Lightning Bolt: the official album thread

[VinylGuy]

I'm really digging MYM more and more with each new listen. I don't really get the Bad Religion comparisons, but YMMV. Also, the argument about "well if this was the Foos playing it" doesn't resonate with me b/c I just really don't think many other current bands could credibly pull off a song like this. It's a "made for PJ" moment.

I will say, though, that, if I were ranking the first singles off the recent releases from the "era" bands, I'd have it: 'Hollow' > 'MYM' > 'Been Away Too Long'

The guitars have a strong BR influence, and Eddie´s vocal delivery too.

I think Foo Fighters can make a song like this any time. Bridge Burning has a similar guitar pattern.

[stip]

That, and I think the whole "any song is instantly better if it's Pearl Jam playing it" is a foolish way to approach music.

If you really like Pearl Jam, I think that's a perfectly valid approach.

(see my longer post on the previous page)

I don't think I can get past the first line of that post. Songwriting and performance will always be the main things I listen for and judge my music by, not unmeasurables and intangibles like "the feel of these 5 specific people playing music together".

Music is the ultimate intangible.

I'm going to make you a bookmark with that on it.

great post.

i still agree with Platypus and his original post. He had a point, most of you are missing by saying " hey i like it because its pearl jam". That is pretty obvious...Im guessing he was pointing about how a lot of people here ( me included and he included im sure ) seem to dismiss some other bands when they are making similar music, just because we dont like those bands for whatever reason.

yeah, but the intangibles in music do the vast majority of the heavy lifting. It's no small thing to have the foo fighters and pearl jam perform the exact same song. It will still feel different.

[evenslow]

I'm really digging MYM more and more with each new listen. I don't really get the Bad Religion comparisons, but YMMV. Also, the argument about "well if this was the Foos playing it" doesn't resonate with me b/c I just really don't think many other current bands could credibly pull off a song like this. It's a "made for PJ" moment.

This is a great point. Like John Witherspoon in Boomerang you gotta "reverse it." Think of another current band trying to pull off the elements at play here. I think they'd all be missing at least one element, be it Ed's voice, Cameron's drumming, Stone/Mike's interplay, Boom's... cookies that he brought to the studio that day.

[epilogue]

That, and I think the whole "any song is instantly better if it's Pearl Jam playing it" is a foolish way to approach music.

If you really like Pearl Jam, I think that's a perfectly valid approach.

(see my longer post on the previous page)

I don't think I can get past the first line of that post. Songwriting and performance will always be the main things I listen for and judge my music by, not unmeasurables and intangibles like "the feel of these 5 specific people playing music together".

Listen to Rod Stewart sing Downtown Train.

That's what we're talking about.

[VinylGuy]

That, and I think the whole "any song is instantly better if it's Pearl Jam playing it" is a foolish way to approach music.

If you really like Pearl Jam, I think that's a perfectly valid approach.

(see my longer post on the previous page)

I don't think I can get past the first line of that post. Songwriting and performance will always be the main things I listen for and judge my music by, not unmeasurables and intangibles like "the feel of these 5 specific people playing music together".

Music is the ultimate intangible.

I'm going to make you a bookmark with that on it.

great post.

i still agree with Platypus and his original post. He had a point, most of you are missing by saying " hey i like it because its pearl jam". That is pretty obvious...Im guessing he was pointing about how a lot of people here ( me included and he included im sure ) seem to dismiss some other bands when they are making similar music, just because we dont like those bands for whatever reason.

yeah, but the intangibles in music do the vast majority of the heavy lifting. It's no small thing to have the foo fighters and pearl jam perform the exact same song. It will still feel different.

I agree with that. That might be the main reason we are posting in a PJ forum right?
And yet, by pointing that out you can still think, if this song was played and released by another band, most of these guys, maybe me included, wouldnt be so blown away.

[Birds in Hell]

And yet, by pointing that out you can still think, if this song was played and released by another band, most of these guys, maybe me included, wouldnt be so blown away.

I don't think that's a very meaningful observation.

[mray10]

Honestly, some of this is also about relationships, and many of us still have quite strong relationships with the music. Some of us are still happily married. Some of us feel like they've been cheating and want to be taken back, but the emotional connection you've established (at some point presumably on the strength of songwriting and performance) enhances the songs you like, and may make you turn against the ones you don't with greater vitriol (since it's not just a song you don't like. it's a betrayal).

This is a real thing. Your girlfriend will look more attractive to you than she probably 'objectively' is. I'm sure I think my daughter is more adorable than she objectively is. The objective standards don't matter. How you feel about the person obviously affects how you process who they are and what they do. But a lot of this is earned. Once you've made that commitment you never listen to songs in a vacuum. You hear them in the context of a career, and that adds all sorts of layers and dimensions to the experience that the simple writing can't account for.

I can't believe there aren't Elvis Costello songs you appreciate, even love, that would bore you if someone else wrote them. I'd say the same thing to McP about Tom Waits.

And sometimes it's just about giving something a real chance. I can have one listen of an album from some more or less unknown group (or even a known group I'm just not an especially big fan of) and if nothing grabs me, I'll probably never put it on again. If I'm being honest, I'm probably not even paying super close attention unless one of the early songs were good enough to get me realy invested.

But with a group I love, love enough to be on a message board devoted to them at 9:00 on a Thursday night? I'm going to give their new song a few spins. I'm going to listen to that new album multiple times to see what strikes me at different points.

Sure, if MYM wasn't Pearl Jam I might just listen to the iTunes clip and not even make it through the full 90 seconds. Or maybe it would suck me in. I don't know. I'm aware enough of my biases to know I can't honestly tell you how it would be, because the first time I heard any of the song I knew it was Pearl Jam. I was already invested at an entirely different level.

[VinylGuy]

And yet, by pointing that out you can still think, if this song was played and released by another band, most of these guys, maybe me included, wouldnt be so blown away.

I don't think that's a very meaningful observation.

Why?

[Strat]

That, and I think the whole "any song is instantly better if it's Pearl Jam playing it" is a foolish way to approach music.

If you really like Pearl Jam, I think that's a perfectly valid approach.

(see my longer post on the previous page)

I don't think I can get past the first line of that post. Songwriting and performance will always be the main things I listen for and judge my music by, not unmeasurables and intangibles like "the feel of these 5 specific people playing music together".

Listen to Rod Stewart sing Downtown Train.

That's what we're talking about.

I love you.

[stip]

regarding the Lightning bolt title:

1. When I was wondering earlier if there were worse titles than Lightning Bolt I forgot all about King Animal. that's much worse. They both still suck though.


2. I said I had a theory about where they might be going with the lightning bolt stuff. This could be totally wrong, and I am extrapolating out of what i think is going on in MYM, so I guess we'll find out if this is a huge reach or not once we get the album.

I think the broad theme of the album is going to be that epiphanal moment of inspiration when you start to understand that you're not trapped and that things can not only change, but that you're the one who has to do it. The bridge in MYM gets at this. And so think of a lightning bolt in that context. It's a brief flash in the darkness that really illuminates everything, and even though it just lasts for a split second, the images linger. It's powerful energy that, when harnessed, moves mountains. It's dangerous for its power.


Or it could be about surfboards. But my take makes me dislike a terrible title slightly less.

[evenslow]

That, and I think the whole "any song is instantly better if it's Pearl Jam playing it" is a foolish way to approach music.

If you really like Pearl Jam, I think that's a perfectly valid approach.

(see my longer post on the previous page)

I don't think I can get past the first line of that post. Songwriting and performance will always be the main things I listen for and judge my music by, not unmeasurables and intangibles like "the feel of these 5 specific people playing music together".

Music is the ultimate intangible.

I'm going to make you a bookmark with that on it.

great post.

i still agree with Platypus and his original post. He had a point, most of you are missing by saying " hey i like it because its pearl jam". That is pretty obvious...Im guessing he was pointing about how a lot of people here ( me included and he included im sure ) seem to dismiss some other bands when they are making similar music, just because we dont like those bands for whatever reason.

yeah, but the intangibles in music do the vast majority of the heavy lifting. It's no small thing to have the foo fighters and pearl jam perform the exact same song. It will still feel different.

This goes hand in hand with the other post I just made but when I think of foo fighters doing MYM I think it would be awful and lacking in sweet sweet panache.

[Birds in Hell]

And yet, by pointing that out you can still think, if this song was played and released by another band, most of these guys, maybe me included, wouldnt be so blown away.

I don't think that's a very meaningful observation.

Why?

For the reasons I've already talked about on the last few pages. I think it's fairly self-evident that a bunch of Pearl Jam fans will enjoy this song as performed by Pearl Jam more than they would if it were performed by another band who they don't enjoy listening to as much.

[mray10]

regarding the Lightning bolt title:

1. When I was wondering earlier if there were worse titles than Lightning Bolt I forgot all about King Animal. that's much worse. They both still suck though.


2. I said I had a theory about where they might be going with the lightning bolt stuff. This could be totally wrong, and I am extrapolating out of what i think is going on in MYM, so I guess we'll find out if this is a huge reach or not once we get the album.

I think the broad theme of the album is going to be that epiphanal moment of inspiration when you start to understand that you're not trapped and that things can not only change, but that you're the one who has to do it. The bridge in MYM gets at this. And so think of a lightning bolt in that context. It's a brief flash in the darkness that really illuminates everything, and even though it just lasts for a split second, the images linger. It's powerful energy that, when harnessed, moves mountains. It's dangerous for its power.


Or it could be about surfboards. But my take makes me dislike a terrible title slightly less.

We really need to make sure we don't lose this, so it can be addressed in the guided tour thread come January ...

[Birds in Hell]

regarding the Lightning bolt title:

1. When I was wondering earlier if there were worse titles than Lightning Bolt I forgot all about King Animal. that's much worse. They both still suck though.

I think they're both great titles.

*shrug*

[VinylGuy]

And yet, by pointing that out you can still think, if this song was played and released by another band, most of these guys, maybe me included, wouldnt be so blown away.

I don't think that's a very meaningful observation.

Why?

For the reasons I've already talked about on the last few pages. I think it's fairly self-evident that a bunch of Pearl Jam fans will enjoy this song as performed by Pearl Jam more than they would if it were performed by another band who they don't enjoy listening to as much.

Even if im sure they will like it more, you can also judge music beyond your fandom.

[stip]

And yet, by pointing that out you can still think, if this song was played and released by another band, most of these guys, maybe me included, wouldnt be so blown away.

I don't think that's a very meaningful observation.

Why?

i think mray's point above is part of this, but I think what I said about the way the history enhances the music matters too. I'd almost certainly like this less, but that's not surprising. This would be the case with almost every song by every band. Take even the very best Pearl Jam or REM or Mark Lanegan or Tom Waits song and have someone else sing it, and it won't be the same. The song could literally sound identical, right down t the inflections in the singer's voice. Chances are pretty good I'd like the song a lot. But when I first heard The Gravedigger's Song off Mark Lanegan's recent album I wasn't just listening to The Gravedigger's song. I was listening to the best parts of the soulsaver's records, the high points of bubblegum, of field songs, of whisky for the holy ghost. That invests every sound with weight that will simply not be there for the uninitiated.

[gems and rhinestones]

yeah, but the intangibles in music do the vast majority of the heavy lifting. It's no small thing to have the foo fighters and pearl jam perform the exact same song. It will still feel different.

Exactly This!!!

[stip]

regarding the Lightning bolt title:

1. When I was wondering earlier if there were worse titles than Lightning Bolt I forgot all about King Animal. that's much worse. They both still suck though.

I think they're both great titles.

*shrug*

this is a totally non hostile and serious question. Why do you like them?

[doug rr]

regarding the Lightning bolt title:

1. When I was wondering earlier if there were worse titles than Lightning Bolt I forgot all about King Animal. that's much worse. They both still suck though.


2. I said I had a theory about where they might be going with the lightning bolt stuff. This could be totally wrong, and I am extrapolating out of what i think is going on in MYM, so I guess we'll find out if this is a huge reach or not once we get the album.

I think the broad theme of the album is going to be that epiphanal moment of inspiration when you start to understand that you're not trapped and that things can not only change, but that you're the one who has to do it. The bridge in MYM gets at this. And so think of a lightning bolt in that context. It's a brief flash in the darkness that really illuminates everything, and even though it just lasts for a split second, the images linger. It's powerful energy that, when harnessed, moves mountains. It's dangerous for its power.


Or it could be about surfboards. But my take makes me dislike a terrible title slightly less.

it will come out that lightning bolt is about surfboards and Gerry Lopez...my 2 cents

[Waverider]

The general disappointment with the title is baffling.

Here's hoping album #11 will be called " CHUBBY RAIN "