Lightning Bolt: The Official Album Thread

[fishbob]

Some of Pearl Jam's best melodic moments come during their most subtle tunes, for example: Sometimes and Parting Ways

Infallible, for all intents and purposes, is not a subtle tune

[Jorge]

"By thinking we're infallible, we are tempting fate instead" is kind of shitty lyrically, for an intended anthem. Maybe that's why I like it.

It's the biggest hook in the song. It's actually genius to take the line most representative of the song and make it so melodic. People are singing along to these lyrics in their head. As an artist, no better way to get the message across than to implant it in the heads of your listeners. This isn't a 'wave your lighters' personal song. It's social commentary done in a most effective way. You don't drone on so you put everyone off it. If you want to be heard, this is how you do it.

You can't convince me that "Infallible's" chorus is a better chorus than the choruses you don't like (and I do), just because it's melodic.

Dude, you just don't get it. It's GENIUS to take the line most representative of the song and make it so melodic. That just doesn't happen in songs. Except for Reach Out (I'll Be There). And Live Forever. And Tears of a Clown. And You've Got To Hide Your Love Away. And You Can't Always Get What You Want. And Human Nature. And Controversy. And Better Man. And Miss Jackson. And Nothing Compares 2 U. But definitely no other songs besides those. And Born to Run. And Anarchy in the UK. But that's it.

And Waterloo Sunset.


And Common People.



But nothing else.

[Heathen]

Wow, this Flac download is pretty shoddy. Mislabeled "Getwaway" (sic), Lightning Bolt is track nine, and no liner note jpgs or anything.

First time I went digital and I gots burned. Ten Club make-a me sad.

GET WAWAY

[Mike]

There are so many different things so enjoy in music aside from the vocal melodies. Even songs completely lacking a vocal melody can be enjoyable! Fascinating, I know. For a Pearl Jam example: See the verses of Push Me, Pull Me or the three Binaural instrumentals.

[Jorge]

Infallible, for all intents and purposes, is not a subtle tune

And it doesn't have to be, and that's absolutely fine. What I struggle with is the idea that this is the prime example of Pearl Jam doing a "melodic chorus", and that makes it better than everything after Vitalogy.

[fishbob]

Infallible, for all intents and purposes, is not a subtle tune

And it doesn't have to be, and that's absolutely fine. What I struggle with is the idea that this is the prime example of Pearl Jam doing a "melodic chorus", and that makes it better than everything after Vitalogy.

Yeah that's what I was trying to say. A song doesn't have to be obvious to be good, but being obvious shouldn't be the only reason why it's good

[Release_Me]

"By thinking we're infallible, we are tempting fate instead" is kind of shitty lyrically, for an intended anthem. Maybe that's why I like it.

It's the biggest hook in the song. It's actually genius to take the line most representative of the song and make it so melodic. People are singing along to these lyrics in their head. As an artist, no better way to get the message across than to implant it in the heads of your listeners. This isn't a 'wave your lighters' personal song. It's social commentary done in a most effective way. You don't drone on so you put everyone off it. If you want to be heard, this is how you do it.

You can't convince me that "Infallible's" chorus is a better chorus than the choruses you don't like (and I do), just because it's melodic.

I don't need to convince anyone of anything being better objectively because this entire discussion is subjective. Infallible has a great chorus for me because it is melodic and Ed is singing as well as he ever has done. Those things make it great for me.

[Lament]

The best part is his handle is from a song whose strengths are derived less from the chorus than possibly any other song in the entire Pearl Jam catalog.

[Release_Me]

Some of Pearl Jam's best melodic moments come during their most subtle tunes, for example: Sometimes and Parting Ways

Infallible, for all intents and purposes, is not a subtle tune

Two songs I don't care for at all. This only highlights the subjective nature of this discussion.

[fishbob]

That was your 420th post. Blazin

[ABNorman]

Has this been posted yet?

http://www.avclub.com/articles/pearl-ja ... -b,104188/

[Release_Me]

One thing I never understand is people's hate for Pearl Jam's best choruses. A chorus is the part of the song which is supposed to be most melodic. Something that get's imprinted into the listener's head. You don't cram the most difficult words into a chorus or try to make it musically 'complex'. When you do, you end up with forgettable songs.

I suppose some people hate Pearl Jam's "best choruses" because they don't think they're Pearl Jam's best choruses. I love a good pop chorus, but I don't think Pearl Jam are particularly good pop songwriters. Save for a few notable exceptions ("Betterman" being the first one that comes to mind), I think their most outright pop songs fall flat. "Infallible" is a song with a very ordinary chorus melody. It's not about darkness or complexity. It's just kind of hackneyed.

Furthermore, why do you approach songs like TV adverts? A chorus isn't a sales pitch. It doesn't have to be the most melodic part of a song, it just often is. Shooting for earworm usually results in lightweight dreck, and that's not what interests me about Pearl Jam. Their strengths are elsewhere.

I think they are great songwriters and the albums I love all have great pop songwriting. Like this one. I am not a fan of when they stepped away from this and tried to be 'difficult'. I love Infallible. It's in my top ten ever PJ songs so I just disagree with your assessment. A chorus isn't a sales pitch if it's melodic. It's just good. I don't like sonic torture ala Binaural and Riot Act. Good songwriting for me is all about the melodies. PJ's strengths are their marrying of great melodies with non-pop themes and Ed's vocals. LB has this and that's why I feel it's a great PJ album.

"Good songwriting is all about the melodies" strikes me as such a weird thing to say. From the start your thing has been "melody melody melody" and I get that, it's what I gravitate towards as well-- I played the cello for eight years and my favorite pieces to play were always things like Shostakovich's sonatas or Bach's suites, pieces where the instrument was allowed to soar with the melodies instead of carrying the burden of the bass line in a quartet. But unlike you, I don't equate "melodic" with "bright and catchy". I enjoy all kinds of melodies- from the obscure and serpentine ones that require some grappling-with to fully make sense of, to the bounciest and catchiest and sugariest hooks of pop songcraft, through the broken and malformed ones that don't really make sense until you've listened to them twelve times. Binaural and Riot Act aren't avant-garde Ornette Coleman noise-jazz freak-outs, they're collections of very melodic rock songs, with many shades to them, that experiment with texture and space in a way PJ have shied away from. It's not about being "difficult", it's about exploring a broader sonic palette for the joy of it. To suggest that you're only interested in bright, catchy melodies (which is what it sounds like you're saying) is, to me, deliberately turning a blind eye (or, uh, a deaf ear) to a lot of beauty, depth and nuance. That sounds awful to me.

Bright and catchy? Where did I say that in the context of these songs? I enjoy Pendulum and it's far from bright. I dont enjoy Sleight of Hand because it's a drone. Beauty and nuance has nothing to do with it. Immortality has a great melody, and beauty and nuance. It's not bright either. They just haven't written an album's worth of great melodies and hooks for a long time (BS came close). That's why I am enjoying these songs.

[flannelking]

My biggest problem with "Infallible" at this point is not the chorus, but the part where the chorus fizzles out and you just have Ed going yeah yeah yeah over it. The song is two slow, the rhythm too sluggish, to yeah yeah yeah; there's too much space left. I feel as if they need another chorus, almost like the "Ben, the two of us..." refrain of Rats. At this point the song is good, but not great, because that chorus isn't quite getting up there with the rest of the song.

I had been through a break up after the VS release and my name is Ben, so that line has been special to me

[Heathen]

One thing I never understand is people's hate for Pearl Jam's best choruses. A chorus is the part of the song which is supposed to be most melodic. Something that get's imprinted into the listener's head. You don't cram the most difficult words into a chorus or try to make it musically 'complex'. When you do, you end up with forgettable songs.

I suppose some people hate Pearl Jam's "best choruses" because they don't think they're Pearl Jam's best choruses. I love a good pop chorus, but I don't think Pearl Jam are particularly good pop songwriters. Save for a few notable exceptions ("Betterman" being the first one that comes to mind), I think their most outright pop songs fall flat. "Infallible" is a song with a very ordinary chorus melody. It's not about darkness or complexity. It's just kind of hackneyed.

Furthermore, why do you approach songs like TV adverts? A chorus isn't a sales pitch. It doesn't have to be the most melodic part of a song, it just often is. Shooting for earworm usually results in lightweight dreck, and that's not what interests me about Pearl Jam. Their strengths are elsewhere.

I think they are great songwriters and the albums I love all have great pop songwriting. Like this one. I am not a fan of when they stepped away from this and tried to be 'difficult'. I love Infallible. It's in my top ten ever PJ songs so I just disagree with your assessment. A chorus isn't a sales pitch if it's melodic. It's just good. I don't like sonic torture ala Binaural and Riot Act. Good songwriting for me is all about the melodies. PJ's strengths are their marrying of great melodies with non-pop themes and Ed's vocals. LB has this and that's why I feel it's a great PJ album.

"Good songwriting is all about the melodies" strikes me as such a weird thing to say. From the start your thing has been "melody melody melody" and I get that, it's what I gravitate towards as well-- I played the cello for eight years and my favorite pieces to play were always things like Shostakovich's sonatas or Bach's suites, pieces where the instrument was allowed to soar with the melodies instead of carrying the burden of the bass line in a quartet. But unlike you, I don't equate "melodic" with "bright and catchy". I enjoy all kinds of melodies- from the obscure and serpentine ones that require some grappling-with to fully make sense of, to the bounciest and catchiest and sugariest hooks of pop songcraft, through the broken and malformed ones that don't really make sense until you've listened to them twelve times. Binaural and Riot Act aren't avant-garde Ornette Coleman noise-jazz freak-outs, they're collections of very melodic rock songs, with many shades to them, that experiment with texture and space in a way PJ have shied away from. It's not about being "difficult", it's about exploring a broader sonic palette for the joy of it. To suggest that you're only interested in bright, catchy melodies (which is what it sounds like you're saying) is, to me, deliberately turning a blind eye (or, uh, a deaf ear) to a lot of beauty, depth and nuance. That sounds awful to me.

I can see how one would prefer bright over dark but what I don't get is how these bright songs are melodic and darker songs ala Binaural or Riot Act aren't. It's not like you can't sing along to most of these songs, if that's what melodic means (which I'm not sure of).

[Jorge]

Bright and catchy? Where did I say that in the context of these songs?

An attention grabbing melody is a good melody. A droning, plodding song without a catchy melody might as well be prose delivered in spoken word for all I care.

[fishbob]

Some musically droning songs are the best songs ever written, see Tomorrow Never Knows for instance.

[Release_Me]

Infallible, for all intents and purposes, is not a subtle tune

And it doesn't have to be, and that's absolutely fine. What I struggle with is the idea that this is the prime example of Pearl Jam doing a "melodic chorus", and that makes it better than everything after Vitalogy.

Yeah that's what I was trying to say. A song doesn't have to be obvious to be good, but being obvious shouldn't be the only reason why it's good

Infallible is a great song overall but I particularly love the chorus. I find it melodic and delivered with passion and supreme execution. There are technical bits like Ed singing higher in upper chest than he has ever in a clean tone which elevate it to special for me. It is obviously great to me, not great because it is obvious.

[Jorge]

Has this been posted yet?

http://www.avclub.com/articles/pearl-ja ... -b,104188/

Stone talks about Youtube views a lot. LoungeLizard is gonna be psyched.

[Birds in Hell]

Has this been posted yet?

http://www.avclub.com/articles/pearl-ja ... -b,104188/

I hadn't seen it yet.

Thanks for posting, this is fantastic.

[Release_Me]

Bright and catchy? Where did I say that in the context of these songs?

An attention grabbing melody is a good melody. A droning, plodding song without a catchy melody might as well be prose delivered in spoken word for all I care.

Bright does not equate catchy. Catchy is anything that gets stuck in your head. Pendulum and Immortality get stuck in my head too. They're not bright. Black gets stuck in my head the most of any song in their catalogue. The do do do do do part is my daily soundtrack. It grabbed me first time I heard it.