Re: *new song* I won't hold on (?)
Posted: Sun May 11, 2014 7:21 pm
Preferring new Pearl Jam is almost as ridiculous as preferring new Aerosmith. Or that Cream live reunion album where they all sound like they are on crack.
Isn't what Mike is saying here absolutely the latter?Release_Me wrote: Being accessible or wanting to be heard on radio and making music with the intention of selling a huge number of records, gaining sponsorships, etc. are two completely different things.
He's saying that if they have to, they're going to write a song in a certain way so that it gets on the radio and sounds like a mainstream radio hit. He's saying they will let commercial concerns influence their writing process. That's pretty cut-and-dry. He's not saying they're going to revert back to the way they used to do things. If he meant that, he likely would have said that.Mike McCready wrote:But now that we're putting out a record on our own, we're taking on the responsibility of sinking or swimming ourselves. If that means writing a song that sounds like a mainstream radio hit, we're going to do that.
lolLament wrote:THERE COULD BE ANYTHING IN THAT MYSTERY BOX. YOU DON'T KNOW. THERE MIGHT EVEN BE DIAPERS IN IT. OR ANOTHER, SMALL MYSTERY BOX. FILLED WITH SMALLER DIAPERS.
digster wrote:Isn't what Mike is saying here absolutely the latter?Release_Me wrote: Being accessible or wanting to be heard on radio and making music with the intention of selling a huge number of records, gaining sponsorships, etc. are two completely different things.
He's saying that if they have to, they're going to write a song in a certain way so that it gets on the radio and sounds like a mainstream radio hit. He's saying they will let commercial concerns influence their writing process. That's pretty cut-and-dry. He's not saying they're going to revert back to the way they used to do things. If he meant that, he likely would have said that.Mike McCready wrote:But now that we're putting out a record on our own, we're taking on the responsibility of sinking or swimming ourselves. If that means writing a song that sounds like a mainstream radio hit, we're going to do that.
I don't particularly care either way; if the song is good, I'm not too concerned with how they got there. But I don't really see another way to read that.
I live in a 3rd world country where Ten Club won't be shipping the mystery box anyway. Whatever I spend to renew my Ten Club annual membership is all they'll get from me. Call me a cheapskate but that's how it is!Lament wrote:THERE COULD BE ANYTHING IN THAT MYSTERY BOX. YOU DON'T KNOW. THERE MIGHT EVEN BE DIAPERS IN IT. OR ANOTHER, SMALL MYSTERY BOX. FILLED WITH SMALLER DIAPERS.
Preferring new Pearl Jam to early Pearl Jam (the first three albums) might be ridiculous. But preferring new PJ to middle period PJ? I don't see why that's so wrong.Wendy Carlos's Twin wrote:Preferring new Pearl Jam is almost as ridiculous as preferring new Aerosmith. Or that Cream live reunion album where they all sound like they are on crack.
You really want to know? I don't think I'll be viewed the same way if I told you.theplatypus wrote:Where do you live?
I agree with what Stip said. I don't think it's about trying to be greedy and pander to the general public with the hope of getting loads of new fans. That's just not realistic at this point in time.stip wrote:digster wrote:Isn't what Mike is saying here absolutely the latter?Release_Me wrote: Being accessible or wanting to be heard on radio and making music with the intention of selling a huge number of records, gaining sponsorships, etc. are two completely different things.
He's saying that if they have to, they're going to write a song in a certain way so that it gets on the radio and sounds like a mainstream radio hit. He's saying they will let commercial concerns influence their writing process. That's pretty cut-and-dry. He's not saying they're going to revert back to the way they used to do things. If he meant that, he likely would have said that.Mike McCready wrote:But now that we're putting out a record on our own, we're taking on the responsibility of sinking or swimming ourselves. If that means writing a song that sounds like a mainstream radio hit, we're going to do that.
I don't particularly care either way; if the song is good, I'm not too concerned with how they got there. But I don't really see another way to read that.
You're right, but it think release me's larger point (and certainly mine) is that there is a difference between writing songs to grow a larger audience or maintain a certain footprint (albums sold, venues played in, size of organization) since you are no longer able to rely on corporate sponsorship (lets not forget what a major label is), and wanting to write songs to make yourself as much money as possible.
Nor should we read more into those quotes than they actually say. A willingness to not deliberately shy away from writing a song like just breathe is not the same thing as wanting every song to be just breathe
India?Release_Me wrote:You really want to know? I don't think I'll be viewed the same way if I told you.theplatypus wrote:Where do you live?
Mississippitheplatypus wrote:India?Release_Me wrote:You really want to know? I don't think I'll be viewed the same way if I told you.theplatypus wrote:Where do you live?
Mike McCready wrote:But now that we're putting out a record on our own, we're taking on the responsibility of sinking or swimming ourselves. If that means writing a song that sounds like a mainstream radio hit, we're going to do that.
That's absurd.Release_Me wrote:Mike's quote about sinking or swimming probably has something to do with the appreciation of the album within the fanbase, which is really the only audience likely to pay money for their new music and hence decide the commercial success or failure of any new release.
I genuinely don't the band has ever done this. They just started to write better songs during their middle period (and decided to engage less with the press at the same time).Release_Me wrote:That said, it's less about being accessible than it is about being intentionally NOT accessible.
True, but it also reads way too much into what's there to assume that this constitutes an absolute shift in songwriting - that everything is written to try and be a potential hit and maximize 'mainstream' appealdigster wrote:I think that's might just be reading what you want to into that quote, more than is there. He's not saying they're going to not shy away from releasing a song like Just Breathe anymore. He says that if putting out records on their own means writing a song as accessible and mainstream as Just Breathe to raise their stature, they'll do it. Which is pretty much exactly what it means to change your songwriting to be more mainstream.
Like I said before, I don't think that makes it automatically inferior, or that someone can't prefer it to their other records; a lot of the best records made were done to get a paycheck. I would say that it seems like ever since they've tried to be more accessible in the past decade, their music has significantly suffered, but not everyone's going to agree with me on that.