Pearl Jam albums are really frontloaded

[stip]

This board is a much better place for the merging of threads. Apologize to no one, Ruddo

[mikejasond]

This board is a much better place for the merging of threads. Apologize to no one, Ruddo

Half the time everybody is on page 200 and I have no idea what they're talking about because its random pictures and song title puns

[Sgt. Crackpot]

[LoathedVermin72]

[mikejasond]

Again, LV beats me to the punch, but yeah, nobody's saying you're wrong for disliking the songs. That's fine. What's being called into question is your use of dubious terms and ideas like "filler" and "radio friendly" and whether or not songs are complete enough or have the requisite amount of energy.

You said yourself that in the making of an album there will be some songs that aren't as strong as others, but that doesn't make the lesser ones filler. They're not necessarily there just to pad the length. If you had concrete evidence that somebody said, "Hey, this Ten album is too short, how about we put that cute little "Garden" song on there?", then you would have a point.

That may not always be the case, but they have to make a full album, and I get the feeling that these tracks were not the ones they first picked out to say like "Ok we must make an album and put this on it"

[Kevin Davis]

Well, they had quite a few songs to choose from for "Ten," so I imagine the eleven they chose were at least somewhat deliberate. I think you presume an insight into the band's working process that you pretty obviously don't have: "Song I don't care for = song band also doesn't care for and just threw on because they had
nothing better." Not cool, yo.

[wease]

Again, LV beats me to the punch, but yeah, nobody's saying you're wrong for disliking the songs. That's fine. What's being called into question is your use of dubious terms and ideas like "filler" and "radio friendly" and whether or not songs are complete enough or have the requisite amount of energy.

You said yourself that in the making of an album there will be some songs that aren't as strong as others, but that doesn't make the lesser ones filler. They're not necessarily there just to pad the length. If you had concrete evidence that somebody said, "Hey, this Ten album is too short, how about we put that cute little "Garden" song on there?", then you would have a point.

That may not always be the case, but they have to make a full album, and I get the feeling that these tracks were not the ones they first picked out to say like "Ok we must make an album and put this on it"

But only the band decides how many or what songs make "a full album." If they want Ten to only have 9 songs on it, that would be a full album. You seem think "a full album" is some set number of tracks each album must have. This band is very particular about what songs make it on each album. While you may consider some tracks you don't like filler, there's no way I can see this band thinking of any song on any of their albums as filler.




Except Nothing as it Seems, of course...

[Leatherhead]

I'll say it, and I'll mean it, really hard. Satan's Bed is better than Corduroy.

[LetMeSleep]

Again, LV beats me to the punch, but yeah, nobody's saying you're wrong for disliking the songs. That's fine. What's being called into question is your use of dubious terms and ideas like "filler" and "radio friendly" and whether or not songs are complete enough or have the requisite amount of energy.

You said yourself that in the making of an album there will be some songs that aren't as strong as others, but that doesn't make the lesser ones filler. They're not necessarily there just to pad the length. If you had concrete evidence that somebody said, "Hey, this Ten album is too short, how about we put that cute little "Garden" song on there?", then you would have a point.

That may not always be the case, but they have to make a full album, and I get the feeling that these tracks were not the ones they first picked out to say like "Ok we must make an album and put this on it"

But only the band decides how many or what songs make "a full album." If they want Ten to only have 9 songs on it, that would be a full album. You seem think "a full album" is some set number of tracks each album must have. This band is very particular about what songs make it on each album. While you may consider some tracks you don't like filler, there's no way I can see this band thinking of any song on any of their albums as filler.




Except Nothing as it Seems, of course...

Now I'm getting angry......

[Kevin Davis]

I wish I would have thought to say "your mom is really frontloaded" before now.

[LetMeSleep]

I wish I would have thought to say "your mom is really frontloaded" before now.

That's Tommy's mother.

[evenslow]

I'm guessing this was said somewhere in this wonderful thread, but listening to Binaural right now, I'm pretty certain it's a side two that is better than side one.

1. Breakerfall
2. God`s Dice
3. Evacuation
4. Light Years
5. Nothing As It Seems
6. Thin Air
7. Insignificance

8. Of The Girl
9. Grievance
10. Rival
11. Sleight Of Hand
12. Soon Forget
13. Parting Ways

Higher highs on side two.

[Strat]

Binarual is just....the best. Front to back.

[evenslow]

Binarual is just....the best. Front to back.

which do you prefer - released or unreleased tracklist?

[Strat]

Binarual is just....the best. Front to back.

which do you prefer - released or unreleased tracklist?

All of them. They all complement each other. Why segregate?

[LoathedVermin72]

segregreat