Red Mosquito

stip wrote:i think hail hail is a really good song. It's just too loud of a transition

Which is surely the point?

Listener puts on No Code for the first time "what the f*ck is this pussy sh*t?"
Track 2 starts

Blenheim Augustine wrote:

stip wrote:i think hail hail is a really good song. It's just too loud of a transition

Which is surely the point?

Listener puts on No Code for the first time "what the f*ck is this pussy sh*t?"
Track 2 starts

yup, that was the point. I think the desire to have a loud song early in the mix (with an explosively loud beginning), while it may have relaxed skeptics, does not do the album a service.

stip wrote:

Blenheim Augustine wrote:

stip wrote:i think hail hail is a really good song. It's just too loud of a transition

Which is surely the point?

Listener puts on No Code for the first time "what the f*ck is this pussy sh*t?"
Track 2 starts

yup, that was the point. I think the desire to have a loud song early in the mix (with an explosively loud beginning), while it may have relaxed skeptics, does not do the album a service.

As with the remainder of this album and the ideas and thoughts and reactions each song after another inspires, do you think there was a thought behind that very reaction that was meant to be inspired. I find everything about this album sends me down a rabbit hole of trying to glean a meaning or thought process behind what happens both in the album tracks, and in between them. This might be an exact example of why this album is my favorite. These little moments that turn into cavernous debates and thoughts about the artist's intention.

liebzz wrote:

stip wrote:

Blenheim Augustine wrote:

stip wrote:i think hail hail is a really good song. It's just too loud of a transition

Which is surely the point?

Listener puts on No Code for the first time "what the f*ck is this pussy sh*t?"
Track 2 starts

yup, that was the point. I think the desire to have a loud song early in the mix (with an explosively loud beginning), while it may have relaxed skeptics, does not do the album a service.

As with the remainder of this album and the ideas and thoughts and reactions each song after another inspires, do you think there was a thought behind that very reaction that was meant to be inspired. I find everything about this album sends me down a rabbit hole of trying to glean a meaning or thought process behind what happens both in the album tracks, and in between them. This might be an exact example of why this album is my favorite. These little moments that turn into cavernous debates and thoughts about the artist's intention.

personally, no. The position of hail hail, the kind of song it is, sure. But I think the volume in particular is there because they were afraid of losing interest.

We'll take opposite views on this one. I think the volume is specifically meant for the listener to have that visceral reaction - to almost think that this is what Pearl Jam is supposed to sound like as an artistic expression juxtaposed against the introspective and quiet Sometimes and playful and middle-eastern tinged Who You Are. In doing so, the listener can choose to accept that this is how they are supposed to sound, or ultimately question why they think that, and whether their visceral reaction is a good or a bad thing this it lends to imposing limitations on how we allow the artist to express himself.

The fact that Hail Hail is an exceptionally good rock song is just awesomeness anyway and neither adds to nor subtracts from its context on the album.

stip wrote:

Blenheim Augustine wrote:

stip wrote:i think hail hail is a really good song. It's just too loud of a transition

Which is surely the point?

Listener puts on No Code for the first time "what the f*ck is this pussy sh*t?"
Track 2 starts

yup, that was the point. I think the desire to have a loud song early in the mix (with an explosively loud beginning), while it may have relaxed skeptics, does not do the album a service.

I always thought it had a lot to do with the first half of Sometimes being this looping riff that leans prominently on a hypnotically droned D string, then transitioning primarily to F for the second half of the song....that being the two opening chords of Hail Hail.

It doesn't just spike in volume...it sort of takes the entire introspective stretch of the last song and reduces it to a crushingly brief burst through the gates.

If I'm remembering the tabs correctly (it's been a loooooooooong time).

McParadigm wrote:

stip wrote:

Blenheim Augustine wrote:

stip wrote:i think hail hail is a really good song. It's just too loud of a transition

Which is surely the point?

Listener puts on No Code for the first time "what the f*ck is this pussy sh*t?"
Track 2 starts

yup, that was the point. I think the desire to have a loud song early in the mix (with an explosively loud beginning), while it may have relaxed skeptics, does not do the album a service.

I always thought it had a lot to do with the first half of Sometimes being this looping riff that leans prominently on a hypnotically droned D string, then transitioning primarily to F for the second half of the song....that being the two opening chords of Hail Hail.

It doesn't just spike in volume...it sort of takes the entire introspective stretch of the last song and reduces it to a crushingly brief burst through the gates.

If I'm remembering the tabs correctly (it's been a loooooooooong time).

You're right about the chords. That's cool, I never gave it a thought.

Yeah, I could see why someone would think the dynamic jump is misguided, but I think it's going a bit far to suggest that there was some mercenary reasoning behind it, or that they were doing it to keep people comfortable. There's not much of anything they've said that would support that, at least from what I've read. If anything, it seems like they feel No Code is meant to be a bigger turnoff to the longtime PJ fan than, IMO, it actually is.

that's a good point.

Maybe it was BoB's idea?

stip wrote:

liebzz wrote:

stip wrote:

Blenheim Augustine wrote:

stip wrote:i think hail hail is a really good song. It's just too loud of a transition

Which is surely the point?

Listener puts on No Code for the first time "what the f*ck is this pussy sh*t?"
Track 2 starts

yup, that was the point. I think the desire to have a loud song early in the mix (with an explosively loud beginning), while it may have relaxed skeptics, does not do the album a service.

As with the remainder of this album and the ideas and thoughts and reactions each song after another inspires, do you think there was a thought behind that very reaction that was meant to be inspired. I find everything about this album sends me down a rabbit hole of trying to glean a meaning or thought process behind what happens both in the album tracks, and in between them. This might be an exact example of why this album is my favorite. These little moments that turn into cavernous debates and thoughts about the artist's intention.

personally, no. The position of hail hail, the kind of song it is, sure. But I think the volume in particular is there because they were afraid of losing interest.

Your assumption about the bands intentions is surprising since this era, and definitely No Code, is marked by their desire to do exactly what they wanted to do and not worrying about what fans might think.

I find it interesting that when people argue that Backspacer was made with a commercial / intentionally safe mindset and was not what Pearl Jam would naturally do left to their own devices, the main response from some prominent people on this board is that you can't know what was on the band's mind and so it must be the album that they wanted to make. Yet; some of the same prominent people then argue that the placement of Hail Hail on No Code is some intentional ploy not to alienate fans because this is their opinion so the band or Brendan O'Brien must have made it so.

You can't have it both ways - either Hail Hail was intentionally placed to make the album more palatable and Backspacer was made as a favour to Oracle in order to get free computer equipment for the Ten Club; or, Hail Hail is placed perfectly on No Code and Backspacer is just a piece of cr8p album that, like a packet of french fries, gets a sh*tload worse with age.

Self wrote:

McParadigm wrote:

stip wrote:

Blenheim Augustine wrote:

stip wrote:i think hail hail is a really good song. It's just too loud of a transition

Which is surely the point?

Listener puts on No Code for the first time "what the f*ck is this pussy sh*t?"
Track 2 starts

yup, that was the point. I think the desire to have a loud song early in the mix (with an explosively loud beginning), while it may have relaxed skeptics, does not do the album a service.

I always thought it had a lot to do with the first half of Sometimes being this looping riff that leans prominently on a hypnotically droned D string, then transitioning primarily to F for the second half of the song....that being the two opening chords of Hail Hail.

It doesn't just spike in volume...it sort of takes the entire introspective stretch of the last song and reduces it to a crushingly brief burst through the gates.

If I'm remembering the tabs correctly (it's been a loooooooooong time).

You're right about the chords. That's cool, I never gave it a thought.

Then I'd be surprised if that wasn't the reason for the pairing. Hail Hail even begins on what would have been the 1 if Sometimes had continued playing.

On that note, I seem to recall that Who You Are ends on an E, which is where In My Tree picks up as well. And that In My Tree fades out so that, as you hear the last vestiges, it is getting ready to go back to E but is never quite resolved. I don't suppose Smile starts with E as well, does it?

McParadigm wrote:

Self wrote:

McParadigm wrote:

stip wrote:

Blenheim Augustine wrote:

stip wrote:i think hail hail is a really good song. It's just too loud of a transition

Which is surely the point?

Listener puts on No Code for the first time "what the f*ck is this pussy sh*t?"
Track 2 starts

yup, that was the point. I think the desire to have a loud song early in the mix (with an explosively loud beginning), while it may have relaxed skeptics, does not do the album a service.

I always thought it had a lot to do with the first half of Sometimes being this looping riff that leans prominently on a hypnotically droned D string, then transitioning primarily to F for the second half of the song....that being the two opening chords of Hail Hail.

It doesn't just spike in volume...it sort of takes the entire introspective stretch of the last song and reduces it to a crushingly brief burst through the gates.

If I'm remembering the tabs correctly (it's been a loooooooooong time).

You're right about the chords. That's cool, I never gave it a thought.

Then I'd be surprised if that wasn't the reason for the pairing. Hail Hail even begins on what would have been the 1 if Sometimes had continued playing.

On that note, I seem to recall that Who You Are ends on an E, which is where In My Tree picks up as well. And that In My Tree fades out so that, as you hear the last vestiges, it is getting ready to go back to E but is never quite resolved. I don't suppose Smile starts with E as well, does it?

It sure does, Buddy. I think you just deciphered the Code

Blenheim Augustine wrote:I find it interesting that when people argue that Backspacer was made with a commercial / intentionally safe mindset and was not what Pearl Jam would naturally do left to their own devices, the main response from some prominent people on this board is that you can't know what was on the band's mind and so it must be the album that they wanted to make. Yet; some of the same prominent people then argue that the placement of Hail Hail on No Code is some intentional ploy not to alienate fans because this is their opinion so the band or Brendan O'Brien must have made it so.

You can't have it both ways - either Hail Hail was intentionally placed to make the album more palatable and Backspacer was made as a favour to Oracle in order to get free computer equipment for the Ten Club; or, Hail Hail is placed perfectly on No Code and Backspacer is just a piece of cr8p album that, like a packet of french fries, gets a sh*tload worse with age.

by some of you mean me?

I don't want to ruin your big 'gotcha' moment, but the fact that at one point they made a decision on the basis of wanting something to be or not be easily palatable does not mean they have to use the same logic 13 years later. All that really matters is the context of the decision making at the time.

Given Pearl Jam's long history of not always fully pulling the trigger on creative risks (see Binaural, for instance) it is entirely plausible they blinked in the face of their vision. Plausible doesn't mean it happened, of course, and I could be wrong about this (and you are right, speculating about motives is tricky), but there is not some great logical contradiction being made here.


And to clarify (again), my issue with Hail Hail is not so much with its placement and more with the transition. the start of the song is too loud. I hate how it works on the album. I think it's loud because either A: they just made a shitty production decision or B: they were worried about starting the record to slowly, and since hail hail is (as digster pointed out) not a loud fast song in the traditional sense the explosive transition is meant to compensate for that.

there are plenty of other arguments made here about how this is supposed to explode our expectations, etc. but I don't know that I buy that and in general think the presence of hail hail placed where it is and mixed how it is undermines the mood of the first half of the record

Stip, you only have to look at the other contextual qualities (see above) and the other dynamic matchups in the album to know that, whether you liked it or not, that quiet/loud transition was intentional and designed.

Strat wrote:

McParadigm wrote:

Self wrote:

McParadigm wrote:

stip wrote:

Blenheim Augustine wrote:

stip wrote:i think hail hail is a really good song. It's just too loud of a transition

Which is surely the point?

Listener puts on No Code for the first time "what the f*ck is this pussy sh*t?"
Track 2 starts

yup, that was the point. I think the desire to have a loud song early in the mix (with an explosively loud beginning), while it may have relaxed skeptics, does not do the album a service.

I always thought it had a lot to do with the first half of Sometimes being this looping riff that leans prominently on a hypnotically droned D string, then transitioning primarily to F for the second half of the song....that being the two opening chords of Hail Hail.

It doesn't just spike in volume...it sort of takes the entire introspective stretch of the last song and reduces it to a crushingly brief burst through the gates.

If I'm remembering the tabs correctly (it's been a loooooooooong time).

You're right about the chords. That's cool, I never gave it a thought.

Then I'd be surprised if that wasn't the reason for the pairing. Hail Hail even begins on what would have been the 1 if Sometimes had continued playing.

On that note, I seem to recall that Who You Are ends on an E, which is where In My Tree picks up as well. And that In My Tree fades out so that, as you hear the last vestiges, it is getting ready to go back to E but is never quite resolved. I don't suppose Smile starts with E as well, does it?

It sure does, Buddy. I think you just deciphered the Code

MIND BLOWN!

I just listened to this again - it's perfect right down to the drum playing the double speed fill right at the end of Sometimes and the inclusion of the "Sometimes" line in Hail Hail. And god Hail Hail is such a bloody good song.

Seem to remember reading somewhere, O'Brien saying that in sequencing track listing and production, he'll go and listen to the last song on the previous record and work from there.
The same could well be true for songs chords and the step into the next song.

Another song, as someone pointed out earlier, that the idea of putting Hail, Hail after a delicate song like Sometimes wasn't an alien concept to them. They've followed that kind of pattern with live shows pretty much from the beginning (a slow song followed by a rager). I don't think they had commercial concerns in mind every time they did Long Road followed by Breakerfall, to use one of many examples.

oh come on. A live show and an album are very different. I'm not saying that this had to be a reason, but the fact that live shows follow a similar pattern isn't relevant (although how often do they do long road--breakerfall--hard to imagine).


McP's observations about how the songs start/end is pretty cool, and speaks well for the placement of the songs. My issue is here:

It doesn't just spike in volume...it sort of takes the entire introspective stretch of the last song and reduces it to a crushingly brief burst through the gates.

and then goes right back to the introspection in the next 4 songs. I don't think that's good for the mood/flow of the record because McP is right. It basically negates sometimes, but then tries to rebuild it right afterwards.

I need to listen to the start of the album again.