Song of the Moment: Sirens

General Pearl Jam discussion.
Post Reply

So...Sirens?

5 stars
47
38%
4 stars
30
24%
3 stars
25
20%
2 stars
7
6%
1 star
16
13%
 
Total votes: 125

User avatar
harmless
10Club Complaint Department
Posts: 17337
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 2:41 pm

Re: New Song (9.19.13): Sirens

Post by harmless »

I mean, whatever you think about it, Mike can write a song. He wrote 'Inside Job.' Stupid to pretend BoB suddenly taught him how to write a song after all these years.
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.
Tuolumne
likes rhythmic things that butt up against each other
Posts: 770
Joined: Fri January 04, 2013 10:13 pm

Re: New Song (9.19.13): Sirens

Post by Tuolumne »

McParadigm wrote:Is today the 7-day mark, or was yesterday? I always wait for that.

It's going to own Triple A, which is a comparatively small pocket but can be a bridge to bigger things. It's already at 26, which is kind of impressive because that's a much slower moving format than, say, rock or top 40. Just Breathe reached #1 on Triple A, for what it's worth. Sirens is also the fastest growing track at rock radio for the last seven days, but that's already slowing down quite a bit. Most of those adds came in the time between Thursday and Sunday for whatever reason. It's currently at 41 on Active, 36 at Alternative, and 38 at Mainstream. Altogether, 749 plays to an audience of 3.4 million.

It's a pretty nondescript opening...no different from most second singles except for the rush to the top at Triple A. It'll probably be week 3 before we can start to guess what the reaction is going to be.
Good analysis. I also seeing it doing well where Just Breathe did. That would be a great thing at this point in their career. It came out last Wednesday, so the 7 day mark is today.

The song is an odd one in that it has that commercial gloss but there's not that "Use Somebody" chorus. It prevents the song from going to uber-fluffy territory and makes a genuine emotional impact once you get past the gloss. So, I'm just not tuned in to how that plays on radio or not. I don't have objective ears for that. It's definitely impacting my ears alot more now than it did in the beginning.
User avatar
harmless
10Club Complaint Department
Posts: 17337
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 2:41 pm

Re: New Song (9.19.13): Sirens

Post by harmless »

If this song is going to have any staying power in the fanbase, ultimately it'll be due to that lack of a stereotypical structure / discernible chorus that keeps it just this side of Nickelback radio ballad territory. Pearl Jam have done this before, flirted with stereotype and recognisable schlock, but don't go so far as to write a memorable chorus / hummable melody. This one's great to sing along to while it's on, for me, but when I go away from it it's the atmosphere and musical highlights I'm remembering, the subtleties, not the biggest moments, simply because I don't really remember those big moments like I would if this song was a truly annoying earworm of the radio-pop variety.
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
VinylGuy
jeeeesus relax already
Posts: 43426
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:10 pm

Re: New Song (9.19.13): Sirens

Post by VinylGuy »

This song has more than one million views on you tube....is that good?
BONE FUCKIN´ TOMAHAWK.
User avatar
evenslow
Stone's Bitch
Posts: 9164
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 6:47 pm
Location: unnamed mental hospital

Re: New Song (9.19.13): Sirens

Post by evenslow »

harmless wrote:If this song is going to have any staying power in the fanbase, ultimately it'll be due to that lack of a stereotypical structure / discernible chorus that keeps it just this side of Nickelback radio ballad territory. Pearl Jam have done this before, flirted with stereotype and recognisable schlock, but don't go so far as to write a memorable chorus / hummable melody. This one's great to sing along to while it's on, for me, but when I go away from it it's the atmosphere and musical highlights I'm remembering, the subtleties, not the biggest moments, simply because I don't really remember those big moments like I would if this song was a truly annoying earworm of the radio-pop variety.
Yeah this. When I'm not listening, the part that remains in my head is actually the line "Hear the sirens." I'd love to know if the whole "non-chorus" thing is intentional or just kinda happens.
Strat wrote:Alas, we are RM
User avatar
harmless
10Club Complaint Department
Posts: 17337
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 2:41 pm

Re: New Song (9.19.13): Sirens

Post by harmless »

evenslow wrote:
harmless wrote:If this song is going to have any staying power in the fanbase, ultimately it'll be due to that lack of a stereotypical structure / discernible chorus that keeps it just this side of Nickelback radio ballad territory. Pearl Jam have done this before, flirted with stereotype and recognisable schlock, but don't go so far as to write a memorable chorus / hummable melody. This one's great to sing along to while it's on, for me, but when I go away from it it's the atmosphere and musical highlights I'm remembering, the subtleties, not the biggest moments, simply because I don't really remember those big moments like I would if this song was a truly annoying earworm of the radio-pop variety.
Yeah this. When I'm not listening, the part that remains in my head is actually the line "Hear the sirens." I'd love to know if the whole "non-chorus" thing is intentional or just kinda happens.
I just don't think they really know how to write a commercial pop hit, so even when they try it's still muddled. Luckily, even with the addition of BoB, the song remains muddled, which is good news for us, possibly not good news for them.
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.
Tuolumne
likes rhythmic things that butt up against each other
Posts: 770
Joined: Fri January 04, 2013 10:13 pm

Re: New Song (9.19.13): Sirens

Post by Tuolumne »

harmless wrote:If this song is going to have any staying power in the fanbase, ultimately it'll be due to that lack of a stereotypical structure / discernible chorus that keeps it just this side of Nickelback radio ballad territory. Pearl Jam have done this before, flirted with stereotype and recognisable schlock, but don't go so far as to write a memorable chorus / hummable melody. This one's great to sing along to while it's on, for me, but when I go away from it it's the atmosphere and musical highlights I'm remembering, the subtleties, not the biggest moments, simply because I don't really remember those big moments like I would if this song was a truly annoying earworm of the radio-pop variety.
I'd put Ten in that category of flirting with schlock but veering just enough from it to make a genuine emotional impact. It's why Ten was both trashed and praised during those days.
User avatar
Lounge Lizard
AnalLog
Posts: 1843
Joined: Tue July 23, 2013 6:51 am

Re: New Song (9.19.13): Sirens

Post by Lounge Lizard »

evenslow wrote: Yeah this. When I'm not listening, the part that remains in my head is actually the line "Hear the sirens." I'd love to know if the whole "non-chorus" thing is intentional or just kinda happens.
Haven't listened to it for a couple of days and what do you know, walking to my car this morning I catch myself humming 'but all things cha-a-ange... let this remain'
gawddayum
Image Image
User avatar
McParadigm
NEVER STOP JAMMING!
Posts: 22393
Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 1:56 am

Re: New Song (9.19.13): Sirens

Post by McParadigm »

harmless wrote:If this song is going to have any staying power in the fanbase, ultimately it'll be due to that lack of a stereotypical structure / discernible chorus that keeps it just this side of Nickelback radio ballad territory. Pearl Jam have done this before, flirted with stereotype and recognisable schlock, but don't go so far as to write a memorable chorus / hummable melody. This one's great to sing along to while it's on, for me, but when I go away from it it's the atmosphere and musical highlights I'm remembering, the subtleties, not the biggest moments, simply because I don't really remember those big moments like I would if this song was a truly annoying earworm of the radio-pop variety.
It's not like you to say sorry
I was waiting on a different story
This time I'm mistaken
For handing you a heart worth breaking
And I've been wrong, I've been down,
Been to the bottom of every bottle
These five words in my head
Scream "are we having fun yet?"
(patriotic choking noises)
User avatar
harmless
10Club Complaint Department
Posts: 17337
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 2:41 pm

Re: New Song (9.19.13): Sirens

Post by harmless »

Tuolumne wrote:
harmless wrote:If this song is going to have any staying power in the fanbase, ultimately it'll be due to that lack of a stereotypical structure / discernible chorus that keeps it just this side of Nickelback radio ballad territory. Pearl Jam have done this before, flirted with stereotype and recognisable schlock, but don't go so far as to write a memorable chorus / hummable melody. This one's great to sing along to while it's on, for me, but when I go away from it it's the atmosphere and musical highlights I'm remembering, the subtleties, not the biggest moments, simply because I don't really remember those big moments like I would if this song was a truly annoying earworm of the radio-pop variety.
I'd put Ten in that category of flirting with schlock but veering just enough from it to make a genuine emotional impact. It's why Ten was both trashed and praised during those days.
Absolutely, I agree. It meant that the alternative audience thought it was "cool enough", and the commercial audience thought it was "nice enough". To have a pop hit you have to be willing to court bland mediocrity. They do that here, but in my opinion there's enough going on with the sentiment and atmosphere for me to stay interested.
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
evenslow
Stone's Bitch
Posts: 9164
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 6:47 pm
Location: unnamed mental hospital

Re: New Song (9.19.13): Sirens

Post by evenslow »

harmless wrote:
evenslow wrote:
harmless wrote:If this song is going to have any staying power in the fanbase, ultimately it'll be due to that lack of a stereotypical structure / discernible chorus that keeps it just this side of Nickelback radio ballad territory. Pearl Jam have done this before, flirted with stereotype and recognisable schlock, but don't go so far as to write a memorable chorus / hummable melody. This one's great to sing along to while it's on, for me, but when I go away from it it's the atmosphere and musical highlights I'm remembering, the subtleties, not the biggest moments, simply because I don't really remember those big moments like I would if this song was a truly annoying earworm of the radio-pop variety.
Yeah this. When I'm not listening, the part that remains in my head is actually the line "Hear the sirens." I'd love to know if the whole "non-chorus" thing is intentional or just kinda happens.
I just don't think they really know how to write a commercial pop hit, so even when they try it's still muddled. Luckily, even with the addition of BoB, the song remains muddled, which is good news for us, possibly not good news for them.
I would love to hear a version of Sirens with a massive Bono chorus in it just so we could compare.
Strat wrote:Alas, we are RM
User avatar
harmless
10Club Complaint Department
Posts: 17337
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 2:41 pm

Re: New Song (9.19.13): Sirens

Post by harmless »

Lounge Lizard wrote:
evenslow wrote: Yeah this. When I'm not listening, the part that remains in my head is actually the line "Hear the sirens." I'd love to know if the whole "non-chorus" thing is intentional or just kinda happens.
Haven't listened to it for a couple of days and what do you know, walking to my car this morning I catch myself humming 'but all things cha-a-ange... let this remain'
gawddayum
It's a nice part, that.
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
Strat
Waiting for HVAC Repairman
Posts: 35419
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 3:48 pm
Location: Twin City Kisses

Re: New Song (9.19.13): Sirens

Post by Strat »

ooooooover.....


That is always in my head. ALWAYS.
User avatar
harmless
10Club Complaint Department
Posts: 17337
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 2:41 pm

Re: New Song (9.19.13): Sirens

Post by harmless »

One of my favourite parts is probably the break between the solo and the next "chorus" (3:58-4:16-ish). It's just a nice, unfussy way of bringing that back in. A lesser song would've had a huge dum-dum-DUM-DUM drum build-up at that point.
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
evenslow
Stone's Bitch
Posts: 9164
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 6:47 pm
Location: unnamed mental hospital

Re: New Song (9.19.13): Sirens

Post by evenslow »

harmless wrote:One of my favourite parts is probably the break between the solo and the next "chorus" (3:58-4:16-ish). It's just a nice, unfussy way of bringing that back in. A lesser song would've had a huge dum-dum-DUM-DUM drum build-up at that point.
At pretty much every step of the way, they went tasteful where they could've gone obvious. This makes it a more interesting song but conversely hurts its pop radio singalong potential.
Strat wrote:Alas, we are RM
User avatar
harmless
10Club Complaint Department
Posts: 17337
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 2:41 pm

Re: New Song (9.19.13): Sirens

Post by harmless »

evenslow wrote:
harmless wrote:One of my favourite parts is probably the break between the solo and the next "chorus" (3:58-4:16-ish). It's just a nice, unfussy way of bringing that back in. A lesser song would've had a huge dum-dum-DUM-DUM drum build-up at that point.
At pretty much every step of the way, they went tasteful where they could've gone obvious. This makes it a more interesting song but conversely hurts its pop radio singalong potential.
The bit that most disappoints me (musically, I like the lyrics) is "I didn't care before you were here..." to "let this remain". That same section the second time begins "I want you to know..." There's a lot of "Dum-dee-Dum-dee-Dum-dee" Robbie Williams-style piano in there. More guitar would've been good there. But it's a small section. I actually think the length of this song helps to bury the worst parts. Again, not a great idea commercially but better for me. It's easier to get lost in the better parts.
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
evenslow
Stone's Bitch
Posts: 9164
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 6:47 pm
Location: unnamed mental hospital

Re: New Song (9.19.13): Sirens

Post by evenslow »

harmless wrote:
evenslow wrote:
harmless wrote:One of my favourite parts is probably the break between the solo and the next "chorus" (3:58-4:16-ish). It's just a nice, unfussy way of bringing that back in. A lesser song would've had a huge dum-dum-DUM-DUM drum build-up at that point.
At pretty much every step of the way, they went tasteful where they could've gone obvious. This makes it a more interesting song but conversely hurts its pop radio singalong potential.
The bit that most disappoints me (musically, I like the lyrics) is "I didn't care before you were here..." to "let this remain". That same section the second time begins "I want you to know..." There's a lot of "Dum-dee-Dum-dee-Dum-dee" Robbie Williams-style piano in there. More guitar would've been good there. But it's a small section. I actually think the length of this song helps to bury the worst parts. Again, not a great idea commercially but better for me. It's easier to get lost in the better parts.
Yes, the length saves it. :li:
Strat wrote:Alas, we are RM
User avatar
McParadigm
NEVER STOP JAMMING!
Posts: 22393
Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 1:56 am

Re: New Song (9.19.13): Sirens

Post by McParadigm »

The musical "break" after the first chorus always causes me to make a bit of a face (yeah, that face. That's the one), because it really does nothing for the song. It's not like there's such a powerful atmosphere to the verse sections that it requires reintroduction, or anything, and nobody really felt the need to color it up enough to justify it. I just find myself singing "Where-uhs the siiiruhhnnns?" whenever I get to that part.
(patriotic choking noises)
User avatar
harmless
10Club Complaint Department
Posts: 17337
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 2:41 pm

Re: New Song (9.19.13): Sirens

Post by harmless »

I kinda like it, and sue me, but I think BoB's piano adds colour to this song, as does the 12-string guitar. There could've been far more added colour, that's for certain. I also wish they'd just pull a fucking minor chord once or twice. It's all so "pretty". But never mind.
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: New Song (9.19.13): Sirens

Post by stip »

McParadigm wrote:The musical "break" after the first chorus always causes me to make a bit of a face (yeah, that face. That's the one), because it really does nothing for the song. It's not like there's such a powerful atmosphere to the verse sections that it requires reintroduction, or anything, and nobody really felt the need to color it up enough to justify it. I just find myself singing "Where-uhs the siiiruhhnnns?" whenever I get to that part.

I couldn't say that it's necessary, but I do think that the length of this song, and the drifting sameness of it, the lingering moment that this song is chronicling, helps it. It's almost 6 minutes but it is a fast 6 minutes, which is remarkable since it's not like there's a ton of movement in the song.

I'm usually arguing for songs to be shorter, but not here.
Post Reply