Red Mosquito

ItsOkay wrote: What baffles me is Ed saying Backspacer was recorded with live shows in mind. There isn't any Backspacer song that I'd be sorry to be left off a setlist.

I think UK isn't bad live, Ed just sings it slightly differently every time so the crowd never matches him. It's like he is writing it 5 years later. Force of Nature could have evolved into something better live if they had bothered to play it more.

ItsOkay wrote: If you were stuck in your car with one Pearl Jam album, which would you NOT want it to be?

Backspacer, hands down.

verb_to_trust wrote:

harmless wrote:And also, I don't believe that if a song is good it will come off live. PJ have been butchering their live material for a long time now, and I almost always prefer it on the CD.

They are a 'live' band, they always have been. I think its just been about 10 years since they put enough effort in for you to remember that. If a song sucks live, its going to suck on the album. Thats true for most any band, but especially Pearl Jam.

It's not that I've forgotten, it's that 'live band' was never my perception of Pearl Jam. They were a live band only in the sense that every band that makes albums also performs live. I went along with the 'Touring Band' bollocks and that 'Grateful Dead' schtick they're supposed to have, but I've only seen them 3 times in my lifetime, so I'm sorry but I was into Pearl Jam because I thought their CDs were fucking awesome. Matt Cameron has always brought down PJ from being a 'great live band' (as they were early on) to being just a good one, and I always thought that people hailing them as the best live band of all time were kind of delusional. So having said all that, I disagree again. If a PJ song sucks live, it can suck for a million reasons, and possibly 500,000 of those are Matt Cameron and shit sound. Seriously, the sound has fucked up two out of three PJ gigs I've seen. The sound at the 02 in London was horrendous. If I came away thinking that this live experience was the band in all its fullness, I would never have listened to them again. My dad did, and now he doesn't.

--- wrote:

harmless wrote:

--- wrote:harmless i don't remember you being this PJ-weary. when did this happen?

Over the last 4 years since Backspacer, I realised more and more that I found it kind of boring and don't revisit it anymore. I always disliked S/T, even though I can stomach half of it. But mostly it's not the music that I've gone off, mostly it's the attitude they seem to give off with every song they write now: this is OK, but we couldn't be bothered to make it any better because we have better thinks to do and we'll make enough money from this anyway. I don't know when it clicked that I want more from this band, and I'm tired of making excuses for them. That said, when I say 'more', I don't mean much more.

I see.

I was thinking after hearing "Future Days" this morning: why is every post-2003 PJ acoustic number pretty much the exact same? Why don't they create something understated, something vital that exists in its own unique space? Why have they excised the Strangest Tribes and Fatals from their unplugged leitmotif (Parachutes is an obvious exception)?

Well, I liked the acoustic songs on Riot Act but I have no idea. It's since Ed got all finger-picky that they all sound the same.

ItsOkay wrote:

harmless wrote:

--- wrote:harmless i don't remember you being this PJ-weary. when did this happen?

Over the last 4 years since Backspacer, I realised more and more that I found it kind of boring and don't revisit it anymore.

I realized the same when I was stuck in my car with only Backspacer (all my other music in our other car). I skipped every song but Force of Nature, then turned on ESPN radio. I don't want to try and like Lightning Bolt like I did Backspacer and S/T.

If you were stuck in your car with one Pearl Jam album, which would you NOT want it to be?

I really dislike S/T, so probably that. For all that it sounds like I feel a lot of venom towards Backspacer, I don't. It's a distinctly pleasant listen throughout. But I want more than pleasant. So I'm not sure whether I dislike S/T more for having songs I hate, or Backspacer for not having any songs I really love.

harmless wrote:

ItsOkay wrote:

harmless wrote:

--- wrote:harmless i don't remember you being this PJ-weary. when did this happen?

Over the last 4 years since Backspacer, I realised more and more that I found it kind of boring and don't revisit it anymore.

I realized the same when I was stuck in my car with only Backspacer (all my other music in our other car). I skipped every song but Force of Nature, then turned on ESPN radio. I don't want to try and like Lightning Bolt like I did Backspacer and S/T.

If you were stuck in your car with one Pearl Jam album, which would you NOT want it to be?

I really dislike S/T, so probably that. For all that it sounds like I feel a lot of venom towards Backspacer, I don't. It's a distinctly pleasant listen throughout. But I want more than pleasant. So I'm not sure whether I dislike S/T more for having songs I hate, or Backspacer for not having any songs I really love.

Backspacer is the only PJ Cd in my car apart from a burn of MYM. Mine would be Riot Act..i'd rather not fall asleep behind the wheel.

It just occurred to me that PJ's career is mirroring that of Eddie Murphy's.

--- wrote:

harmless wrote:

--- wrote:harmless i don't remember you being this PJ-weary. when did this happen?

Over the last 4 years since Backspacer, I realised more and more that I found it kind of boring and don't revisit it anymore. I always disliked S/T, even though I can stomach half of it. But mostly it's not the music that I've gone off, mostly it's the attitude they seem to give off with every song they write now: this is OK, but we couldn't be bothered to make it any better because we have better thinks to do and we'll make enough money from this anyway. I don't know when it clicked that I want more from this band, and I'm tired of making excuses for them. That said, when I say 'more', I don't mean much more.

I see.

I was thinking after hearing "Future Days" this morning: why is every post-2003 PJ acoustic number pretty much the exact same? Why don't they create something understated, something vital that exists in its own unique space? Why have they excised the Strangest Tribes and Fatals from their unplugged leitmotif (Parachutes is an obvious exception)?

Stone ain't writing them anymore. Or theyve forgotten how to be subtle at all . Or ed doesnt want to sing them anymore. I wish he'd throw us a deadman or long nights instead of just breathe redux.

These are Ed songs for sure. I haven't been liking his Pearl Jam songs lately. They are formatic now. I'm ok with "Future Days" but I feel I heard it before, nothing new. As for "Lightning Bolt" it's averge. It's the Chorus that kills it, I liked it right off the bat until the "Lightning Bolt" chorus came in. I thought it was cheesy. All in all, I don't think they are terrible songs just your standard Ed songs. Nothing special.

Look, I keep my expectations low because this is the 10th album. Bands, all bands, have about 5-6 great albums in them then they run their creative course. They are human beings and there's really only so much a person can do with a rock song. Thusly, I have low expectations. There will be 4-5 songs on the album I like and afew that are ok, 2-4 that I don't like. I really like MYM however, I've been digging that song a lot. A lot more then I would expect, so I'm very happy with that one. There's only so much to be inspired by in life, there's no way a person can find that much darker stuff to write about. It's not easy to write a song. I'm just happy with what I've gotten from them in the past, so not worried to much about "Lighning Bolt" I still have all there great albums and great memories.

Thejambi wrote:

harmless wrote:

ItsOkay wrote:

harmless wrote:

--- wrote:harmless i don't remember you being this PJ-weary. when did this happen?

Over the last 4 years since Backspacer, I realised more and more that I found it kind of boring and don't revisit it anymore.

I realized the same when I was stuck in my car with only Backspacer (all my other music in our other car). I skipped every song but Force of Nature, then turned on ESPN radio. I don't want to try and like Lightning Bolt like I did Backspacer and S/T.

If you were stuck in your car with one Pearl Jam album, which would you NOT want it to be?

I really dislike S/T, so probably that. For all that it sounds like I feel a lot of venom towards Backspacer, I don't. It's a distinctly pleasant listen throughout. But I want more than pleasant. So I'm not sure whether I dislike S/T more for having songs I hate, or Backspacer for not having any songs I really love.

Backspacer is the only PJ Cd in my car apart from a burn of MYM. Mine would be Riot Act..i'd rather not fall asleep behind the wheel.

I really love Riot Act. Their last great album for me.

I enjoyed lightning bolt pretty well, but it was a shitty video so its hard to tell, and future days didn't seem like much, but again it was a shitty video so im really not gonna hold any judgment of them until i hear better versions. Im still excited to see how the studio versions are, and im still excited for what ever that soundcheck song was

Ed just tries too hard to write catchy choruses. Choruses that are supposed to rile up an entire stadium. It just comes across as lame. Feels as though everything outside of the chorus is quickly glanced over so he can hurry up to a lame cheesy chorus phrase. PJ's best songs and most interesting periods are nothing like this.

Dr. Van Nostrand wrote:I enjoyed lightning bolt pretty well, but it was a shitty video so its hard to tell, and future days didn't seem like much, but again it was a shitty video so im really not gonna hold any judgment of them until i hear better versions. Im still excited to see how the studio versions are, and im still excited for what ever that soundcheck song was

Strat wrote:Ed just tries too hard to write catchy choruses. Choruses that are supposed to rile up an entire stadium. It just comes across as lame. Feels as though everything outside of the chorus is quickly glanced over so he can hurry up to a lame cheesy chorus phrase. PJ's best songs and most interesting periods are nothing like this.

OH IIIIIII..... AAAAAAHAHHOIIIIIIII'M STILL ALIVE

Strat wrote:Ed just tries too hard to write catchy choruses. Choruses that are supposed to rile up an entire stadium. It just comes across as lame. Feels as though everything outside of the chorus is quickly glanced over so he can hurry up to a lame cheesy chorus phrase. PJ's best songs and most interesting periods are nothing like this.

+1

Well there's still no doubt I'm going to buy it, most likely the day it's released. I know there's going to be a few songs on there I'm probaby going to really like. But I'm going in with even more tempered expectations than before.
I do hope there's a more than 1-2 Stone written songs that made the final cut.

Dr. Van Nostrand wrote:I enjoyed lightning bolt pretty well, but it was a shitty video so its hard to tell, and future days didn't seem like much, but again it was a shitty video so im really not gonna hold any judgment of them until i hear better versions. Im still excited to see how the studio versions are, and im still excited for what ever that soundcheck song was

I don't get where you, harmless and maybe others are coming from with the line of thinking that an HQ Youtube vid or a studio recording is going to make an average at best song good. The psychology of Pearl Jam fans is pretty interesting. If this was a good song, the optimal reaction would be "I can't wait to hear the studio version"....."maybe it will be better" is just talking yourself off the ledge.

verb_to_trust wrote:

Dr. Van Nostrand wrote:I enjoyed lightning bolt pretty well, but it was a shitty video so its hard to tell, and future days didn't seem like much, but again it was a shitty video so im really not gonna hold any judgment of them until i hear better versions. Im still excited to see how the studio versions are, and im still excited for what ever that soundcheck song was

I don't get where you, harmless and maybe others are coming from with the line of thinking that an HQ Youtube vid or a studio recording is going to make an average at best song good. The psychology of Pearl Jam fans is pretty interesting. If this was a good song, the optimal reaction would be "I can't wait to hear the studio version"....."maybe it will be better" is just talking yourself off the ledge.

But "maybe it will be better" is a version of "I can't wait to hear the studio version." They're not mutually exclusive. Some people think a song lives or dies live, I don't. I think that the choices made in a studio setting are absolutely crucial to the success of a song. If I believed that a song is only good if it's good live, I would hate most of PJ's catalogue.

harmless wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

Dr. Van Nostrand wrote:I enjoyed lightning bolt pretty well, but it was a shitty video so its hard to tell, and future days didn't seem like much, but again it was a shitty video so im really not gonna hold any judgment of them until i hear better versions. Im still excited to see how the studio versions are, and im still excited for what ever that soundcheck song was

I don't get where you, harmless and maybe others are coming from with the line of thinking that an HQ Youtube vid or a studio recording is going to make an average at best song good. The psychology of Pearl Jam fans is pretty interesting. If this was a good song, the optimal reaction would be "I can't wait to hear the studio version"....."maybe it will be better" is just talking yourself off the ledge.

But "maybe it will be better" is a version of "I can't wait to hear the studio version." They're not mutually exclusive. Some people think a song lives or dies live, I don't. I think that the choices made in a studio setting are absolutely crucial to the success of a song. If I believed that a song is only good if it's good live, I would hate most of PJ's catalogue.

Give me an example of a Pearl Jam song you really enjoy on the album version but straight up dislike live. I'm struggling with this....

There could be some really cool angular guitar work going on underneath the vocals that are not apparent in that live version. A proper studio recording could reveal interesting things going on with the song that can't be captured from the back of Wrigley field on a camera phone. There can be certain aspects of a song that make it more enjoyable than what the bare bones may suggest.

Who knows.