Red Mosquito

Tass Man wrote:ok folks... as promised, i will try to boost my post count and keep the discussion in this thread going...
since Sirens is officially being released today, what's the consensus? i don't think i'll actively seek it out, but if it happens to come up oh the radio while i'm listening, i'll definitely crank it up..

so far, it's been very easy to stay in this club... while i'm excited to hear the new album, i have zero temptation to seek out any of the low quality rips of the leaked songs..

lets see if we can catch the LB thread in # of pages

harmless wrote:

Sgt. Crackpot wrote:

harmless wrote:

Sgt. Crackpot wrote:

LetMeSleep wrote:

Sgt. Crackpot wrote:I'll be listening Sirens (not the leak version, the proper one), mainly because it's an official release and we know the quality will be good. (Not chud good, but good enough for me).

Don't do it Sarge.

Is it really that bad?

I will say that it might not be the best second song to hear after MYM. It's a baffling second single but (in my humble and naive opinion) an amazing song.

As far as baffling singles go, wasn't Who You Are the launch single for No Code?

Yes. This band have a history of releasing the most unexpected songs as singles, and more or less the choice has had a "meh" reaction every time. But your reaction to this will not be "meh". You'll either fall in love with it in 1, or 5, or 10 listens, or you'll want to exorcise Pearl Jam from your life forever. This doesn't sound anything like Who You Are. It cares not for street cred. In that sense only is it anything like No Code.

If you think about it. This song is truly the anti-no code. It is this complete opposite of everything that album was intended to be. Hard to believe that the same people are responsible for it, including producer. (sans Jack, of course)

hlniv wrote:

harmless wrote:

Sgt. Crackpot wrote:

harmless wrote:

Sgt. Crackpot wrote:

LetMeSleep wrote:

Sgt. Crackpot wrote:I'll be listening Sirens (not the leak version, the proper one), mainly because it's an official release and we know the quality will be good. (Not chud good, but good enough for me).

Don't do it Sarge.

Is it really that bad?

I will say that it might not be the best second song to hear after MYM. It's a baffling second single but (in my humble and naive opinion) an amazing song.

As far as baffling singles go, wasn't Who You Are the launch single for No Code?

Yes. This band have a history of releasing the most unexpected songs as singles, and more or less the choice has had a "meh" reaction every time. But your reaction to this will not be "meh". You'll either fall in love with it in 1, or 5, or 10 listens, or you'll want to exorcise Pearl Jam from your life forever. This doesn't sound anything like Who You Are. It cares not for street cred. In that sense only is it anything like No Code.

If you think about it. This song is truly the anti-no code. It is this complete opposite of everything that album was intended to be. Hard to believe that the same people are responsible for it, including producer. (sans Jack, of course)

Yep, the whole album is the anti-No Code I think. They're probably still trying to throw off hardcore fans, and BO'B doesn't realise this. Or BO'B realises they want to search wider and is assisting that aim.

Dr. Van Nostrand wrote:

Tass Man wrote:ok folks... as promised, i will try to boost my post count and keep the discussion in this thread going...
since Sirens is officially being released today, what's the consensus? i don't think i'll actively seek it out, but if it happens to come up oh the radio while i'm listening, i'll definitely crank it up..

so far, it's been very easy to stay in this club... while i'm excited to hear the new album, i have zero temptation to seek out any of the low quality rips of the leaked songs..

lets see if we can catch the LB thread in # of pages

we would need all of us to post at Harmless' rate... and even still, not sure we'll make it

Tass Man wrote:

Dr. Van Nostrand wrote:

Tass Man wrote:ok folks... as promised, i will try to boost my post count and keep the discussion in this thread going...
since Sirens is officially being released today, what's the consensus? i don't think i'll actively seek it out, but if it happens to come up oh the radio while i'm listening, i'll definitely crank it up..

so far, it's been very easy to stay in this club... while i'm excited to hear the new album, i have zero temptation to seek out any of the low quality rips of the leaked songs..

lets see if we can catch the LB thread in # of pages

we would need all of us to post at Harmless' rate... and even still, not sure we'll make it

oh what could have been, if only harmless had stuck with us

Dr. Van Nostrand wrote:
oh what could have been, if only harmless had stuck with us

It was a memorable 5 minutes. (and, that's how long it took him to find & dl the songs.)

I'm regretting it. Hold fast, team. I won't listen to the rest.

Looking at this thread I feel kind of like the people that went to see 'The Royal Nonesuch' and are now in a quiet anticipation of the reaction of their neighbors who were going to see the play on the next day.

harmless wrote:

hlniv wrote:

harmless wrote:

Sgt. Crackpot wrote:

harmless wrote:

As far as baffling singles go, wasn't Who You Are the launch single for No Code?

Yes. This band have a history of releasing the most unexpected songs as singles, and more or less the choice has had a "meh" reaction every time. But your reaction to this will not be "meh". You'll either fall in love with it in 1, or 5, or 10 listens, or you'll want to exorcise Pearl Jam from your life forever. This doesn't sound anything like Who You Are. It cares not for street cred. In that sense only is it anything like No Code.

If you think about it. This song is truly the anti-no code. It is this complete opposite of everything that album was intended to be. Hard to believe that the same people are responsible for it, including producer. (sans Jack, of course)

Yep, the whole album is the anti-No Code I think. They're probably still trying to throw off hardcore fans, and BO'B doesn't realise this. Or BO'B realises they want to search wider and is assisting that aim.

I don't think the band is intending anything. Vitalogy through Riot Act (maybe except for Yield), the band was purposefully attempting to produce a type of specific energy, sound, or statement. Some time around 2005, I think they simply realized that don't have to make music for a purpose any more. It seems their last 3 records have been simply about writing and recording on their schedule and with whatever feeling comes to them at the time. I guess you could say that about Riot Act, too. I would argue that is going to hold true for LB as well.

Whatever polish, gloss, or glam that gets mixed in with it is not something I bet they're all that interested in defining. For some reason, they trust BOB enough to handle that. But, while I certainly hope that they don't let him determine how to commercialize their song structures or single selections, i think that they are even letting go of that also.

hlniv wrote:

harmless wrote:

hlniv wrote:

harmless wrote:

Sgt. Crackpot wrote:

harmless wrote:

As far as baffling singles go, wasn't Who You Are the launch single for No Code?

Yes. This band have a history of releasing the most unexpected songs as singles, and more or less the choice has had a "meh" reaction every time. But your reaction to this will not be "meh". You'll either fall in love with it in 1, or 5, or 10 listens, or you'll want to exorcise Pearl Jam from your life forever. This doesn't sound anything like Who You Are. It cares not for street cred. In that sense only is it anything like No Code.

If you think about it. This song is truly the anti-no code. It is this complete opposite of everything that album was intended to be. Hard to believe that the same people are responsible for it, including producer. (sans Jack, of course)

Yep, the whole album is the anti-No Code I think. They're probably still trying to throw off hardcore fans, and BO'B doesn't realise this. Or BO'B realises they want to search wider and is assisting that aim.

I don't think the band is intending anything. Vitalogy through Riot Act (maybe except for Yield), the band was purposefully attempting to produce a type of specific energy, sound, or statement. Some time around 2005, I think they simply realized that don't have to make music for a purpose any more. It seems their last 3 records have been simply about writing and recording on their schedule and with whatever feeling comes to them at the time. I guess you could say that about Riot Act, too. I would argue that is going to hold true for LB as well.

How is that not purposeful intention? To write and play what you like? You might think it's all bullshit, but it's full of intention. It's comparable to No Code in the sense that that album was also a "Fuck you, we'll play what we like" statement. Except that time, we all lapped that shit up. But not everyone did. And not everyone will this time. The reasons for this "Fuck you" to the fans might be different to the reasons for No Code, but I do think it's most definitely the same thing: we're older, we don't have all the time in the world, recording music isn't a top priority, we'll do what we feel like at the time. I've raged about that time and again before, but now I'm like meh, if they do something enjoyable again I'll still lap that shit up.

harmless wrote:

hlniv wrote:

harmless wrote:

hlniv wrote:

harmless wrote:

Sgt. Crackpot wrote:

harmless wrote:

As far as baffling singles go, wasn't Who You Are the launch single for No Code?

Yes. This band have a history of releasing the most unexpected songs as singles, and more or less the choice has had a "meh" reaction every time. But your reaction to this will not be "meh". You'll either fall in love with it in 1, or 5, or 10 listens, or you'll want to exorcise Pearl Jam from your life forever. This doesn't sound anything like Who You Are. It cares not for street cred. In that sense only is it anything like No Code.

If you think about it. This song is truly the anti-no code. It is this complete opposite of everything that album was intended to be. Hard to believe that the same people are responsible for it, including producer. (sans Jack, of course)

Yep, the whole album is the anti-No Code I think. They're probably still trying to throw off hardcore fans, and BO'B doesn't realise this. Or BO'B realises they want to search wider and is assisting that aim.

I don't think the band is intending anything. Vitalogy through Riot Act (maybe except for Yield), the band was purposefully attempting to produce a type of specific energy, sound, or statement. Some time around 2005, I think they simply realized that don't have to make music for a purpose any more. It seems their last 3 records have been simply about writing and recording on their schedule and with whatever feeling comes to them at the time. I guess you could say that about Riot Act, too. I would argue that is going to hold true for LB as well.

How is that not purposeful intention? To write and play what you like? You might think it's all bullshit, but it's full of intention. It's comparable to No Code in the sense that that album was also a "Fuck you, we'll play what we like" statement. Except that time, we all lapped that shit up. But not everyone did. And not everyone will this time. The reasons for this "Fuck you" to the fans might be different to the reasons for No Code, but I do think it's most definitely the same thing: we're older, we don't have all the time in the world, recording music isn't a top priority, we'll do what we feel like at the time. I've raged about that time and again before, but now I'm like meh, if they do something enjoyable again I'll still lap that shit up.

Writing and playing what you like is certainly not purposeful intention. Purposeful intention (as I am trying to define it here, anyway) is writing and playing with a pre-determined set of expectations. No Code had the intention of pulling back and being anti-commercial, of being different than what they've done. Every song fits that pre-determined expectation. Binaural had the pre-determined expectation of changing their sound, hence the change in producer, technique, varying mixes, etc...

You could say Backspacer had a pre-determined expectation of being "poppy", but I don't buy that. I think that's just what came out of it and what resulted from an older and lightly warped BOB being allowed to make most of the decisions. LB is shaping up to be that again, but with a different set of tunes to start from. And while I believe those tunes are much better, they still are creted without a pre-determined expectation.

So to say Pearl Jam is "trying to" do anything with this album is not something I agree with.

so when Oct 15 does come around and we all listen to it... i think we should discuss it first amongst ourselves in this thread, rather than going to the LB thread... everyone there will have already had most (and by that time, i'm sure all) of the songs and listened to them... they will no longer be on the "new listen" high that we will likely be on.

hlniv wrote:

harmless wrote:

hlniv wrote:

harmless wrote:

hlniv wrote:

harmless wrote:

Sgt. Crackpot wrote:

harmless wrote:

As far as baffling singles go, wasn't Who You Are the launch single for No Code?

Yes. This band have a history of releasing the most unexpected songs as singles, and more or less the choice has had a "meh" reaction every time. But your reaction to this will not be "meh". You'll either fall in love with it in 1, or 5, or 10 listens, or you'll want to exorcise Pearl Jam from your life forever. This doesn't sound anything like Who You Are. It cares not for street cred. In that sense only is it anything like No Code.

If you think about it. This song is truly the anti-no code. It is this complete opposite of everything that album was intended to be. Hard to believe that the same people are responsible for it, including producer. (sans Jack, of course)

Yep, the whole album is the anti-No Code I think. They're probably still trying to throw off hardcore fans, and BO'B doesn't realise this. Or BO'B realises they want to search wider and is assisting that aim.

I don't think the band is intending anything. Vitalogy through Riot Act (maybe except for Yield), the band was purposefully attempting to produce a type of specific energy, sound, or statement. Some time around 2005, I think they simply realized that don't have to make music for a purpose any more. It seems their last 3 records have been simply about writing and recording on their schedule and with whatever feeling comes to them at the time. I guess you could say that about Riot Act, too. I would argue that is going to hold true for LB as well.

How is that not purposeful intention? To write and play what you like? You might think it's all bullshit, but it's full of intention. It's comparable to No Code in the sense that that album was also a "Fuck you, we'll play what we like" statement. Except that time, we all lapped that shit up. But not everyone did. And not everyone will this time. The reasons for this "Fuck you" to the fans might be different to the reasons for No Code, but I do think it's most definitely the same thing: we're older, we don't have all the time in the world, recording music isn't a top priority, we'll do what we feel like at the time. I've raged about that time and again before, but now I'm like meh, if they do something enjoyable again I'll still lap that shit up.

Writing and playing what you like is certainly not purposeful intention. Purposeful intention (as I am trying to define it here, anyway) is writing and playing with a pre-determined set of expectations. No Code had the intention of pulling back and being anti-commercial, of being different than what they've done. Every song fits that pre-determined expectation. Binaural had the pre-determined expectation of changing their sound, hence the change in producer, technique, varying mixes, etc...

You could say Backspacer had a pre-determined expectation of being "poppy", but I don't buy that. I think that's just what came out of it and what resulted from an older and lightly warped BOB being allowed to make most of the decisions. LB is shaping up to be that again, but with a different set of tunes to start from. And while I believe those tunes are much better, they still are creted without a pre-determined expectation.

So to say Pearl Jam is "trying to" do anything with this album is not something I agree with.

I don't know; how much of your "predetermined expectations" stuff is just what you've absorbed from third-person articles, interviews and fan mythology? You mostly hear prior intention in the music because it sounds brilliant to you, so you think there *must* have been an intention. I find this album incredibly consistent thematically, and conceptually, so am I allowed to think there was prior intention? I didn't think there was for Backspacer because I didn't like very much about it and thought the songs were thematically all over the place. What I'm saying is, yes apparently No Code was designed to put the fans off, but let's be honest, they wrote some songs they liked and jammed them out together and put them on an album. So whatever the *reason* for doing what they're doing -- and that changes with every album -- there is always an intention. And if that intention is to have very few pre-determined ideas, it's still deliberate, whether it creates shit or gold. You can't write, play and record an album by accident. I think this well end up a very fully-realised, mostly pop rock album.

hlniv wrote:

harmless wrote:

hlniv wrote:

harmless wrote:

Sgt. Crackpot wrote:

harmless wrote:

As far as baffling singles go, wasn't Who You Are the launch single for No Code?

Yes. This band have a history of releasing the most unexpected songs as singles, and more or less the choice has had a "meh" reaction every time. But your reaction to this will not be "meh". You'll either fall in love with it in 1, or 5, or 10 listens, or you'll want to exorcise Pearl Jam from your life forever. This doesn't sound anything like Who You Are. It cares not for street cred. In that sense only is it anything like No Code.

If you think about it. This song is truly the anti-no code. It is this complete opposite of everything that album was intended to be. Hard to believe that the same people are responsible for it, including producer. (sans Jack, of course)

Yep, the whole album is the anti-No Code I think. They're probably still trying to throw off hardcore fans, and BO'B doesn't realise this. Or BO'B realises they want to search wider and is assisting that aim.

I don't think the band is intending anything. Vitalogy through Riot Act (maybe except for Yield), the band was purposefully attempting to produce a type of specific energy, sound, or statement. Some time around 2005, I think they simply realized that don't have to make music for a purpose any more. It seems their last 3 records have been simply about writing and recording on their schedule and with whatever feeling comes to them at the time. I guess you could say that about Riot Act, too. I would argue that is going to hold true for LB as well.

Whatever polish, gloss, or glam that gets mixed in with it is not something I bet they're all that interested in defining. For some reason, they trust BOB enough to handle that. But, while I certainly hope that they don't let him determine how to commercialize their song structures or single selections, i think that they are even letting go of that also.

If you don't get specific sound or intent out of S/T or Backspacer you aren't really trying.

Tass Man wrote:so when Oct 15 does come around and we all listen to it... i think we should discuss it first amongst ourselves in this thread, rather than going to the LB thread... everyone there will have already had most (and by that time, i'm sure all) of the songs and listened to them... they will no longer be on the "new listen" high that we will likely be on.

i like that idea, i was planning on putting my thoughts on it in here first, though im usually not all that descriptive, ill probably just say they are all great

harmless wrote:I'm regretting it. Hold fast, team. I won't listen to the rest.

number of posters who believe this=0

harmless was allowed to vote

yes, but at least you'll be able to say that officially!

stip wrote:

harmless wrote:I'm regretting it. Hold fast, team. I won't listen to the rest.

number of posters who believe this=0

harmless was allowed to vote

stip wrote:

harmless wrote:I'm regretting it. Hold fast, team. I won't listen to the rest.

number of posters who believe this=0

harmless was allowed to vote

I have listened to the Wrigley Lightning Bolt & Future Days once each. Since Sirens seems to be getting a(n) somewhat official release I'll listen to that one; treat it like Mind Your Manners. I won't seek it out but if it pops on the Siruis channel so be it.
But I'll keep holding off on the others. I have read the reviews though.