exists because Scott insisted on being the lyric writer. He said he couldn't maintain honesty if he was singing others' words. Dean, on the other hand, had no problem playing songs written by Kretz or his brother. At the end of the day, what was best won out. I wonder if any better melody or lyrical ideas were tossed by Scott because he wanted that to be his? Did the rest of the band, for example, have a better idea for the chorus to First Kiss On Mars that was rejected by Scott because he wanted it to be his (I know the DeLeos came up with some melodies, such as Interstate Love Song).

It's the same argument for me w/ VR as it is with STP.  Scott made VR go.  There were other synergies going on including the Guitar Hero phenomena that was going on right then.  But at the end of the day Slither was an undeniably great rock tune and you had Slash/Duff and GnR and STP and they had a nice run.  Hence, my argument to get Chester, slap a name on it other than STP, and make a run with some great music.  Instead, the Deleos make a foolish decision IMO.  Because the discussion is not about the music or EP.  It's about Scott and STP legacy and everything else except the music.  It's a lose lose lose.  Sucks for Chester to have to be compared to Scott.  Sucks for the new music cause alot of fans will never accept it.  Sucks for the fans to have to hash out.  All so the Deleos can tour shitty casinos for the next few years??  Ugh.  Frustrating.

At the end of the day, honestly, from what I hear from friends, it's the fact that its Chester Bennington. My friends are casual STP fans, but some of them have a really good taste for rock music. To them, it seems like Chester is just an awful choice, and sort of makes them band seem like a karaoke act. They don't seem to care about them using the name; just the fact that its Chester.

I made a comment on here about how Chester just sounds so robotic, and there's really no soul or emotion when he sings these lyrics. What I mean by this, is that even though he sings in key, he's not really feeling the story behind the lyrics. That's what I hate about those American idol talent show people; they stand there and hit all these notes, yet completely ignore what the words mean. A perfect example of this, is when Scott sings the bridge part for Atlanta. He's not just hitting notes, but he's singing these words for what they mean. It's a bit hard to explain.

I watched a video from artisan news (same interview from above) except Chester was talking, and he said he really didnt care about the words.. Just the melodies and notes. That right there summed it all up for me.

[STP92]

Those who say Scott is the heart of STP would have a lot more credibility with me if they reacted similarly regarding any band member departure of a loved band. As I've said before, just because vocals are the most easily relatable and identifiable parts of a song don't make them the heart.

Too bad every song STP has written is credited to S Weiland.  Every single one.  It will never be his......ever.

Nope. Scott's only credit with "Words by", he's very RARELY been credited with the actual songwriting.

Songwriting credit is whatever the band wants it to be. Van Halen, for example, always gave credit to Alex Van Halen, Edward Van Halen, Michael Anthony, David Lee Roth/Sammy Hagar. Not sure royalties were split equally, but their attitude was that everyone contributed even if Sam/Dave and Ed were the driving force, so Ll got credit.


STP lists it individually by song. It's a band's prerogative.


For copyright purposes, though, lyrics are just as important as anything else.


To Blu'es point, it seems that solo Scott relies on a songwriting partnership. He got lots of help on 12B. Since then it's been Doug.

The point I was trying to make was that Scott is given credit in each song in STP's catalog.  100% of them.  Can't be said with any other member of the band.  Agreed that Scott does rely on a partnership, just like the Deleos do.  The difference, though, that Scott has found success outside STP and success has eluded the Deleos. 

I get what you're trying to say. VR is a weird thing. Scott is very talented, but Slash is the "frontman" of that band, and the size of the GnR fan base ensured success. By contrast, Talk Show hired an unknown singer and Army of Anyone released a bad first single. Filter also isn't exactly at the same level as GnR.


Part of what you're saying, though, exists because Scott insisted on being the lyric writer. He said he couldn't maintain honesty if he was singing others' words. Dean, on the other hand, had no problem playing songs written by Kretz or his brother. At the end of the day, what was best won out. I wonder if any better melody or lyrical ideas were tossed by Scott because he wanted that to be his? Did the rest of the band, for example, have a better idea for the chorus to First Kiss On Mars that was rejected by Scott because he wanted it to be his (I know the DeLeos came up with some melodies, such as Interstate Love Song).

It's the same argument for me w/ VR as it is with STP.  Scott made VR go.  There were other synergies going on including the Guitar Hero phenomena that was going on right then.  But at the end of the day Slither was an undeniably great rock tune and you had Slash/Duff and GnR and STP and they had a nice run.  Hence, my argument to get Chester, slap a name on it other than STP, and make a run with some great music.  Instead, the Deleos make a foolish decision IMO.  Because the discussion is not about the music or EP.  It's about Scott and STP legacy and everything else except the music.  It's a lose lose lose.  Sucks for Chester to have to be compared to Scott.  Sucks for the new music cause alot of fans will never accept it.  Sucks for the fans to have to hash out.  All so the Deleos can tour shitty casinos for the next few years??  Ugh.  Frustrating.

At the end of the day, honestly, from what I hear from friends, it's the fact that its Chester Bennington. My friends are casual STP fans, but some of them have a really good taste for rock music. To them, it seems like Chester is just an awful choice, and sort of makes them band seem like a karaoke act. They don't seem to care about them using the name; just the fact that its Chester.

I made a comment on here about how Chester just sounds so robotic, and there's really no soul or emotion when he sings these lyrics. What I mean by this, is that even though he sings in key, he's not really feeling the story behind the lyrics. That's what I hate about those American idol talent show people; they stand there and hit all these notes, yet completely ignore what the words mean. A perfect example of this, is when Scott sings the bridge part for Atlanta. He's not just hitting notes, but he's singing these words for what they mean. It's a bit hard to explain.

I watched a video from artisan news (same interview from above) except Chester was talking, and he said he really didnt care about the words.. Just the melodies and notes. That right there summed it all up for me.

I know exactly what you mean. In today's world, unfortunately, anyone who sings everything perfectly and hits every single note is at the forefront of the music industry. There are singers out there now like Matt Berninger of The National and Matt Schultz of Cage the Elephant, who don't have tremendous range or don't hit notes perfectly, but have emotion and conviction behind their vocals. They're the types of unique singers who would be turned down on shows like American Idol or The Voice.

[Chris Pepper]

Those who say Scott is the heart of STP would have a lot more credibility with me if they reacted similarly regarding any band member departure of a loved band. As I've said before, just because vocals are the most easily relatable and identifiable parts of a song don't make them the heart.

Too bad every song STP has written is credited to S Weiland.  Every single one.  It will never be his......ever.

Nope. Scott's only credit with "Words by", he's very RARELY been credited with the actual songwriting.

Songwriting credit is whatever the band wants it to be. Van Halen, for example, always gave credit to Alex Van Halen, Edward Van Halen, Michael Anthony, David Lee Roth/Sammy Hagar. Not sure royalties were split equally, but their attitude was that everyone contributed even if Sam/Dave and Ed were the driving force, so Ll got credit.


STP lists it individually by song. It's a band's prerogative.


For copyright purposes, though, lyrics are just as important as anything else.


To Blu'es point, it seems that solo Scott relies on a songwriting partnership. He got lots of help on 12B. Since then it's been Doug.

The point I was trying to make was that Scott is given credit in each song in STP's catalog.  100% of them.  Can't be said with any other member of the band.  Agreed that Scott does rely on a partnership, just like the Deleos do.  The difference, though, that Scott has found success outside STP and success has eluded the Deleos. 

I get what you're trying to say. VR is a weird thing. Scott is very talented, but Slash is the "frontman" of that band, and the size of the GnR fan base ensured success. By contrast, Talk Show hired an unknown singer and Army of Anyone released a bad first single. Filter also isn't exactly at the same level as GnR.


Part of what you're saying, though, exists because Scott insisted on being the lyric writer. He said he couldn't maintain honesty if he was singing others' words. Dean, on the other hand, had no problem playing songs written by Kretz or his brother. At the end of the day, what was best won out. I wonder if any better melody or lyrical ideas were tossed by Scott because he wanted that to be his? Did the rest of the band, for example, have a better idea for the chorus to First Kiss On Mars that was rejected by Scott because he wanted it to be his (I know the DeLeos came up with some melodies, such as Interstate Love Song).

It's the same argument for me w/ VR as it is with STP.  Scott made VR go.  There were other synergies going on including the Guitar Hero phenomena that was going on right then.  But at the end of the day Slither was an undeniably great rock tune and you had Slash/Duff and GnR and STP and they had a nice run.  Hence, my argument to get Chester, slap a name on it other than STP, and make a run with some great music.  Instead, the Deleos make a foolish decision IMO.  Because the discussion is not about the music or EP.  It's about Scott and STP legacy and everything else except the music.  It's a lose lose lose.  Sucks for Chester to have to be compared to Scott.  Sucks for the new music cause alot of fans will never accept it.  Sucks for the fans to have to hash out.  All so the Deleos can tour shitty casinos for the next few years??  Ugh.  Frustrating.

At the end of the day, honestly, from what I hear from friends, it's the fact that its Chester Bennington. My friends are casual STP fans, but some of them have a really good taste for rock music. To them, it seems like Chester is just an awful choice, and sort of makes them band seem like a karaoke act. They don't seem to care about them using the name; just the fact that its Chester.

I made a comment on here about how Chester just sounds so robotic, and there's really no soul or emotion when he sings these lyrics. What I mean by this, is that even though he sings in key, he's not really feeling the story behind the lyrics. That's what I hate about those American idol talent show people; they stand there and hit all these notes, yet completely ignore what the words mean. A perfect example of this, is when Scott sings the bridge part for Atlanta. He's not just hitting notes, but he's singing these words for what they mean. It's a bit hard to explain.

I watched a video from artisan news (same interview from above) except Chester was talking, and he said he really didnt care about the words.. Just the melodies and notes. That right there summed it all up for me.

Interesting take.

I'm not anti Chester so I'm not totally feeling that side of the argument.  It's definitely karaoke that I would never pay to see but not because of Chester.  It's more that the Deleos are fucking idiots and they always have been and they can't get out of their own way.  Then this decision is the cake topper, it's the most idiotic decision I've ever seen from them which is saying alot.  When you need an adult in the room you hope the Deleos provide the levity that Scott lacks but instead they go lower than Scott when you think it's impossible to do so.  I would've respected them so much more if they said, hey life's too short and we're never ever going to work with Scott again.  We've got Chester and we're gonna rock some new shit.  So come out and see us, we'll sprinkle in some STP and LP in the set and it'll be all good.  Instead, you get Dean getting all pissy, it's mine, mine, mine.  And Rob trying to be dignified and failing miserably and sounding like a bigger douche by the day.  And  poor Chester just trying to be above it all, probably thinking what the fuck did I just get myself into.   

[lovemachine97]

The Deleos are so far removed from reality, it's ridiculous.  What has Dean ever done w/out Scott.  Nothing!  Even in this new incarnation, they perform songs that Scott wrote the lyrics/melodies too.  They'll never be anything w/out Scott, ever.  Must suck to realize what people are really thinking about you and no matter what you say or do you'll always be tied to S Weiland.  The Deleos will never detach from the S Weiland tit. 

I feel like we've maintained some good dialogue here, and I don't want this to devolve, but the word I would use here would be "ludicrous."

What do you mean that the DeLeos have done "nothing" without Scott? Are we equating album sales with doing something? Most of the great artists of the last several centuries, then, would have done "nothing" by your definition because they weren't popular at the time they were creating it. Just because something sells a lot doesn't mean it is good. Similarly, just because something doesn't sell a lot doesn't mean it's not good.

Who cares if the guy singing now is mostly singing songs that Scott wrote the lyrics and (most of) the melodies to? I don't understand this logic. Why was this not a problem before? Did you have a problem the last 20 years when Scott sang the lines in Plush (whichever ones they are) that Eric wrote? What about Dean playing the guitar chords that Robert wrote. Should Dean have sat Plush out, Robert switch over to guitar, Eric (and not Scott) sing the words he wrote for Plush, and then pump the bass in since Robert can't play both at the same time? Should Robert have been sitting out Sour Girl since Dean wrote it and just have the bass pumped in from the album?

Of course not. Why? Because this is just getting silly. Chester's job in the band is to sing. It doesn't matter who wrote it, just like it doesn't matter who wrote the chords to Plush--Dean's job in the band is the guitar player and he plays the guitar live despite who wrote the guitar chords. Is Dean somehow less passionate about the song? Of course not. To the contrary, because everyone is involved in the songwriting process--despite who gets credit for what--Robert's contribution to Sour Girl is pretty important. What drives the beat of Sour Girl despite not officially being a "written" part? Rob's 8th note bass line. So he's legitimately contributing something to the process even if he isn't gettting "credit. This is a point I have been trying to make through all of this. All of the guys in the band do this for every song.

Chester is doing his vocal thing on melodies and lyrics he didn't write--just like Dean is when playing guitar on Plush--and he has contributed to 5 new songs, four of which have yet to be released.

[size=78%][[/size]quote author=Chris Pepper link=topic=9320.msg168926#msg168926 date=1379444491[size=78%]][/size]It's the same argument for me w/ VR as it is with STP.  Scott made VR go.  There were other synergies going on including the Guitar Hero phenomena that was going on right then.  But at the end of the day Slither was an undeniably great rock tune and you had Slash/Duff and GnR and STP and they had a nice run.  Hence, my argument to get Chester, slap a name on it other than STP, and make a run with some great music.  Instead, the Deleos make a foolish decision IMO.  Because the discussion is not about the music or EP.  It's about Scott and STP legacy and everything else except the music.  It's a lose lose lose.  Sucks for Chester to have to be compared to Scott.  Sucks for the new music cause alot of fans will never accept it.  Sucks for the fans to have to hash out.  All so the Deleos can tour shitty casinos for the next few years??  Ugh.  Frustrating.

Scott only made VR go in the sense that they were only missing a singer and they wanted one that could write songs and meshed well with what they wanted to do. Take Slash out of the equation and the band goes nowhere as well. Take Duff out of the equation and it's just "Slash's new band," not the bass player, drummer (albeit not the original drummer), and lead guitarist from GnR.

Yes, Slither is a great song, but so is It Doesn't Seem to Matter from Army of Anyone. Both groups had great songs.

I'm beginning to get the feeling that you've never studied music, played an instrument, recorded in a pro studio, or written songs. I don't understand how you can think the DeLeos are nothings that are riding Scott's coattails. To take another argument from earlier and turn it around, who would Scott have been without Dean? Would STP be what it is if Hickock had never left the band? Probably not.

Interesting take.
I'm not anti Chester so I'm not totally feeling that side of the argument.  It's definitely karaoke that I would never pay to see but not because of Chester.  It's more that the Deleos are fucking idiots and they always have been and they can't get out of their own way.  Then this decision is the cake topper, it's the most idiotic decision I've ever seen from them which is saying alot.  When you need an adult in the room you hope the Deleos provide the levity that Scott lacks but instead they go lower than Scott when you think it's impossible to do so.  I would've respected them so much more if they said, hey life's too short and we're never ever going to work with Scott again.  We've got Chester and we're gonna rock some new shit.  So come out and see us, we'll sprinkle in some STP and LP in the set and it'll be all good.  Instead, you get Dean getting all pissy, it's mine, mine, mine.  And Rob trying to be dignified and failing miserably and sounding like a bigger douche by the day.  And  poor Chester just trying to be above it all, probably thinking what the fuck did I just get myself into.   

I'll recall some quotes to the LA Times  when Talk Show was in town to open for Aerosmith:

"I've been on the road now for a few months, and I need a dose of my home life. . . . I need to be refueled. [During] the last few STP tours, we traveled around by jet and had our families with us--at least some of the time. Now it's just the band and our crew going stop to stop on a bus. The road is a wacky place, man. Sometimes it's not very replenishing to your soul...After STP, I have a real hard time being an opening act. I'm disillusioned by it. Let's face it--everyone comes out to see Aerosmith, not Talk Show...It's weird getting back to this situation after [releasing] three pretty successful records. I don't honestly know if I was fully ready for this."

I think it's pretty obvious what has happened here. After Scott derailed STP's plans the first time, they got a new name. It didn't take off, and they didn't like the life on the road after being used to the success of STP. When Scott derailed them another time, they got a "name" singer and it was essentially the same thing.

This time around, the 3/4 of STP who have had a lot to do with the success of the band--despite what you think--decided they weren't going to let 1/4 of STP dictate their lifestyle. Nope--they're taking the name and moving on. Not sure why this is A) a shock, or B) a problem, unless someone thinks that the only useful member of a band is the singer and also thinks Scott hasn't continually created expensive burdens for the other 3/4 of STP.

At the end of the day, honestly, from what I hear from friends, it's the fact that its Chester Bennington. My friends are casual STP fans, but some of them have a really good taste for rock music. To them, it seems like Chester is just an awful choice, and sort of makes them band seem like a karaoke act. They don't seem to care about them using the name; just the fact that its Chester.I made a comment on here about how Chester just sounds so robotic, and there's really no soul or emotion when he sings these lyrics. What I mean by this, is that even though he sings in key, he's not really feeling the story behind the lyrics. That's what I hate about those American idol talent show people; they stand there and hit all these notes, yet completely ignore what the words mean. A perfect example of this, is when Scott sings the bridge part for Atlanta. He's not just hitting notes, but he's singing these words for what they mean. It's a bit hard to explain. I watched a video from artisan news (same interview from above) except Chester was talking, and he said he really didnt care about the words.. Just the melodies and notes. That right there summed it all up for me.

I am not a Chester fan, but I think Robert and Dean are insanely talented at writing and at their instruments, so I will listen to them with any singer (just like I will listen to Scott's albums without them).

You are correct that there is often a certain immediacy when an artist sings their own song. But that doesn't mean that others cannot do it justice or can even improve on it (does Joe Cocker not sing with emotion when he covered Feelin' Alright or With a Little Help From My Friends?)

You don't necessarily have to have words to express emotion. Guitar players do it all the time. Let's not fool ourselves, though. Scott's lyrics have never been amazing, though he did get better as time went on. But I doubt this incarnation of the band will play Atlanta much, a song that is obviously close to Scott's heart. Hell, STP with Scott rarely played it.

I know exactly what you mean. In today's world, unfortunately, anyone who sings everything perfectly and hits every single note is at the forefront of the music industry. There are singers out there now like Matt Berninger of The National and Matt Schultz of Cage the Elephant, who don't have tremendous range or don't hit notes perfectly, but have emotion and conviction behind their vocals. They're the types of unique singers who would be turned down on shows like American Idol or The Voice.

It's not about being perfect, it's about not being terrible. Cornell isn't perfect, but he was terrible during his time in Audioslave. But he got sober and stopped smoking and sounds better today than he has in over ten years.

[Chris Pepper]

The Deleos are so far removed from reality, it's ridiculous.  What has Dean ever done w/out Scott.  Nothing!  Even in this new incarnation, they perform songs that Scott wrote the lyrics/melodies too.  They'll never be anything w/out Scott, ever.  Must suck to realize what people are really thinking about you and no matter what you say or do you'll always be tied to S Weiland.  The Deleos will never detach from the S Weiland tit. 

I feel like we've maintained some good dialogue here, and I don't want this to devolve, but the word I would use here would be "ludicrous."

What do you mean that the DeLeos have done "nothing" without Scott? Are we equating album sales with doing something? Most of the great artists of the last several centuries, then, would have done "nothing" by your definition because they weren't popular at the time they were creating it. Just because something sells a lot doesn't mean it is good. Similarly, just because something doesn't sell a lot doesn't mean it's not good.

Who cares if the guy singing now is mostly singing songs that Scott wrote the lyrics and (most of) the melodies to? I don't understand this logic. Why was this not a problem before? Did you have a problem the last 20 years when Scott sang the lines in Plush (whichever ones they are) that Eric wrote? What about Dean playing the guitar chords that Robert wrote. Should Dean have sat Plush out, Robert switch over to guitar, Eric (and not Scott) sing the words he wrote for Plush, and then pump the bass in since Robert can't play both at the same time? Should Robert have been sitting out Sour Girl since Dean wrote it and just have the bass pumped in from the album?

Of course not. Why? Because this is just getting silly. Chester's job in the band is to sing. It doesn't matter who wrote it, just like it doesn't matter who wrote the chords to Plush--Dean's job in the band is the guitar player and he plays the guitar live despite who wrote the guitar chords. Is Dean somehow less passionate about the song? Of course not. To the contrary, because everyone is involved in the songwriting process--despite who gets credit for what--Robert's contribution to Sour Girl is pretty important. What drives the beat of Sour Girl despite not officially being a "written" part? Rob's 8th note bass line. So he's legitimately contributing something to the process even if he isn't gettting "credit. This is a point I have been trying to make through all of this. All of the guys in the band do this for every song.

Chester is doing his vocal thing on melodies and lyrics he didn't write--just like Dean is when playing guitar on Plush--and he has contributed to 5 new songs, four of which have yet to be released.

[size=78%][[/size]quote author=Chris Pepper link=topic=9320.msg168926#msg168926 date=1379444491[size=78%]][/size]It's the same argument for me w/ VR as it is with STP.  Scott made VR go.  There were other synergies going on including the Guitar Hero phenomena that was going on right then.  But at the end of the day Slither was an undeniably great rock tune and you had Slash/Duff and GnR and STP and they had a nice run.  Hence, my argument to get Chester, slap a name on it other than STP, and make a run with some great music.  Instead, the Deleos make a foolish decision IMO.  Because the discussion is not about the music or EP.  It's about Scott and STP legacy and everything else except the music.  It's a lose lose lose.  Sucks for Chester to have to be compared to Scott.  Sucks for the new music cause alot of fans will never accept it.  Sucks for the fans to have to hash out.  All so the Deleos can tour shitty casinos for the next few years??  Ugh.  Frustrating.

Scott only made VR go in the sense that they were only missing a singer and they wanted one that could write songs and meshed well with what they wanted to do. Take Slash out of the equation and the band goes nowhere as well. Take Duff out of the equation and it's just "Slash's new band," not the bass player, drummer (albeit not the original drummer), and lead guitarist from GnR.

Yes, Slither is a great song, but so is It Doesn't Seem to Matter from Army of Anyone. Both groups had great songs.

I'm beginning to get the feeling that you've never studied music, played an instrument, recorded in a pro studio, or written songs. I don't understand how you can think the DeLeos are nothings that are riding Scott's coattails. To take another argument from earlier and turn it around, who would Scott have been without Dean? Would STP be what it is if Hickock had never left the band? Probably not.

Interesting take.
I'm not anti Chester so I'm not totally feeling that side of the argument.  It's definitely karaoke that I would never pay to see but not because of Chester.  It's more that the Deleos are fucking idiots and they always have been and they can't get out of their own way.  Then this decision is the cake topper, it's the most idiotic decision I've ever seen from them which is saying alot.  When you need an adult in the room you hope the Deleos provide the levity that Scott lacks but instead they go lower than Scott when you think it's impossible to do so.  I would've respected them so much more if they said, hey life's too short and we're never ever going to work with Scott again.  We've got Chester and we're gonna rock some new shit.  So come out and see us, we'll sprinkle in some STP and LP in the set and it'll be all good.  Instead, you get Dean getting all pissy, it's mine, mine, mine.  And Rob trying to be dignified and failing miserably and sounding like a bigger douche by the day.  And  poor Chester just trying to be above it all, probably thinking what the fuck did I just get myself into.   

I'll recall some quotes to the LA Times  when Talk Show was in town to open for Aerosmith:

"I've been on the road now for a few months, and I need a dose of my home life. . . . I need to be refueled. [During] the last few STP tours, we traveled around by jet and had our families with us--at least some of the time. Now it's just the band and our crew going stop to stop on a bus. The road is a wacky place, man. Sometimes it's not very replenishing to your soul...After STP, I have a real hard time being an opening act. I'm disillusioned by it. Let's face it--everyone comes out to see Aerosmith, not Talk Show...It's weird getting back to this situation after [releasing] three pretty successful records. I don't honestly know if I was fully ready for this."

I think it's pretty obvious what has happened here. After Scott derailed STP's plans the first time, they got a new name. It didn't take off, and they didn't like the life on the road after being used to the success of STP. When Scott derailed them another time, they got a "name" singer and it was essentially the same thing.

This time around, the 3/4 of STP who have had a lot to do with the success of the band--despite what you think--decided they weren't going to let 1/4 of STP dictate their lifestyle. Nope--they're taking the name and moving on. Not sure why this is A) a shock, or B) a problem, unless someone thinks that the only useful member of a band is the singer and also thinks Scott hasn't continually created expensive burdens for the other 3/4 of STP.

At the end of the day, honestly, from what I hear from friends, it's the fact that its Chester Bennington. My friends are casual STP fans, but some of them have a really good taste for rock music. To them, it seems like Chester is just an awful choice, and sort of makes them band seem like a karaoke act. They don't seem to care about them using the name; just the fact that its Chester.I made a comment on here about how Chester just sounds so robotic, and there's really no soul or emotion when he sings these lyrics. What I mean by this, is that even though he sings in key, he's not really feeling the story behind the lyrics. That's what I hate about those American idol talent show people; they stand there and hit all these notes, yet completely ignore what the words mean. A perfect example of this, is when Scott sings the bridge part for Atlanta. He's not just hitting notes, but he's singing these words for what they mean. It's a bit hard to explain. I watched a video from artisan news (same interview from above) except Chester was talking, and he said he really didnt care about the words.. Just the melodies and notes. That right there summed it all up for me.

I am not a Chester fan, but I think Robert and Dean are insanely talented at writing and at their instruments, so I will listen to them with any singer (just like I will listen to Scott's albums without them).

You are correct that there is often a certain immediacy when an artist sings their own song. But that doesn't mean that others cannot do it justice or can even improve on it (does Joe Cocker not sing with emotion when he covered Feelin' Alright or With a Little Help From My Friends?)

You don't necessarily have to have words to express emotion. Guitar players do it all the time. Let's not fool ourselves, though. Scott's lyrics have never been amazing, though he did get better as time went on. But I doubt this incarnation of the band will play Atlanta much, a song that is obviously close to Scott's heart. Hell, STP with Scott rarely played it.

I know exactly what you mean. In today's world, unfortunately, anyone who sings everything perfectly and hits every single note is at the forefront of the music industry. There are singers out there now like Matt Berninger of The National and Matt Schultz of Cage the Elephant, who don't have tremendous range or don't hit notes perfectly, but have emotion and conviction behind their vocals. They're the types of unique singers who would be turned down on shows like American Idol or The Voice.

It's not about being perfect, it's about not being terrible. Cornell isn't perfect, but he was terrible during his time in Audioslave. But he got sober and stopped smoking and sounds better today than he has in over ten years.

Love the LA Times reference. 

My take is a reference to Dean's remarks.  Just because you put 20 years into something doesn't give you the right to call it yours.  Regardless of your participation.  Scott included.  I've never said the Deleos were nothings, but Scott is a significant part of their success.  And attempting to rip it away in the fashion they've done is deplorable.  My underlying argument is that STP doesn't work w/out Scott and I'd have similar feelings if the role was reversed.  But it's not.  I'm not necessarily pro Scott, more pro STP.  Not pro STP w/ Chester or whatever they would do otherwise. 

To me it does matter who wrote/recorded it.  Hell, the world recognizes this in credits, royalties, ect.  To say that it doesn't matter doesn't fly with me.  Slash murdered STP songs with VR but it was OK because he wasn't playing 90 minutes of STP.  It was a couple of takes and it was fun.  Hearing Chester sing a set of STP songs is just silly.  Not because he doesn't do it justice..........but for the same reason as Slash wouldn't try to do Dean's guitars for a 90 min, its not the same.       

I'm going to leave the VR and AOA comparisons alone.  Apples v Oranges.  Similar to people trying to compare STP w/ Chester to Scott solo.  It's not comparable.  Slither was amazing, though.

It may be 3/4 of STP in numbers but not in soul, style, connection to fans.  At least not in my book.  For me it's clear that Scott was the face of STP.  Will stop there as I don't care to argue their importance vs. each other anymore.  But I will say that the Deleos were a significant hindrance to STP as well.  They blame Scott when they should look in a mirror, too.  I cringe to think in a few years the full impact of the decisions the Deloes have made the past few weeks. 

I think it's easy to pick a 30 min you tube clip of Scott and bash the hell out of him.  Is some of it deserving?  Perhaps.  But as with most performances, theatrical, concert, sports.  How many fuck ups are there in any given one.  Some you don't pick up on and some you say oh shit.  Bottom line, at the end of the night was it entertaining?  I saw Scott at the Viper Room in early August and it was well worth the $$.  Small shows are cool IMO cause there's no hiding.  Scott killed some of the songs.  He's did the others justice.  And a couple of others should sound better.  I've never been to a show from Scott that wasn't worth the $$ I paid.  Never.  Almost, all of them have been amazing and those few that weren't were solid (only because they didn't change the setlist and it was the same show I had seen earlier). 

Did I say I loved the LA Times reference. 

 

[stp4ever]

It's very interesting what Dean says at the end there.


With AoA, Dean would always list off Filter songs that he loves or wishes he wrote: Take a Picture, Skinny, Welcome to the Fold. Hell, he even brought it up in a recent interview since STPw/C + Filter started touring together.


But now with Chester, he just says they have each dug what each other has done over the past decade and a half...but he doesn't list any Linkin Park song in particular.


It just doesn't sound like he means it. And I don't blame him. "Erase all the pain 'til it's gone." I know that's their dumb rapper's lyric, but still. Give me a break.

[STP92]

[/size]

I know exactly what you mean. In today's world, unfortunately, anyone who sings everything perfectly and hits every single note is at the forefront of the music industry. There are singers out there now like Matt Berninger of The National and Matt Schultz of Cage the Elephant, who don't have tremendous range or don't hit notes perfectly, but have emotion and conviction behind their vocals. They're the types of unique singers who would be turned down on shows like American Idol or The Voice.

It's not about being perfect, it's about not being terrible. Cornell isn't perfect, but he was terrible during his time in Audioslave. But he got sober and stopped smoking and sounds better today than he has in over ten years.

I'm not talking about artists affecting their voices by using, or even Weiland specifically. I guess what I'm trying to say is that most people don't care if a singer sings with passion or conviction as long as they're hitting the notes and sound good, which I think is unfortunate. I bring up Matt Berninger because he's a guy who's not known for having a lot of range, but is someone who can put his heart into the words. But I suppose just sounding good is what gets the most downloads these days.

[lovemachine97]

Love the LA Times reference. 

My take is a reference to Dean's remarks.  Just because you put 20 years into something doesn't give you the right to call it yours.  Regardless of your participation.  Scott included.  I've never said the Deleos were nothings, but Scott is a significant part of their success.  And attempting to rip it away in the fashion they've done is deplorable.  My underlying argument is that STP doesn't work w/out Scott and I'd have similar feelings if the role was reversed.  But it's not.  I'm not necessarily pro Scott, more pro STP.  Not pro STP w/ Chester or whatever they would do otherwise. 

To me it does matter who wrote/recorded it.  Hell, the world recognizes this in credits, royalties, ect.  To say that it doesn't matter doesn't fly with me.  Slash murdered STP songs with VR but it was OK because he wasn't playing 90 minutes of STP.  It was a couple of takes and it was fun.  Hearing Chester sing a set of STP songs is just silly.  Not because he doesn't do it justice..........but for the same reason as Slash wouldn't try to do Dean's guitars for a 90 min, its not the same.       

I'm going to leave the VR and AOA comparisons alone.  Apples v Oranges.  Similar to people trying to compare STP w/ Chester to Scott solo.  It's not comparable.  Slither was amazing, though.

It may be 3/4 of STP in numbers but not in soul, style, connection to fans.  At least not in my book.  For me it's clear that Scott was the face of STP.  Will stop there as I don't care to argue their importance vs. each other anymore.  But I will say that the Deleos were a significant hindrance to STP as well.  They blame Scott when they should look in a mirror, too.  I cringe to think in a few years the full impact of the decisions the Deloes have made the past few weeks. 

I think it's easy to pick a 30 min you tube clip of Scott and bash the hell out of him.  Is some of it deserving?  Perhaps.  But as with most performances, theatrical, concert, sports.  How many fuck ups are there in any given one.  Some you don't pick up on and some you say oh shit.  Bottom line, at the end of the night was it entertaining?  I saw Scott at the Viper Room in early August and it was well worth the $$.  Small shows are cool IMO cause there's no hiding.  Scott killed some of the songs.  He's did the others justice.  And a couple of others should sound better.  I've never been to a show from Scott that wasn't worth the $$ I paid.  Never.  Almost, all of them have been amazing and those few that weren't were solid (only because they didn't change the setlist and it was the same show I had seen earlier). 

Did I say I loved the LA Times reference.

I think you're putting too much stock into edited comments that are taken out of context (this particular video). We have no idea what the question is. We have no idea what he said before or after.


But if we're going to analyze it, remember that he starts off by saying, "This is our livelihood. [These are] our boyhood dreams," before he says it is his and that no one can take it away from him.


Look, I was the guitar player in a band for a while. 3 of the 5 of us were the primary creative force. We changed drummers once and changed bass players once. If we'd signed to a label, been successful, had some hits, and then we changed drummers, people would have probably noticed. The original guy we played with used double bass and was a metal drummer through and through. What was probably our best written song (at the time), however, was not something he could put drums to. We realized that we could not continue creatively with him on drums. We held "auditions" and found a guy who was closer to the direction we were headed creatively, but he was unreliable and didn't fit personality-wise. Then we asked a guy with whom we'd shared a bill with his band. It worked great. He wasn't reliable either, but very good, we got along, and he played the shit out of the old stuff and newer stuff (he now plays professionally and his currently on tour).


But he sounded WAY different than the initial guy we had. If we'd gotten signed, had some hits and success after he joined the band, no one would have noticed. We would have just been "us" with no preconceived notions about the "right" or "original" drummer.


The point I am making is that sometimes we draw arbitrary lines. Is Jimmy Eat World only the true Jimmy Eat World when Tom Linton was the lead singer, or is it the real Jimmy Eat World now that Jim Adkins is the lead singer?


With Layne Staley and Mike Starr dead and the true money lying with the name Alice in Chains, are Jerry Cantrell, Sean Kinney, and Mike Inez wrong for recording and touring as Alice in Chains? Does it matter why there is a new singer? It shouldn't. Alice in Chains is either only Alice in Chains in its "original" incarnation (Staley, Cantrell, Starr, Kinney) or Alice in Chains is malleable and can change with time. It can't be both. Same goes for AC/DC, Van Halen, Rush, The Eagles, etc.


I pick up on lots of mistakes as a musician. But mistakes here and there happen. I cringe when I listen to an otherwise pretty good performance of Atlanta on Craig Kilborn when Robert misses a note pretty early on. But overall, the rest of the guys in the band have kept up their chops and actually gotten to be better musicians over time.


Ask yourself these questions. 1) Is Scott a better singer today than in 1992? 2) Songwriter? 3) Is Dean a better guitarist today than he was in 1992? 4) Songwriter? My answers are:


1) Not even close. He peaked in 2000/2001. He could be the same singer he was then, but he has kept smoking and imbibing, and he often goes on stage in a state where it is impossible to sing well.
2) Probably. His melodies and harmonies are more complex and he writes different kinds of music.
3) Not even close. Yes.
4) Probably. He doesn't write as much as his brother, but he contributes a good amount of variety and well-crafted guitar music.


As far as the LA Times goes, it shouldn't be a surprise. Just like Alice in Chains, STP as a name is worth money. 75% of the band believes the best thing for the band is to have a new singer moving forward. When Scott created issues for them in the past, they tried A) no name singer and new name and B) well-known singer and new name. Neither attempt was able to come close to what they helped create, so they have decided to wrestle control over what they helped create.


Fine by me. If Scott isn't going to be healthy, I'd rather see the DeLeos be successful than not.

[HelloItsLate]

I had no idea that "Stone Temple Pilots" was Dean's boy hood dream, or that he started the band himself, let alone the band is entirely HIS, and that he alone deserves it more than anyone else.

There's a big difference between "MINE" and "OURS", which he seems to have forgotten.  If his dream was to play music for a living then he should be thanking his brother for inviting him into the band, or Corey Hicock for leaving; without whom he'd be working a regular job.  But even despite all that, he's acting like Scott was holding him back from his childhood dream, which is ridiculous.  He was ONLY able to realize his dream in part due to Scott, so despite how things ended AFTER 20 YEARS, he should be thankful for that.  STP's success is the only thing that allowed him to continue his "dream".  But two attempts without Scott failed by comparison, and now he's back to milk the one thing that worked.  So this "fired up" sense of self-entitlement is bullshit.

Maybe I missed it, but I didn't hear Dean ever say that he wasn't thankful to Scott (or Robert or whomever) for helping him realize his childhood dream. You talk about the difference between MINE and OURS. How would you feel if your "OURS" project was shared by someone who completely sabotaged it, day after day, for years? Would you just sit back and continue to kiss that person's feet because he gave you the opportunity in the first place? Is that what you expect Dean to do? Yes, Scott started the band more than 20 years ago, and Dean should be thankful to him for that. But Dean worked his ass off contributing to that band's success for many years, and he all wants is to continue to do so today. Unfortunately, his "OURS" partner, Scott, is unwilling or unable to do the same. Should that mean that Dean is basically screwed? Dean should just let Scott drag him down into oblivion along with him? Then there would be two tragedies instead of one. Well, in this case, there would really be four tragedies instead of one, but we're talking about Dean here.

 
And please, spare me the bullshit about Dean having some obligation to save Scott. It's unfortunate, but some people simply can't be saved.

[lovemachine97]

I know exactly what you mean. In today's world, unfortunately, anyone who sings everything perfectly and hits every single note is at the forefront of the music industry. There are singers out there now like Matt Berninger of The National and Matt Schultz of Cage the Elephant, who don't have tremendous range or don't hit notes perfectly, but have emotion and conviction behind their vocals. They're the types of unique singers who would be turned down on shows like American Idol or The Voice.

It's not about being perfect, it's about not being terrible. Cornell isn't perfect, but he was terrible during his time in Audioslave. But he got sober and stopped smoking and sounds better today than he has in over ten years.

I'm not talking about artists affecting their voices by using, or even Weiland specifically. I guess what I'm trying to say is that most people don't care if a singer sings with passion or conviction as long as they're hitting the notes and sound good, which I think is unfortunate. I bring up Matt Berninger because he's a guy who's not known for having a lot of range, but is someone who can put his heart into the words. But I suppose just sounding good is what gets the most downloads these days.

I would argue that it's more about what genres are popular. Rock is in 4th place behind hip hop, country, and pop. What is important and lucrative in rock isn't necessarily the same in those genres.


I love Tom Waits, and he's a terrible singer. He's a character--and most people aren't looking for what he delivers. But it's not much different live than he is in studio.


Cornell's problem was that he laid down great vocals on the Audioslave albums but couldn't come close to replicating the same notes live while he was smoking and drinking. Now he can. No one expects perfection from him, but no one is really buying the type of music he creates either.


Scott, it could be argued, isn't fooling anyone either. Listen to his Christmas album and you pretty much know what you're getting live.