Re: The Essential Pearl Jam
Posted: Mon October 14, 2013 5:23 pm
Sorry, I got the name wrong. I meant "Infallible".
What a pile of shit. They just changed the name on RVM? Why even bother? That had to cost more money than just tossing copies of RVM into the $5 bins with all the "Essential" CDs.ridleybradout wrote:
Confirmation this is just a re-issue of Rearviewmirror 1991-2003:
http://www.amazon.com/The-Essential-rea ... l_1#disc_1
they've probably stuck it in a jewel case to save money on production.B wrote:What a pile of shit. They just changed the name on RVM? Why even bother? That had to cost more money than just tossing copies of RVM into the $5 bins with all the "Essential" CDs.ridleybradout wrote:
Confirmation this is just a re-issue of Rearviewmirror 1991-2003:
http://www.amazon.com/The-Essential-rea ... l_1#disc_1
"Essential" has been Sony's brand of greatest hits collections for a while. I guess they wanted a PJ one (i presume RVM will be discontinued) but they didn't collaborate on it/didn't let Sony use anything unreleased or recorded after they left them.McParadigm wrote:Also, Rearviewmirror is by far their biggest catalog seller. It outpaces Ten. So what on earth would the benefit even be to slapping an "I did this in Paint" title change on it, reregistering and rebarcoding it, printing up new shipping notices and...and....and....
I don't understand.
i think these are digipacks by the rule but i'm not sureWtOB? wrote:they've probably stuck it in a jewel case to save money on production.B wrote:What a pile of shit. They just changed the name on RVM? Why even bother? That had to cost more money than just tossing copies of RVM into the $5 bins with all the "Essential" CDs.ridleybradout wrote:
Confirmation this is just a re-issue of Rearviewmirror 1991-2003:
http://www.amazon.com/The-Essential-rea ... l_1#disc_1
I think in recent years they've gone to cardboard. I've even seen that Springsteen 3-disc Essentials in digipac form.theplatypus wrote:You mean Essentials? The two that I have are jewel cases.
I didn't think you were picking on it. Leaving out even flow was tough. it's just a question of what to take off.mray10 wrote:If I'm just picking from Ten-era stuff, I'd cut Release. It's a great track and pretty important for Pearl Jam, but it doesn't measure up to Even Flow (I prefer Release, I'm just talking about "importance.")stip wrote:mray10 wrote:And ... still no Even Flow?stip wrote:I was interpreting essential pretty broadly--songs that kind of embody the band, not necessarily the GH. Otherwise we'll never get past the first 3 records.
The lyrical themes, the delivery of the lyric, even the fact that it's one of the most classic examples of people listening to a Vedder lyric and wondering "WTH is he saying?"
That they've played it live more than any other song?
Seems to embody the band to me.
Look, I'd just give people the first 3 records and say that's all you REALLY need. It's not enough to say 'add even flow'. What would you cut?
Anyway, sorry, I'm nt trying to pick on your list. I just don't see how any kind of "essential" set of songs that's supposed to give a listener an idea of "what pearl Jam" is could not include Even Flow.
theplatypus wrote:You mean Essentials? The two that I have are jewel cases.

Ed's gonna get mad.mastaflatch wrote:theplatypus wrote:You mean Essentials? The two that I have are jewel cases.
mastaflatch wrote:my tracklist would be exactly like Jorge's.

If it's 7 vinyl singles, that's a lot of vinyl to replace if they fuck it up.stupidmop wrote:Turning this into random shit on amazon that turns out to be nothing thread.
http://community.pearljam.com/viewtopic ... 4&t=223998
What if its an EP?! What if its an EP?!
- Spoiler: show