PJ : Comparison with Rolling Stones

[ducko]

OK, there's been a shortage of new threads recently so I'm just going to throw this out there and see what ppl reckon.

I read an interview with Keith Richards in a guitar mag once, and he was basically saying that what he thought made the stones a great band, or at least a great live band that people enjoyed listening to or watching, was the fact that they evolved to a point with their live shows where noone in the band was actually playing the main rhythm part (or melody or whatever) of the song. His comment that echoed with me was that he enjoyed that fact they were so slick that they all played around the main rhythm figure but none them actually played it - yet it all still worked.

Last I heard a live Stones show was 'Shine a Light' and I thought that by that stage they had taken this concept a bit too far and what happened was it actually sounded like shit.

Nevertheless, this comment stayed with me and I found myself thinking many times when listening to Pearl Jam's music that the same could be said about them. In particular their earlier stuff off Ten and Vs, but perhaps to a certain extent some of their other albums before they became kind of a punk band who played power chords rather than riffs. Perhaps the best example I can think of would be a live version of Rats - when it really pumped, and both Mike and Stone are playing different stuff over Jeff's bass, yet it all fits together to make the song.

Anyway, that is all. Discuss…or not, I don't really mind.

[Wendy Carlos's Twin]

I understand what you're saying. They went from tight to sloppy and all nuance in the various instrumental parts was lost. We have discussed this many times with Pearl Jam's live history. And yes, The Stones are another perfect example of this. From 1969 to about 1973, they were fantastic live...and then they became the sloppy, indistinguishable Stones we all know now.

[E.H. Ruddock]

Oh man how great would it be if Eddie Vedder started doing that chicken walk across the stage?

[rick malone]

They were tight on Vs. but alot of the song structures were less than solid giving the music an edge that fit the vocals. It felt like it could fall apart but didn't.

[Kevin Davis]

I don't know that Pearl Jam's music has ever "evolved" to a point where specific band members' parts have changed, where a part that was once the anchoring force of the song became "implied," etc. They have some songs that are written around Jeff's bassline ("Rats" being a good example), but I'm not sure any of them evolved to that point because of some sophisticated chemistry they cultivated.

I'm not a Stones aficionado by any means but I wonder if the kind of thing Keith is talking about isn't more a result of having key personnel changes necessitate a periodic rethinking of their live configuration than it is some hoodoo voodoo telepathy that caused their rhythm parts to magically disappear.

[McParadigm]

It more evolved from a mix of Keith adopting 5-string open g tuning, the Stones getting into the country rock style of the late 60's/early 70's, and the way Mick Taylor approached second guitar status during his tenure. And it's a shame Pearl Jam never explored something similar. The times when they had riffs that left empty spaces between progressions (Around the Bend) often resulted in some of their best studio performances.

[bodysnatcher]

Oh man how great would it be if Eddie Vedder started doing that chicken walk across the stage?

it'd be better than this move

[ducko]

They were tight on Vs. but alot of the song structures were less than solid giving the music an edge that fit the vocals. It felt like it could fall apart but didn't.

The bit about feeling like it could fall apart but didn't it was I was thinking. Added a great edge to the music.

Also agree that their music perhaps didn't evolve to this point, but perhaps the songs were structured to revolve around a certain theme - mainly Jeff's bass - hence giving the same effect.

I guess I miss the riffage...

[rick malone]

They were tight on Vs. but alot of the song structures were less than solid giving the music an edge that fit the vocals. It felt like it could fall apart but didn't.

The bit about feeling like it could fall apart but didn't it was I was thinking. Added a great edge to the music.

Also agree that their music perhaps didn't evolve to this point, but perhaps the songs were structured to revolve around a certain theme - mainly Jeff's bass - hence giving the same effect.

I guess I miss the riffage...

Yes I agree about the bass. Also the way Vs. was mixed is really percussive. It just feels intense. Vitalogy was similar of course but went for more of a song approach.