Red Mosquito

15showsandcounting wrote:

Strat wrote:I hear Bruce and james taylor.

You should apologize to both of them after that comment.

Look, its a horrible impersonation but its an impersonation nonetheless.

harmless wrote:

iceagecoming wrote:

harmless wrote:That might've been what Ed was thinking, but if so, Brendan got it wrong.

Ed obviously approved. The tone and cheesiness of it actually sounds akin to some of Tom's earliest records. I'm just not sure if I want that on a PJ record, or at least, this PJ record.

It sounds nothing like Tom Waits, sorry. There are hundreds of kinds of cheese. I'm not saying Ed didn't approve, just that it doesn't sound like Tom Waits just because Ed approved it.

I'm just trying to think how it's inclusion might be artistically justified. This was the best I could come up with, though Bruce is a more accurate parallel. By the way, calling the sound of some of those early Tom Waits songs as 'cheesy' isn't necessarily a bad thing - I love a lot of those tracks for the way they sound.

I'm not trying to defend Future Days, which isn't in the same league as Tom's shittest stuff, but what would PJ fans think if Eddie and the guys recorded a song that sounded like On the Nickel or Ruby's Arms?

iceagecoming wrote:

harmless wrote:

iceagecoming wrote:

harmless wrote:That might've been what Ed was thinking, but if so, Brendan got it wrong.

Ed obviously approved. The tone and cheesiness of it actually sounds akin to some of Tom's earliest records. I'm just not sure if I want that on a PJ record, or at least, this PJ record.

It sounds nothing like Tom Waits, sorry. There are hundreds of kinds of cheese. I'm not saying Ed didn't approve, just that it doesn't sound like Tom Waits just because Ed approved it.

I'm just trying to think how it's inclusion might be artistically justified. This was the best I could come up with, though Bruce is a more accurate parallel. By the way, calling the sound of some of those early Tom Waits songs as 'cheesy' isn't necessarily a bad thing - I love a lot of those tracks for the way they sound.

I'm not trying to defend Future Days, which isn't in the same league as Tom's shittest stuff, but what would PJ fans think if Eddie and the guys recorded a song that sounded like On the Nickel or Ruby's Arms?

if its a good song, its a good song no matter the presentation.

iceagecoming wrote:

harmless wrote:

iceagecoming wrote:

harmless wrote:That might've been what Ed was thinking, but if so, Brendan got it wrong.

Ed obviously approved. The tone and cheesiness of it actually sounds akin to some of Tom's earliest records. I'm just not sure if I want that on a PJ record, or at least, this PJ record.

It sounds nothing like Tom Waits, sorry. There are hundreds of kinds of cheese. I'm not saying Ed didn't approve, just that it doesn't sound like Tom Waits just because Ed approved it.

I'm just trying to think how it's inclusion might be artistically justified. This was the best I could come up with, though Bruce is a more accurate parallel. By the way, calling the sound of some of those early Tom Waits songs as 'cheesy' isn't necessarily a bad thing - I love a lot of those tracks for the way they sound.

I'm not trying to defend Future Days, which isn't in the same league as Tom's shittest stuff, but what would PJ fans think if Eddie and the guys recorded a song that sounded like On the Nickel or Ruby's Arms?

I prefer future days to quite a bit of TW's 70s catalog.

iceagecoming wrote:

harmless wrote:

iceagecoming wrote:

harmless wrote:That might've been what Ed was thinking, but if so, Brendan got it wrong.

Ed obviously approved. The tone and cheesiness of it actually sounds akin to some of Tom's earliest records. I'm just not sure if I want that on a PJ record, or at least, this PJ record.

It sounds nothing like Tom Waits, sorry. There are hundreds of kinds of cheese. I'm not saying Ed didn't approve, just that it doesn't sound like Tom Waits just because Ed approved it.

I'm just trying to think how it's inclusion might be artistically justified. This was the best I could come up with, though Bruce is a more accurate parallel. By the way, calling the sound of some of those early Tom Waits songs as 'cheesy' isn't necessarily a bad thing - I love a lot of those tracks for the way they sound.

I'm not trying to defend Future Days, which isn't in the same league as Tom's shittest stuff, but what would PJ fans think if Eddie and the guys recorded a song that sounded like On the Nickel or Ruby's Arms?

A lot of them would love it. There's a sizeable contingent of Waits fans in the fanbase. The few I know don't like FD very much. I happen to be a fan of good cheese, whether it's edible or musical. I love Sirens, and allegedly that's cheesy as well. I also love Tom Waits, but there's a whole ton of very different sounds that could be put into the general category "cheese". I'd far sooner put FD into it than Tom Waits. If this song was given a real Tom Waits treatment, the piano would be a real one, not a keyboard, for a start. And it wouldn't be drenched in reverb. There would be no synthetic overdubbed harmonies on Ed's vocals, no Brian Eno synths to obscure the violin, and no organ and keyboard at the same time. It would be a piano, guitar, possibly a nice jazz-style drum groove, and that's it. The song could've been amazing given that treatment, I just don't think this is it. If Tom Waits is cheese, this is Cheetos.

I like to think that this song sounds like a bad Christian worship song deliberately, given the album context. But Ed's probably not that clever.

harmless wrote:I like to think that this song sounds like a bad Christian worship song deliberately, given the album context. But Ed's probably not that clever.

not consciously, but I think Eddie probably makes a lot of great artistic decisions without setting down to deliberately craft them. The idea could be inchoately floating in the back of his mind, influencing what was done without ever being consciously articulated.

Not saying that's necessarily the case here, mind you.

stip wrote:

harmless wrote:I like to think that this song sounds like a bad Christian worship song deliberately, given the album context. But Ed's probably not that clever.

not consciously, but I think Eddie probably makes a lot of great artistic decisions without setting down to deliberately craft them. The idea could be inchoately floating in the back of his mind, influencing what was done without ever being consciously articulated.

Not saying that's necessarily the case here, mind you.

Still, it works for the piece. We'll never know what Ed did deliberately or not, after all.

I enjoy the stuff more if I give it the benefit of the doubt, so why not?

You two are genius. Seriously it's like reading Eddie comment on the songs. Please continue... that is all.

So far my favorite version of "Future Days" we've heard has been the isolated guitar/vocal take from Wrigley. The thing about this song is that, despite its library of cliches plucked straight out of the Dianne Warren book of ballads, it's undoubtedly very sincere, perfectly consistent with "Just Breathe" or"Skipping" or anything else Eddie has written about his wife and/or children, none of which are remarkable songs but are successful enough as moments, as fleeting sentiments carried by understated genuineness. There was something similar going on in that guitar/vocal take--there was never going to be any convincing me that this was a great song, but there was just enough immediacy in the moment for me to suspend my disbelief and buy into this as the private love letter that it looks like on paper. The final version takes that love letter and flashes it across a Jumb-O-Tron, or renders it in skywriting. Gaudy and embarrassing.

IlluminEddie wrote:You two are genius. Seriously it's like reading Eddie comment on the songs. Please continue... that is all.

You're right, IlluminEddie critique is so much more thorough and enlightening.

I saw this in Brooklyn and Philly... when I first heard Boom's organ intro during Brooklyn 2... I thought "wow, that's actually pretty cool"... It's got a real distorted tone to it. It was light years away from the album version. I wonder how much people's opinions of this song would be swayed if they just made that one adjustment on the final version.

bluestate wrote:I saw this in Brooklyn and Philly... when I first heard Boom's organ intro during Brooklyn 2... I thought "wow, that's actually pretty cool"... It's got a real distorted tone to it. It was light years away from the album version. I wonder how much people's opinions of this song would be swayed if they just made that one adjustment on the final version.

That would've made all the difference to me.

this is starting to climb for me. I might have it 3rd or 4th up from the bottom

stupidmop wrote:

Is there a video out there with the whole song including Boom's new organ intro? Because it sounded so much fucking better and I need a reason to cry today.

the only video I could find did not have the distorted organ intro. But I'm bad at youtube

I am totally into this song right now. I am considering give it 4 stars based on my enjoyment of it. If you had told me I'd get this into Future Days after Wrigley I would have called you a liar