Lightning Bolt: the official album thread

[harmless]

As much as I loathe everything about Backspacer, PJ has actually been on a small win streak with me lately.

Of The Earth, Ole, and now MYM. I like em all. In fact, I think they are pretty great songs. Not Earth-shattering by any means, but still. A streak is a streak.

My hopes are raised.

Hard to believe, finally the hopes are raised!

[harmless]

I know this is very cynical of me, but I can't help but think that some people are kind of forcing themselves to like this song. I think if you presented this same song with a different singer (say a Bob Mould or a Greg? Graffin) to a bunch of Pearl Jam fans, most of them would go "meh."

Jorge, you of all people should acknowledge that this non-argument is ridiculous. Because if you replaced the guitars on STBC with jazz piano and presented it to PJ fans, most of them would go "Meh". I don't get that removing the vocals ON A PJ SONG proves anything. If I took Ed off most of PJ's catalogue I would like it less.

[darth_vedder]

As much as I loathe everything about Backspacer, PJ has actually been on a small win streak with me lately.

Of The Earth, Ole, and now MYM. I like em all. In fact, I think they are pretty great songs. Not Earth-shattering by any means, but still. A streak is a streak.

My hopes are raised.

Hard to believe, finally the hopes shades are raised!

[harmless]

I know this is very cynical of me, but I can't help but think that some people are kind of forcing themselves to like this song. I think if you presented this same song with a different singer (say a Bob Mould or a Greg? Graffin) to a bunch of Pearl Jam fans, most of them would go "meh."

Not only that, but if everything about this song remained unchanged, including the music, Eddie's voice, etc., and you were to hear this song for the first time and the band Pearl Jam never existed, people would think "meh."

Ah, the 'If there was absolutely no context influencing your opinion, you'd hate the song' fallacy. It's a long name for a fallacy but I don't agree with it either.

[harmless]

As much as I loathe everything about Backspacer, PJ has actually been on a small win streak with me lately.

Of The Earth, Ole, and now MYM. I like em all. In fact, I think they are pretty great songs. Not Earth-shattering by any means, but still. A streak is a streak.

My hopes are raised.

Hard to believe, finally the hopes shades are raised!

Man, you just undid my joke.

[Heathen]

isn't that dude with the bleach-ass hair someone in their org?

I think... I think that's denverapolis

[evenslow]

I know this is very cynical of me, but I can't help but think that some people are kind of forcing themselves to like this song. I think if you presented this same song with a different singer (say a Bob Mould or a Greg? Graffin) to a bunch of Pearl Jam fans, most of them would go "meh."

Jorge, you of all people should acknowledge that this non-argument is ridiculous. Because if you replaced the guitars on STBC with jazz piano and presented it to PJ fans, most of them would go "Meh". I don't get that removing the vocals ON A PJ SONG proves anything. If I took Ed off most of PJ's catalogue I would like it less.

let's not start this up again.

[bada]

Remove Ed from Ten you have Bad Company. Remove Ed from Lightning Bolt you have Bad Religion. Add Micheal Jackson you have Bad.

[wilkins]

Well this explains a lot

http://www.lightningbolt-usa.com/Bolt/about

So, they boosted the avocado consumption/economy, saved Tom Tomorrow's career, and now are saving a surfboard company...

[stip]

where's their parade?

[stupidmop]

http://www.musicradar.com/news/guitars/ ... olt-580058

"If you're a Pearl Jam fan you're going to love it," says a proud Mike of the album, "and even if you're not, maybe it'll turn you into one!"Mike explained that the writing process for the album before recording began with longtime friend and producer Brendan O'Brien was a drawn-out affair even by the Seattle legends' standards."We started it two years ago," says Mike, "then we had to pull back. We finished seven songs two years ago and we had to take some time to figure out what we wanted to do. And write some more songs. So about four months ago we started up again with a brand new batch of songs to go along with those."I think getting away from them and taking the time to do it, and discussing with Brendan O'Brien who is producing it, having many meetings between ourselves about these things, yet keeping it fresh while we were recording it."And the guitarist believes that taking their time has definitely paid off."I think it's helped. I think it's going to be really cool record and I'm very excited about it. Every artist says that about their new thing but I feel like we've been through a long journey to get there and it was totally worth it."For more on Mike McCready read the full feature on his role in supergroup Mad Season in issue 243 of Total Guitar.

[i got bugs]

i have a bolt shirt, maybe ill wear it to one of the shows

[digster]

Good to know we can always count on Mike to really get in-depth about the studio.

[EJ]

Should be plenty of material left for the EP.

[stip]

Should be plenty of material left for the EP.

[harmless]

I think it just comes down to "I like to hear these guys play, and Eddie Vedder sing."

I think this is probably exactly the mentality.

Its been that way for a long time.

That's how it is for me for the most part. It's not that I like every Pearl Jam song. But if you take a brand new song that I never heard before, have Pearl Jam play it, and have another band play it, I'd like the Pearl Jam version better.

Yea and i dont understand why this is a bad thing or why we shouldnt then like this song

It's not a bad thing.

It's not a bad thing, but it evinces some kind of failure in critical thinking. The idea that a song is made inherently better or more enjoyable just because it's being played by this particular group of people, performance or songwriting themselves notwithstanding.

Maybe you're evincing a tendency to glorify critical thinking.

[harmless]

http://www.musicradar.com/news/guitars/ ... olt-580058

"If you're a Pearl Jam fan you're going to love it," says a proud Mike of the album, "and even if you're not, maybe it'll turn you into one!"Mike explained that the writing process for the album before recording began with longtime friend and producer Brendan O'Brien was a drawn-out affair even by the Seattle legends' standards."We started it two years ago," says Mike, "then we had to pull back. We finished seven songs two years ago and we had to take some time to figure out what we wanted to do. And write some more songs. So about four months ago we started up again with a brand new batch of songs to go along with those."I think getting away from them and taking the time to do it, and discussing with Brendan O'Brien who is producing it, having many meetings between ourselves about these things, yet keeping it fresh while we were recording it."And the guitarist believes that taking their time has definitely paid off."I think it's helped. I think it's going to be really cool record and I'm very excited about it. Every artist says that about their new thing but I feel like we've been through a long journey to get there and it was totally worth it."For more on Mike McCready read the full feature on his role in supergroup Mad Season in issue 243 of Total Guitar.

Why does all the journalism surrounding Pearl Jam always sound so lame?

[Kevin Davis]

I know this is very cynical of me, but I can't help but think that some people are kind of forcing themselves to like this song. I think if you presented this same song with a different singer (say a Bob Mould or a Greg? Graffin) to a bunch of Pearl Jam fans, most of them would go "meh."

Jorge, you of all people should acknowledge that this non-argument is ridiculous. Because if you replaced the guitars on STBC with jazz piano and presented it to PJ fans, most of them would go "Meh". I don't get that removing the vocals ON A PJ SONG proves anything. If I took Ed off most of PJ's catalogue I would like it less.

The fallacy inherent to Jorge's position is that, putting the song in the hands of, say, Bob Mould, does not put it on some kind of neutral plane where a listener would therefore be able to assess the song as a piece of work on its objective merits; all putting it in Mould's hands would do would create an entirely new set of subjective circumstances that could be just as offputting to a Pearl Jam fan as Eddie Vedder's voice could be attractive to them. The fact that a Pearl Jam fan might not like the Bob Mould version of "Mind Your Manners" doesn't necessarily signify that "MYM" is any better or worse of a song than any given fan's perception of it might dictate; all it signifies is that it works for them less in that context, in which case you have to pose the question all over again, rendering a kind of circular tail-chase with no logical answer.

The problem is that songs don't exist as objective free-standing entities, sans interpreter. I suppose you could say that the sheet music for a song reflects its base elements in a non-contextual way, but I would also suspect that even the most profound sight readers wouldn't be so foolish as to assign a value judgment to a piece of music based on what it is on a piece of paper, without having heard it. Once you turn written notes into tangible sounds that fill the air, you're putting it into some kind of interpretive context, even if all it is is a midi file--in some way, these notes are being interpreted in a manner that somehow could be different, thereby provoking a different response. So the argument ultimately boils down to, "Well, if something about this were different, you would probably feel differently about it," which to me is self-evident and not really reflective of anything, though it can be an interesting thought to ponder if kept in perspective.

In a lot of ways our initial reactions to music are our most honest ones, regardless of what biases may cloud them. Since there is no objective way to appreciate music, it seems reasonable that our subjective reactions to it could (and should) be influenced by other entirely subjective factors (how much we like the band, for instance). This does not signal a dulling of our critical faculties by any stretch of the imagination, and the notion that "criticism" should somehow be immune from bias and personal investment is almost assuredly the number one reason why most people who write about music are extremely bad at it. Good criticism is determined by how well a writer is able to convey his subjective experience in a meaningful way, no matter how prominent his biases or how scientifically sound his methods; it is not determined by how well he is able to adhere to a systematic process for determining whether something is really as objectively good as he thinks it is.

[harmless]

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".

Sorry, but I think you're just kind of trolling now. (I'm also sorry I'm bringing up old posts, I'm reading through from the beginning.) If I love drumkits, and consider 'Pearl' drumkits to be my favourite (for example), then I'm likely to think my drumkit is better quality because it has a 'Pearl' logo on it, even if it's the same colour and material as other drumkits. Why? Because it sounds like a Pearl drumkit, and I am discerning.

[VinylGuy]

So these guys dont know the tracklist yet right?