I liked that commercial. It was "different".IlluminEddie wrote:Maybe this?hlniv wrote:I don't think the meaning of words is "subjective". Words have meanings that are in the dictionary. DuhLeatherhead wrote:This is just an argument about the subjective meanings of words.
Once again, I would like to move this thread back to how/when the band sold out-
I'll put out another one-
Pearl Jam sold out when they appeared on another artist's album solely for the money.
that album sucks. no it doesn't!cutuphalfdead wrote:6 more pages? Someone please sum up this thread for me.
Burt did.cutuphalfdead wrote:God damnit, give me a summary!
Mine wrote:Yup. most of Ten was written in 1989 and Sirens sounds like it was written in 1989harmless wrote:Also, I do think that while Lightning Bolt doesn't *sound* like Ten, it shares certain similarities that make it an attempt at something similar, aesthetically.
Superficially/artificially catchy aren't terms used to describe a depressive ballads usually even though they can be all of it. Both Pendulum and Yellow Moon fit your description. Catchy basically means appealing regardless of the connotation it usually has when describing music. Pendulum is a sum of superficial and artificial elements to make a song sound dark and depressive. There isn't a song on the whole record that isn't catchy btw. I think that many people perceive this kind of songs as deep/honest or plain better by default just because they're dark and depressive or because they like them. I think Pendulum is as popular as it is precisely because it's superficially and artificially catchy.harmless wrote:You don't think they're of a higher quality in any way whatsoever? I'm not arguing they're better just because they're sad. I actually think "Pendulum", at least lyrically, is a pretty calculated attempt at a "depressing song" that doesn't sound very depressing. It's got a lot more going for it than LTRP for other reasons.Mine wrote:Because they're "sad" ballads?harmless wrote:Seriously? We're talking about degrees here; they may not be classical pieces with 47 movements (and all of them deliberately-off-putting), but they're not "LTRP" either.Mine wrote:Pendulum and Yellow Moon are exactly superficially/artificially catchy given the audience their intended too. Does that make them bad by default? No.harmless wrote:Who cares? Low Light was awesome. I don't need Pearl Jam to be original, I just want them to be interesting, and "LTRP" and "Future Days" are not that in any way whatsoever. The thing about Pendulum and Yellow Moon is that no, they aren't boring, but neither are they superficially / artificially "catchy", as if everyone wants that kind of thing. They're not perfect, but they are among the best songs on this album.Mine wrote:Or we may end up dying of boredom. Seriously, i don't dislike Pendulum at all but it's a risky area for them. I think i get why Yellow Moon almost didn't make the album. This songs benefit from being an exception rather than the rule. Especially with PJ because they really don't know how the explore the possibilities a song like this gives. You could really go anywhere musically from that intro.harmless wrote: If PJ carry that instinct forward, as well as the instinct to write "Pendulum" et al, we might see better future days after all.
I will try to explain my point with something that people who really like it tend to say - i wish it was longer. I doubt that means repeating a certain a couple of different bars 4 times. I don't think they're capable of writing more of this kind of songs without relying on clichés or citing themselves or both. How many people posted that Yellow Moon reminds them of Low Light?
if he's a second account, whoever is responsible deserves an award for some expert level trolling.VinylGuy wrote:Illumineddie is a genius. He puts his soul into every post.
I have some sympathy with that argument. But if you're going down that road, you could argue that basically every song in the world is "catchy" as long as it gives you an eargasm, which basically ends all debate on it.Mine wrote:Superficially/artificially catchy aren't terms used to describe a depressive ballads usually even though they can be all of it. Both Pendulum and Yellow Moon fit your description. Catchy basically means appealing regardless of the connotation it usually has when describing music. Pendulum is a sum of superficial and artificial elements to make a song sound dark and depressive. There isn't a song on the whole record that isn't catchy btw. I think that many people perceive this kind of songs as deep/honest or plain better by default just because they're dark and depressive or because they like them. I think Pendulum is as popular as it is precisely because it's superficially and artificially catchy.harmless wrote:You don't think they're of a higher quality in any way whatsoever? I'm not arguing they're better just because they're sad. I actually think "Pendulum", at least lyrically, is a pretty calculated attempt at a "depressing song" that doesn't sound very depressing. It's got a lot more going for it than LTRP for other reasons.Mine wrote:Because they're "sad" ballads?harmless wrote:Seriously? We're talking about degrees here; they may not be classical pieces with 47 movements (and all of them deliberately-off-putting), but they're not "LTRP" either.Mine wrote:Pendulum and Yellow Moon are exactly superficially/artificially catchy given the audience their intended too. Does that make them bad by default? No.harmless wrote:Who cares? Low Light was awesome. I don't need Pearl Jam to be original, I just want them to be interesting, and "LTRP" and "Future Days" are not that in any way whatsoever. The thing about Pendulum and Yellow Moon is that no, they aren't boring, but neither are they superficially / artificially "catchy", as if everyone wants that kind of thing. They're not perfect, but they are among the best songs on this album.Mine wrote:Or we may end up dying of boredom. Seriously, i don't dislike Pendulum at all but it's a risky area for them. I think i get why Yellow Moon almost didn't make the album. This songs benefit from being an exception rather than the rule. Especially with PJ because they really don't know how the explore the possibilities a song like this gives. You could really go anywhere musically from that intro.harmless wrote: If PJ carry that instinct forward, as well as the instinct to write "Pendulum" et al, we might see better future days after all.
I will try to explain my point with something that people who really like it tend to say - i wish it was longer. I doubt that means repeating a certain a couple of different bars 4 times. I don't think they're capable of writing more of this kind of songs without relying on clichés or citing themselves or both. How many people posted that Yellow Moon reminds them of Low Light?
While i like Pendulum and Yellow Moon more than LTRP i don't think they're of a considerable higher quality and what there is better is superficial.
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.
I'm not disagreeing with this btw. I think the music and business side of things aren't necessarily dependent on each other. The videos they did for Riot Act weren't art pieces but promotional material. One of them was for I Am Mine. That's a relatively easy listening song.harmless wrote:This is what I was thinking, yeah.digster wrote:I would actually say they were in the weeds as much, if not more, on Riot Act than Binaural. I don't think the fact that they shot some live footage discounts the fact that it's a pretty un-commercial listen overall.harmless wrote:OK, fair enough.Mine wrote:Considering it was their 1st album Epic probably made most of the money or at least a good chunk out of it. I think McP posted something about this things not long ago. They were rejecting media exposure and the kind of promotion you'd expect from them considering how many records they were selling but rejecting money is still a long way from that. This is still just Vs trough No Code. Yield was a concious attempt at selling more records. There probably isn't a interview Stone gave promoting it that doesn't have that implied. Selling more records is making more money. Having said that i think they were ultimately disappointed with how that worked out because even though it did outsell No Code it still didn't by a margin large enough to make it relevant. You're basically left with only one album (Binaural) that follows your logic. By Riot Act they were doing music videos again. Hardly a sign of going against the machine.harmless wrote:Since No Code, they were proverbially "rejected" the money and fame they had generated during Ten, and could've been making by creating cookie-cutter radio hits like "Jeremy" (or, hell, "The Fixer"). Each album post-Yield was making less and less money, and (in my opinion) getting more and more artistically interesting. The band appeared to want to follow their artistic, ethical and political drives over and above being part of the "machine". They don't have a label now, in effect they are still doing as much as they can to look like a "label" band, and even if they're still not making much money, many of the musical and peripheral decisions they've made in the past several years were clearly designed for that purpose. You know this. I'm teaching Grandma to suck eggs here. If you don't agree, you don't agree.Mine wrote:rejected what money? They were probably making more money back in the day and they could still be making considerably more money.harmless wrote:Yeah. The disappointment isn't that they sold out, the disappointment is that they deliberately rejected the money and fame being thrown at them, and then when they felt better about the world, decided they wanted to fight to get it back again.Mine wrote:i think they had that figured out by 1992hlniv wrote: It took a couple years for them to realize they had a cash machine
Oh and they've been "fighting to get it back again" since Yield.
Why i don't buy the idea of them purposely trying to make more money and that being at the root of everything they do doesn't have anything to do with idealising them btw. I just think money hasn't been an issue for them for so long that they simply don't have to actually care about it partly because they were never really refusing it all that much.
