Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!

General Pearl Jam discussion.
Post Reply

which song artwork is your favorite?

Mind Your Manners
5
7%
Future Days
6
9%
Sirens
5
7%
Yellow Moon
12
18%
Swallowed Whole
7
10%
Getaway
4
6%
Let The Records Play
2
3%
My Father's Son
10
15%
Sleeping By Myself
0
No votes
Lightning Bolt
2
3%
Infallible
9
13%
Pendulum
6
9%
 
Total votes: 68

User avatar
epilogue
We All We Got, We All We Need
Posts: 84852
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:33 pm
Location: Ghorman
Contact:

Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!

Post by epilogue »

cutuphalfdead wrote:
durdencommatyler wrote:
cutuphalfdead wrote:
Birds in Hell wrote:I don't know, I think looking for meaning in rock lyrics is a fool's errand. I think of vocals as an instrument in themselves: the sounds being made by the voice is what really matters, not what words are being sung.
To me, one of the most cringe inducing things is listening to someone analyze rock lyrics.
More than the lyrics themselves, it's how they marry with the song. There are plenty of simple or maybe even wonky lyrics that I love because they work so well in the context of the song. The Beatles are guilty of this quite often.
There are exceptions, of course. What I should have said was: One of the most cringe inducing things is listening to someone analyze Pearl Jam lyrics.
I like discussing them. But, yeah, i get what you're saying. I can totally understand why people hate doing it.
User avatar
stupidmop
Future Drummer
Posts: 2796
Joined: Wed May 01, 2013 4:29 pm

Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!

Post by stupidmop »

Dumb get right/ big wave lyrics are fine with me. Its when they're either overly sentimental or trying to be deep and (to me)failing thats its a problem.
User avatar
verb_to_trust
Gone
Posts: 24014
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 10:53 pm
Location: Illinois

Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!

Post by verb_to_trust »

LetMeSleep wrote:
verb_to_trust wrote:
harmless wrote:
verb_to_trust wrote:
harmless wrote:
verb_to_trust wrote:
harmless wrote:
verb_to_trust wrote:
harmless wrote:
verb_to_trust wrote:
WtOB? wrote:
harmless wrote:Ed has always self-referenced. I'm OK with it. I'd rather that than him trying to write something with a new subject. Johnny Guitar is the furthest he got.
and i don't want him to go there again. jg was awful. much worse than inside job.
Ed is too boring to be self referencing. Make some interesting shit up, I say.
He's "too boring" and yet you want him to make "interesting shit" up? Good luck with that.

If Ed self-references, he can only be as boring as the original songs imo. Anything that self-references my favourite PJ songs is at least worth giving a go. I also think Johnny Guitar was the best song on Backspacer, but it was most definitely a witty pop song and I wouldn't want it to represent Pearl Jam.
I'm not interested in a rich 50 year old family man's self references. I think the better choice would be to dream up some interesting things to say rather than Future Days type subject matter. Hopefully we get more of that...
What makes you think he'll suddenly come up with new and interesting things to say after the last two albums? I really wish people would stop bringing up the rich 50 year old family man crap.
He's boring an uninteresting to me as a person, that's all. Its not his fault. Younger Eddie was at least interesting. Its okay to fake it through some lyrics at 50 if it means we don't have to listen to love songs to his model wife and kids.
I don't give a shit whether he's 50 and rich, or his wife is a model. Being married and having kids is fucking wonderful and I don't mind if he sings about it. The experience isn't less true because he's rich and his wife is a model. Maybe you'd feel differently if you were a model.
Or maybe if I was one rolled up in blood.
Is that it? He's abandoned all his principles by marrying someone who models underwear for a living?
I don't care that hes married to someone hot and much taller than him, I just think its boring subject matter for a Pearl Jam song.
But she as a model has never been subject matter for him. He has always had love songs. Did Oceans or Wishlist bother you?
His wife and family seem to be the subject matter for future days. Wives and families, while nice, bore me as subject matter for Pearl Jam songs. Is this really such an offensive stance to take?
Dick/Balls
User avatar
epilogue
We All We Got, We All We Need
Posts: 84852
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:33 pm
Location: Ghorman
Contact:

Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!

Post by epilogue »

harmless wrote:
durdencommatyler wrote:
cutuphalfdead wrote:
Birds in Hell wrote:I don't know, I think looking for meaning in rock lyrics is a fool's errand. I think of vocals as an instrument in themselves: the sounds being made by the voice is what really matters, not what words are being sung.
To me, one of the most cringe inducing things is listening to someone analyze rock lyrics.
More than the lyrics themselves, it's how they marry with the song. There are plenty of simple or maybe even wonky lyrics that I love because they work so well in the context of the song. The Beatles are guilty of this quite often.
We are obviously talking within a certain skill level with PJ lyrics. But it reached its peak at Vitalogy and stayed good till Riot Act. Rock is rock. As long as lyrics don't embarrass me they're OK.
Pretty much, yeah.
User avatar
stip
The worst
Posts: 42946
Joined: Thu December 13, 2012 6:31 pm

Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!

Post by stip »

verb_to_trust wrote:
stip wrote:i have no thoughts whatsoever about what any of these songs are going to sound like other than the three we've heard. One of these songs damn well better feature that awesome music from the tour vid, though
I don't get what why everyone is splooshing over that. Its just ambient noise. It will be a nice lead in to one of these tracks I'm thinking, maybe Sirens. If it is included, it will be a good sign for this album because its nowhere near cheesy sounding enough to fit on backspacer and sounded like it had too much depth for Avocado.
really cool ambient noise, though
User avatar
philpritchard
Rank This Poster
Posts: 4155
Joined: Thu January 03, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!

Post by philpritchard »

cutuphalfdead wrote:
durdencommatyler wrote:
cutuphalfdead wrote:
Birds in Hell wrote:I don't know, I think looking for meaning in rock lyrics is a fool's errand. I think of vocals as an instrument in themselves: the sounds being made by the voice is what really matters, not what words are being sung.
To me, one of the most cringe inducing things is listening to someone analyze rock lyrics.
More than the lyrics themselves, it's how they marry with the song. There are plenty of simple or maybe even wonky lyrics that I love because they work so well in the context of the song. The Beatles are guilty of this quite often.
There are exceptions, of course. What I should have said was: One of the most cringe inducing things is listening to someone analyze Pearl Jam lyrics.
I think they have some lyrics that are genuinely worth analyzing.
User avatar
stip
The worst
Posts: 42946
Joined: Thu December 13, 2012 6:31 pm

Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!

Post by stip »

Birds in Hell wrote:The music of Inside Job isn't bad.

And I mean, really, who cares about lyrics? They're just words.

sure, in the same way that music is just notes.
User avatar
Norah
Poster of the Year
Posts: 37327
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 2:04 pm
Location: September 2020 Poster of the Month

Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!

Post by Norah »

philpritchard wrote:
cutuphalfdead wrote:
durdencommatyler wrote:
cutuphalfdead wrote:
Birds in Hell wrote:I don't know, I think looking for meaning in rock lyrics is a fool's errand. I think of vocals as an instrument in themselves: the sounds being made by the voice is what really matters, not what words are being sung.
To me, one of the most cringe inducing things is listening to someone analyze rock lyrics.
More than the lyrics themselves, it's how they marry with the song. There are plenty of simple or maybe even wonky lyrics that I love because they work so well in the context of the song. The Beatles are guilty of this quite often.
There are exceptions, of course. What I should have said was: One of the most cringe inducing things is listening to someone analyze Pearl Jam lyrics.
I think they have some lyrics that are genuinely worth analyzing.
Maybe they are, I don't know. But when I open a guided tour thread I just want to puke.
User avatar
harmless
10Club Complaint Department
Posts: 17337
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 2:41 pm

Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!

Post by harmless »

verb_to_trust wrote:
LetMeSleep wrote:
verb_to_trust wrote:
harmless wrote:
verb_to_trust wrote:
harmless wrote:
verb_to_trust wrote:
harmless wrote:
verb_to_trust wrote:
harmless wrote:
verb_to_trust wrote:
WtOB? wrote:
harmless wrote:Ed has always self-referenced. I'm OK with it. I'd rather that than him trying to write something with a new subject. Johnny Guitar is the furthest he got.
and i don't want him to go there again. jg was awful. much worse than inside job.
Ed is too boring to be self referencing. Make some interesting shit up, I say.
He's "too boring" and yet you want him to make "interesting shit" up? Good luck with that.

If Ed self-references, he can only be as boring as the original songs imo. Anything that self-references my favourite PJ songs is at least worth giving a go. I also think Johnny Guitar was the best song on Backspacer, but it was most definitely a witty pop song and I wouldn't want it to represent Pearl Jam.
I'm not interested in a rich 50 year old family man's self references. I think the better choice would be to dream up some interesting things to say rather than Future Days type subject matter. Hopefully we get more of that...
What makes you think he'll suddenly come up with new and interesting things to say after the last two albums? I really wish people would stop bringing up the rich 50 year old family man crap.
He's boring an uninteresting to me as a person, that's all. Its not his fault. Younger Eddie was at least interesting. Its okay to fake it through some lyrics at 50 if it means we don't have to listen to love songs to his model wife and kids.
I don't give a shit whether he's 50 and rich, or his wife is a model. Being married and having kids is fucking wonderful and I don't mind if he sings about it. The experience isn't less true because he's rich and his wife is a model. Maybe you'd feel differently if you were a model.
Or maybe if I was one rolled up in blood.
Is that it? He's abandoned all his principles by marrying someone who models underwear for a living?
I don't care that hes married to someone hot and much taller than him, I just think its boring subject matter for a Pearl Jam song.
But she as a model has never been subject matter for him. He has always had love songs. Did Oceans or Wishlist bother you?
His wife and family seem to be the subject matter for future days. Wives and families, while nice, bore me as subject matter for Pearl Jam songs. Is this really such an offensive stance to take?
Not offensive, but maybe a bit naive.
RisingTides wrote:There is more kindness on the internet than we would care to admit to ourselves. Sometimes we are so afraid of falling victim to a ruse, we miss out on actual opportunities.
User avatar
verb_to_trust
Gone
Posts: 24014
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 10:53 pm
Location: Illinois

Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!

Post by verb_to_trust »

stip wrote:
verb_to_trust wrote:
stip wrote:i have no thoughts whatsoever about what any of these songs are going to sound like other than the three we've heard. One of these songs damn well better feature that awesome music from the tour vid, though
I don't get what why everyone is splooshing over that. Its just ambient noise. It will be a nice lead in to one of these tracks I'm thinking, maybe Sirens. If it is included, it will be a good sign for this album because its nowhere near cheesy sounding enough to fit on backspacer and sounded like it had too much depth for Avocado.
really cool ambient noise, though
I think it sounds good too
Last edited by verb_to_trust on Sat August 31, 2013 1:25 am, edited 1 time in total.
Dick/Balls
User avatar
stip
The worst
Posts: 42946
Joined: Thu December 13, 2012 6:31 pm

Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!

Post by stip »

stupidmop wrote:
WtOB? wrote:
verb_to_trust wrote:
stip wrote:i have no thoughts whatsoever about what any of these songs are going to sound like other than the three we've heard. One of these songs damn well better feature that awesome music from the tour vid, though
I don't get what why everyone is splooshing over that. Its just ambient noise. It will be a nice lead in to one of these tracks I'm thinking, maybe Sirens. If it is included, it will be a good sign for this album because its nowhere near cheesy sounding enough to fit on backspacer and sounded like it had too much depth for Avocado.
yeah, i'm thinking it was just something they noodled with in the studio and used it for a tour vid; like they always do with that kinda stuff. they never put it on the records. unfortunately.
But what if. WHAT IF? We're in that sweetspot before we start hearing snippets and descriptions, where anything is possible.
Right now just about everyone has envisioned the perfect record in their head. This can only end well
User avatar
verb_to_trust
Gone
Posts: 24014
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 10:53 pm
Location: Illinois

Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!

Post by verb_to_trust »

harmless wrote:
verb_to_trust wrote:
LetMeSleep wrote:
verb_to_trust wrote:
harmless wrote:
verb_to_trust wrote:
harmless wrote:
verb_to_trust wrote:
harmless wrote:
verb_to_trust wrote:
harmless wrote:
verb_to_trust wrote:
WtOB? wrote:
harmless wrote:Ed has always self-referenced. I'm OK with it. I'd rather that than him trying to write something with a new subject. Johnny Guitar is the furthest he got.
and i don't want him to go there again. jg was awful. much worse than inside job.
Ed is too boring to be self referencing. Make some interesting shit up, I say.
He's "too boring" and yet you want him to make "interesting shit" up? Good luck with that.

If Ed self-references, he can only be as boring as the original songs imo. Anything that self-references my favourite PJ songs is at least worth giving a go. I also think Johnny Guitar was the best song on Backspacer, but it was most definitely a witty pop song and I wouldn't want it to represent Pearl Jam.
I'm not interested in a rich 50 year old family man's self references. I think the better choice would be to dream up some interesting things to say rather than Future Days type subject matter. Hopefully we get more of that...
What makes you think he'll suddenly come up with new and interesting things to say after the last two albums? I really wish people would stop bringing up the rich 50 year old family man crap.
He's boring an uninteresting to me as a person, that's all. Its not his fault. Younger Eddie was at least interesting. Its okay to fake it through some lyrics at 50 if it means we don't have to listen to love songs to his model wife and kids.
I don't give a shit whether he's 50 and rich, or his wife is a model. Being married and having kids is fucking wonderful and I don't mind if he sings about it. The experience isn't less true because he's rich and his wife is a model. Maybe you'd feel differently if you were a model.
Or maybe if I was one rolled up in blood.
Is that it? He's abandoned all his principles by marrying someone who models underwear for a living?
I don't care that hes married to someone hot and much taller than him, I just think its boring subject matter for a Pearl Jam song.
But she as a model has never been subject matter for him. He has always had love songs. Did Oceans or Wishlist bother you?
His wife and family seem to be the subject matter for future days. Wives and families, while nice, bore me as subject matter for Pearl Jam songs. Is this really such an offensive stance to take?
Not offensive, but maybe a bit naive.
:cop:
Dick/Balls
User avatar
epilogue
We All We Got, We All We Need
Posts: 84852
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:33 pm
Location: Ghorman
Contact:

Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!

Post by epilogue »

stip wrote:
Birds in Hell wrote:The music of Inside Job isn't bad.

And I mean, really, who cares about lyrics? They're just words.

sure, in the same way that music is just notes.
And when you hear people like Tom Waits or Leonard Cohen, you see how amazing rock lyrics can be. They can be more than just words.
User avatar
harmless
10Club Complaint Department
Posts: 17337
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 2:41 pm

Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!

Post by harmless »

stupidmop wrote:Dumb get right/ big wave lyrics are fine with me. Its when they're either overly sentimental or trying to be deep and (to me)failing thats its a problem.
I don't think the lyrics to Get Right are dumb. They're just not serious.
RisingTides wrote:There is more kindness on the internet than we would care to admit to ourselves. Sometimes we are so afraid of falling victim to a ruse, we miss out on actual opportunities.
User avatar
stip
The worst
Posts: 42946
Joined: Thu December 13, 2012 6:31 pm

Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!

Post by stip »

LetMeSleep wrote:
Birds in Hell wrote:
LetMeSleep wrote:
Birds in Hell wrote:The music of Inside Job isn't bad.

And I mean, really, who cares about lyrics? They're just words.
hahaha too obvious.
It sounds flippant but I do genuinely mean it.

Lyrics rank somewhere below production choices, snare drum sounds and guitar tone in the things I care about in a song. Unless they're unavoidably terrible to the point where I can't help but notice them (which, admittedly, Inside Job is getting pretty close to) I really don't care that much. They're a pretty minor part of a song to me.
My apologies, it looked like Stip baiting.

PJs bad lyrics usually don't worry me too much.
look, if someone takes the time to bait a line, the least I can do is nibble on it
User avatar
harmless
10Club Complaint Department
Posts: 17337
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 2:41 pm

Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!

Post by harmless »

durdencommatyler wrote:
stip wrote:
Birds in Hell wrote:The music of Inside Job isn't bad.

And I mean, really, who cares about lyrics? They're just words.

sure, in the same way that music is just notes.
And when you hear people like Tom Waits or Leonard Cohen, you see how amazing rock lyrics can be. They can be more than just words.
:thumbsup:

Or Elvis Costello
RisingTides wrote:There is more kindness on the internet than we would care to admit to ourselves. Sometimes we are so afraid of falling victim to a ruse, we miss out on actual opportunities.
User avatar
stip
The worst
Posts: 42946
Joined: Thu December 13, 2012 6:31 pm

Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!

Post by stip »

harmless wrote:
WtOB? wrote:lyrics are also more important in some bands than others. in pearl jam, they're definitely an important factor.
Especially these days, because the band isn't a powerhouse anymore, so I wish the lyrics had got stronger to compensate. But it doesn't look like it.
with only a few exceptions backspacer actually had pretty strong lyrics, harmless. GSMF, Johnny Guitar, Amongst the Waves, Speed of Sound, Force of Nature. Those are all well written songs. Parts of just breathe and unthought known are very strong.
User avatar
harmless
10Club Complaint Department
Posts: 17337
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 2:41 pm

Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!

Post by harmless »

stip wrote:
stupidmop wrote:
WtOB? wrote:
verb_to_trust wrote:
stip wrote:i have no thoughts whatsoever about what any of these songs are going to sound like other than the three we've heard. One of these songs damn well better feature that awesome music from the tour vid, though
I don't get what why everyone is splooshing over that. Its just ambient noise. It will be a nice lead in to one of these tracks I'm thinking, maybe Sirens. If it is included, it will be a good sign for this album because its nowhere near cheesy sounding enough to fit on backspacer and sounded like it had too much depth for Avocado.
yeah, i'm thinking it was just something they noodled with in the studio and used it for a tour vid; like they always do with that kinda stuff. they never put it on the records. unfortunately.
But what if. WHAT IF? We're in that sweetspot before we start hearing snippets and descriptions, where anything is possible.
Right now just about everyone has envisioned the perfect record in their head. This can only end well
:lol:
RisingTides wrote:There is more kindness on the internet than we would care to admit to ourselves. Sometimes we are so afraid of falling victim to a ruse, we miss out on actual opportunities.
User avatar
Norah
Poster of the Year
Posts: 37327
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 2:04 pm
Location: September 2020 Poster of the Month

Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!

Post by Norah »

durdencommatyler wrote:
stip wrote:
Birds in Hell wrote:The music of Inside Job isn't bad.

And I mean, really, who cares about lyrics? They're just words.

sure, in the same way that music is just notes.
And when you hear people like Tom Waits or Leonard Cohen, you see how amazing rock lyrics can be. They can be more than just words.
I guess I'm kind of thinking out loud in this thread, because those are artists that absolutely have lyrics worth discussing. I guess I just can't stand the over analysis of lyrics that are good but not that special. Or, most Pearl Jam lyrics.

It's like hearing a 12 year old go on and on about Stairway To Heaven.
User avatar
Norah
Poster of the Year
Posts: 37327
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 2:04 pm
Location: September 2020 Poster of the Month

Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!

Post by Norah »

Maybe I'm just a douche bag.
Post Reply