Vedder is McCartney ; McCartney is Vedder

General Pearl Jam discussion.
Post Reply
User avatar
Mine
AnalLog
Posts: 1833
Joined: Wed April 03, 2013 8:10 pm

Re: Vedder is McCartney ; McCartney is Vedder

Post by Mine »

McParadigm wrote:Pop singer albums skewed old even at that point. It's the same reason Garth Brooks went from OMG big as Beatles to "remember him?" Cultural lasting records are a part of a different kind of ongoing story...The Monkees had the top selling album of 1967, but they weren't part of that story.
But think of the music scene just before Ten. The overlap between pop and (hard) rock was very substantial both musically and in the way it was promoted and "consumed" by the public. Many power ballads were labelled hard rock for instance. Rock either more or less hard or more or less mainstream or essentially pop with distorted guitars had a huge audience. Ten is musically very related to that scene. Everyone who argues the music is inspired by earlier styles should take in consideration that all of the 80's rock also was.
I think Ten's commercial success had a lot to do with it's "familiar" sound at the time. It was both part of the scene that would be on it's way out in a year and the one that was coming after it. The biggest difference between 10 and a ton of 80's albums is Ed's vocal style.
The fact that most of it's audience was very young isn't surprising either and it's part of the reason it didn't age all that well. Ten didn't offer anything interesting to people who where familiar with the previous 3 decades of rock and it aged accordingly. Ten's "life" has many elements of typically mainstream records because it's what it essentially was.
User avatar
Mine
AnalLog
Posts: 1833
Joined: Wed April 03, 2013 8:10 pm

Re: Vedder is McCartney ; McCartney is Vedder

Post by Mine »

BurtReynolds wrote:
1.What caused the radical departure between MLB and Ten? Was it Ed? Was it just Seattle in general? MLB is pretty strongly 80s crap to my ears, but Ten doesn't sound like that at all other than a few production sounds like Digster said.
Alive was originally performed by MLB as Dollar Short. So there's that. Ten would have probably been MLB's 2nd record.
Consider that Temple Of The Dog sold about as much as Soundgarden was selling at the time which is about 1.5 million.
User avatar
Anders
NEVER STOP JAMMING!
Posts: 23453
Joined: Fri July 12, 2013 9:11 pm
Twitter: https://twitter.com/lowenan
Location: Oslo, Norway

Re: Vedder is McCartney ; McCartney is Vedder

Post by Anders »

I think Dollar Short was just a demo made by Stone Gossard after Andy's death, that he later worked with Mike and Jeff on, then they added Matt, and eventually with Mookie Blaylock/Pearl Jam with Eddie and Dave K.

However, there was a demo called One Time Fire that preceded Black: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MnP0V_VQO0o

I found this as well: "Andy, Bruce and Stone recorded it at Electric Lady Studios in NYC. At least, that's the info I was given when I received this and some other MLB/Andy recordings on cassette 21 years ago. This track is actually called "The One Time Fire" and was reworked by Stone after Andy died and was the basis for what eventually became a vocal-less "Black" by the end of the year."
User avatar
Anders
NEVER STOP JAMMING!
Posts: 23453
Joined: Fri July 12, 2013 9:11 pm
Twitter: https://twitter.com/lowenan
Location: Oslo, Norway

Re: Vedder is McCartney ; McCartney is Vedder

Post by Anders »

Wouldn't you also say that Eddie himself was slightly influenced vocally by what he saw and heard in Seattle. On one of his first days in the studio, he was part of singing on Temple Of The Dog with Chris Cornell.

Eddie seems to have a more powerful voice with early Pearl Jam (think Layne Staley/Chris Cornell), than he had with Bad Radio.
User avatar
bada
Looks Like a Cat
Posts: 12504
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:53 pm

Re: Vedder is McCartney ; McCartney is Vedder

Post by bada »

Grunge didn't kill GnR. GnR killed GnR.
User avatar
Anders
NEVER STOP JAMMING!
Posts: 23453
Joined: Fri July 12, 2013 9:11 pm
Twitter: https://twitter.com/lowenan
Location: Oslo, Norway

Re: Vedder is McCartney ; McCartney is Vedder

Post by Anders »

Lament wrote: "When the hell did Bruce Springsteen become 'classic rock'?" -Dudes in 1994

"When the hell did U2 become 'classic rock'?" -Dudes in 2004

"When the hell did Pearl Jam become 'classic rock'?" -Dudes in 2014

"When the hell did Coldplay become 'classic rock'?" -Dudes in 2024

"When the hell did Mumford & Sons become 'classic rock'?" -Dudes in 2034

And so on and so on...
There's a lot of truth in this.
bada wrote:Grunge didn't kill GnR. GnR killed GnR.
This is true without a shadow of doubt. If they had kept up their quality and stayed together, they would have been at least as big as Metallica in the long run.
User avatar
darth_vedder
Misplaced My Sponge
Posts: 6467
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 9:52 pm

Re: Vedder is McCartney ; McCartney is Vedder

Post by darth_vedder »

Lament wrote:This thread sucks.

"When the hell did Bruce Springsteen become 'classic rock'?" -Dudes in 1994

"When the hell did U2 become 'classic rock'?" -Dudes in 2004

"When the hell did Pearl Jam become 'classic rock'?" -Dudes in 2014

"When the hell did Coldplay become 'classic rock'?" -Dudes in 2024

"When the hell did Mumford & Sons become 'classic rock'?" -Dudes in 2034

And so on and so on...
:lol:
User avatar
spike
The Master
Posts: 35450
Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 4:18 am

Re: Vedder is McCartney ; McCartney is Vedder

Post by spike »

dimejinky99 wrote:Pj were a lot more visible on Mtv over here for Ten, than Nirvana. Jeremy alive and evenflow seemed to be on every hour whereas Teen spirit was the only one of Nirvana's videos that got that level of play
but i bet teen spirit was on just as much as those three combined.
User avatar
stip
The worst
Posts: 42946
Joined: Thu December 13, 2012 6:31 pm

Re: Vedder is McCartney ; McCartney is Vedder

Post by stip »

spike wrote:
dimejinky99 wrote:Pj were a lot more visible on Mtv over here for Ten, than Nirvana. Jeremy alive and evenflow seemed to be on every hour whereas Teen spirit was the only one of Nirvana's videos that got that level of play
but i bet teen spirit was on just as much as those three combined.

in some respects this doesn't matter because all of these bands reinforced each other. Nevermind would not have been the gamechanger that it was if not for the fact that it was followed by Ten, Facelift/Dirt, Badmotorfinger, Gish/Siamese Dream, Core. All of these artists, who could plausibly seen as being in conversation with each other, together are what create a new musical model. Without them Nirvana is a successful pseudo-punk band.

We probably shouldn't overlook the fact that REM and U2, two of the most important rock bands of that era, released their darkest/most steeped in irony records at the same time. This also really enhanced the sense that music had fundamentally shifted. Hell, even Metallica releasing a dark but accessible album that (largely) dialed down on traditional metal themes and embraced a lot of the same themes as these other albums added to this.

The alternative label makes sense in this context. There was probably something of an inevitable backlash brewing against the excess and superficiality of 80s rock music that these guys all tapped into at about the same time. Nirvana maybe broke first, but they were part of a larger movement reacting against what came before. And you don't get the transformation that follows without all these things happening at the same time
User avatar
stip
The worst
Posts: 42946
Joined: Thu December 13, 2012 6:31 pm

Re: Vedder is McCartney ; McCartney is Vedder

Post by stip »

Mine wrote:
McParadigm wrote:Pop singer albums skewed old even at that point. It's the same reason Garth Brooks went from OMG big as Beatles to "remember him?" Cultural lasting records are a part of a different kind of ongoing story...The Monkees had the top selling album of 1967, but they weren't part of that story.
But think of the music scene just before Ten. The overlap between pop and (hard) rock was very substantial both musically and in the way it was promoted and "consumed" by the public. Many power ballads were labelled hard rock for instance. Rock either more or less hard or more or less mainstream or essentially pop with distorted guitars had a huge audience. Ten is musically very related to that scene. Everyone who argues the music is inspired by earlier styles should take in consideration that all of the 80's rock also was.
I think Ten's commercial success had a lot to do with it's "familiar" sound at the time. It was both part of the scene that would be on it's way out in a year and the one that was coming after it. The biggest difference between 10 and a ton of 80's albums is Ed's vocal style.
The fact that most of it's audience was very young isn't surprising either and it's part of the reason it didn't age all that well. Ten didn't offer anything interesting to people who where familiar with the previous 3 decades of rock and it aged accordingly. Ten's "life" has many elements of typically mainstream records because it's what it essentially was.
Ten has aged very well--it just sounds out of place with the rest of pearl jam's catalog. It still moves a fair amount of copies every month
User avatar
McParadigm
NEVER STOP JAMMING!
Posts: 22393
Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 1:56 am

Re: Vedder is McCartney ; McCartney is Vedder

Post by McParadigm »

BurtReynolds wrote:random thoughts:

1.What caused the radical departure between MLB and Ten? Was it Ed? Was it just Seattle in general? MLB is pretty strongly 80s crap to my ears, but Ten doesn't sound like that at all other than a few production sounds like Digster said.
Random thought: who cares?
2.We often credit grunge with the death of GNR (who I don't consider hair metal), but I wonder if that was really the case. If GNR had their shit together, I think they would have pulled through just fine, like Metallica and other harder metal acts. It was the glam stuff that really was crushed. GNR was dead either way because of Axl.
The industry was in full-on trend chase mode by that point, which is why the 80's have such defining and compartmentalized sounds. I always thought that the "hair metal" thing was really just flash-playing party rock. To that end, it had always had to live alongside the likes of Springsteen's more serious intentions, other peoples' more poppy Springsteeny intentions, "change the world" acts like U2 and Tears for Fears, and so on. Then, near the end of the decade, you have a slightly more punk-infused form of metal coming up with GnR and bands like Skid Row, the growing commercial berth of flashy-but-fuck-you bands like 80's Metallica, as well as less flashy anomalies like REM, Midnight Oil, and so on. You've also got indie punk and noise bands doing remarkably well during this time...far better than non-pop non-majors were doing just a few years before. By 1990 Soundgarden has a record floating around the bottom half of the top 200, and by early 1991 Man in the Box is on radio.

So it was hardly a match waiting to get lit. It was an expanding trend waiting to get branded.
4.The internet age makes any kind of large scale and sudden change in the mainstream completely impossible, IMO.


Yup. Most of the highest name-recognition singers are recognized as celebrities more than as singers, now.
(patriotic choking noises)
User avatar
hlniv
Future Drummer
Posts: 3098
Joined: Mon July 08, 2013 5:47 pm
Location: Louisville, KY

Re: Vedder is McCartney ; McCartney is Vedder

Post by hlniv »

Lament wrote:This thread sucks.

"When the hell did Bruce Springsteen become 'classic rock'?" -Dudes in 1994

"When the hell did U2 become 'classic rock'?" -Dudes in 2004

"When the hell did Pearl Jam become 'classic rock'?" -Dudes in 2014

"When the hell did Coldplay become 'classic rock'?" -Dudes in 2024

"When the hell did Mumford & Sons become 'classic rock'?" -Dudes in 2034

And so on and so on...
I've been sitting here trying to come up with a response to this, but I can't.

This just about sums it up

The only comment that's worthwhile I think is that the quantity of rock acts that could belong in this type of progression certainly has dwindled. Give me another "new" band other than Mumford and sons that could fit this description. (Even though m&s are a bit of a stretch)
User avatar
BurtReynolds
An enigma of a man shaped hole in the wall between reality and the soul of the devil.
Posts: 45833
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:13 pm
Location: 6000 feet beyond man and time.

Re: Vedder is McCartney ; McCartney is Vedder

Post by BurtReynolds »

Seems like bands like the White Stripes or Black Keys already qualify. it's all retro these days.
RM's resident disinformation expert.
User avatar
hlniv
Future Drummer
Posts: 3098
Joined: Mon July 08, 2013 5:47 pm
Location: Louisville, KY

Re: Vedder is McCartney ; McCartney is Vedder

Post by hlniv »

White stripes yes, will be classic rock by 2019.

So, are foo fighters classic rock now, too? Or do we have to wait a few more yrs?
User avatar
Jorge
NYUCK NYUCK NYUCK
Posts: 36490
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 3:35 pm
Location: Buenos Aires

Re: Vedder is McCartney ; McCartney is Vedder

Post by Jorge »

Oh my God
Anders wrote:I do not have a «neoliberal assessment of geopolitics», so please stop writing that I do.
User avatar
hlniv
Future Drummer
Posts: 3098
Joined: Mon July 08, 2013 5:47 pm
Location: Louisville, KY

Re: Vedder is McCartney ; McCartney is Vedder

Post by hlniv »

What, did you stub your toe or something?
User avatar
BurtReynolds
An enigma of a man shaped hole in the wall between reality and the soul of the devil.
Posts: 45833
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:13 pm
Location: 6000 feet beyond man and time.

Re: Vedder is McCartney ; McCartney is Vedder

Post by BurtReynolds »

is Mozart classic rock?
RM's resident disinformation expert.
User avatar
EJ
Fake NYC Setlist Relayer
Posts: 7053
Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 3:15 pm

Re: Vedder is McCartney ; McCartney is Vedder

Post by EJ »

Neil Young must be rolling over in his grave right now.
User avatar
Mine
AnalLog
Posts: 1833
Joined: Wed April 03, 2013 8:10 pm

Re: Vedder is McCartney ; McCartney is Vedder

Post by Mine »

Anders wrote:I think Dollar Short was just a demo made by Stone Gossard after Andy's death, that he later worked with Mike and Jeff on, then they added Matt, and eventually with Mookie Blaylock/Pearl Jam with Eddie and Dave K.

However, there was a demo called One Time Fire that preceded Black: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MnP0V_VQO0o

I found this as well: "Andy, Bruce and Stone recorded it at Electric Lady Studios in NYC. At least, that's the info I was given when I received this and some other MLB/Andy recordings on cassette 21 years ago. This track is actually called "The One Time Fire" and was reworked by Stone after Andy died and was the basis for what eventually became a vocal-less "Black" by the end of the year."
That makes 2 PJ songs that where originally MLB songs. They talk about Dollar Short being sung by Wood in Storytellers.
User avatar
Mine
AnalLog
Posts: 1833
Joined: Wed April 03, 2013 8:10 pm

Re: Vedder is McCartney ; McCartney is Vedder

Post by Mine »

BurtReynolds wrote:is Mozart classic rock?
No, but Beethoven was the original riffmaster.
Post Reply