Red Mosquito

JimX6 wrote:

evenslow wrote:

JimX6 wrote:

MemoFromTurner wrote:

harmless wrote:

JimX6 wrote:

Release_Me wrote: I am genuinely enjoying what they have been putting out from S/T onwards.

S/T was okay to me.. Recently BS is where I started to feel the way I do now. It was admittedly after a long break from Pearl Jam I had listened to all their albums again and found I don't like Backspacer much. I do love some of it, but as a whole it's not for me. Interesting enough my taste in PJ has changed since the last time I posted a lot on this board. Riot Act is my favorite followed closely by Vitalogy and No Code.

Riot Act is savagely underrated by humans.

I don't know man. Have you ever tried playing this thing from top to bottom for a normal human? You know, like, not one of us?

They're usually asleep by I Am Mine.


It's a good album and all, and I like it, but it just doesn't move people all that much.

I find myself skipping around a lot less with Riot Act than say, Backspacer

Good for you. I agree. But it has nothing to do with my point.

Maybe I always was a fan of MOR music but I Am Mine is the song that got me into Pearl Jam and I still enjoy it every time.

evenslow wrote:

JimX6 wrote:

evenslow wrote:

JimX6 wrote:

MemoFromTurner wrote:

harmless wrote:

JimX6 wrote:

Release_Me wrote: I am genuinely enjoying what they have been putting out from S/T onwards.

S/T was okay to me.. Recently BS is where I started to feel the way I do now. It was admittedly after a long break from Pearl Jam I had listened to all their albums again and found I don't like Backspacer much. I do love some of it, but as a whole it's not for me. Interesting enough my taste in PJ has changed since the last time I posted a lot on this board. Riot Act is my favorite followed closely by Vitalogy and No Code.

Riot Act is savagely underrated by humans.

I don't know man. Have you ever tried playing this thing from top to bottom for a normal human? You know, like, not one of us?

They're usually asleep by I Am Mine.


It's a good album and all, and I like it, but it just doesn't move people all that much.

I find myself skipping around a lot less with Riot Act than say, Backspacer

Good for you. I agree. But it has nothing to do with my point.

Hah, I did miss your point, sorry. Yes the newer stuff is much more accessible than RA. But why put on this "fuck you we play for us" vibe for years only to backpedal and make stuff like what we've heard in the last decade almost? why establish that and then change your MO and cater to the general audience? It's a bitter pill to swallow and is awkward coming from a band like Pearl Jam. Which is why I can't get behind the poppy/happy stuff.

To which they'd surely reply "Fuck you, we play for us". See the irony?

harmless wrote:To which they'd surely reply "Fuck you, we play for us". See the irony?

true, but it seems like bull shit now. why give a crap about easier lyrics and catchier choruses when you don't care who likes your band?

Riot Act was "fuck you we play for ourselves"

Backspacer and what we've heard from LB (aside from MYM so far) was "Hey remember us? We still make music"

it's sad..

JimX6 wrote:

evenslow wrote:

JimX6 wrote:

evenslow wrote:

JimX6 wrote:

MemoFromTurner wrote:

harmless wrote:

JimX6 wrote:

Release_Me wrote: I am genuinely enjoying what they have been putting out from S/T onwards.

S/T was okay to me.. Recently BS is where I started to feel the way I do now. It was admittedly after a long break from Pearl Jam I had listened to all their albums again and found I don't like Backspacer much. I do love some of it, but as a whole it's not for me. Interesting enough my taste in PJ has changed since the last time I posted a lot on this board. Riot Act is my favorite followed closely by Vitalogy and No Code.

Riot Act is savagely underrated by humans.

I don't know man. Have you ever tried playing this thing from top to bottom for a normal human? You know, like, not one of us?

They're usually asleep by I Am Mine.


It's a good album and all, and I like it, but it just doesn't move people all that much.

I find myself skipping around a lot less with Riot Act than say, Backspacer

Good for you. I agree. But it has nothing to do with my point.

Hah, I did miss your point, sorry. Yes the newer stuff is much more accessible than RA. But why put on this "fuck you we play for us" vibe for years only to backpedal and make stuff like what we've heard in the last decade almost? why establish that and then change your MO and cater to the general audience? It's a bitter pill to swallow and is awkward coming from a band like Pearl Jam. Which is why I can't get behind the poppy/happy stuff.

ok - i wasn't talking about riot act in relation to the more populist stuff that came after. riot act in a vacuum isn't particularly engaging.

Release_Me wrote:

Lament wrote:

harmless wrote:

Lament wrote:

Thejambi wrote:I love the fall back to "they aren't trying and they don't care" observation because they haven't made music that you like. Let's all stop fooling ourselves that Pearl Jam music was ever really that complicated or innovative. They were never a band looking to redefine or push the boundary's of rock and to think that they should be now and criticize them for it is asinine.

I think it's emotionally easier for people to tell themselves "They're not awesome because they don't want to be awesome" than to accept that they may just not be as good of a band as they were ten years ago. People want to hold on to the idea that they could make an album like Yield if they REALLY wanted to, but they just don't.

Don't or can't? You seem to be wanting to say 'can't' here.

No, I mean "don't." It probably would have been clearer if I had said "but they just don't want to." It's still in the context of what the theoretical fan in question wants to believe.

This is kind of where I get lost. The album which they supposedly can't make now is Yield? To me, that's kind of absurd because that's the album LB most reminds me of. Yield is probably PJ's earliest attempt to make poppier, more anthemic songs with positive or at least uplifting themes. I just don't think they did a very good job of it overall, a few great songs notwithstanding. Even those were very basic songs, nothing out of the ordinary as far as song structures are concerned. Vitalogy, Vs and Ten are the albums they probably can't make now. Or at least not make with any degree of artistic integrity.

It's like everyone wants them to make darker songs, but then the album name they throwaround is Yield? I'm just trying to understand this, forgive my repetition.

You can fill in any of the first five albums if it makes my point easier for you to understand. It's not a Yield-specific argument, I just picked that because it is an immensely popular album among people who are attached to the band. The point is still that it's easier for people to believe the band could still make a great record but they just choose not to. A lot of people who aren't fans of the last two records want to believe that they weren't the best the band could do at that moment in time, when in fact they probably were much closer to the best they had in them at that stage than any of those fans would want to admit. Hence the frequency of the "They're just being lazy" argument (even though there definitely are instances where it carries some validity).

Release_Me wrote:
This is kind of where I get lost. The album which they supposedly can't make now is Yield? To me, that's kind of absurd because that's the album LB most reminds me of. Yield is probably PJ's earliest attempt to make poppier, more anthemic songs with positive or at least uplifting themes. I just don't think they did a very good job of it overall, a few great songs notwithstanding. Even those were very basic songs, nothing out of the ordinary as far as song structures are concerned. Vitalogy, Vs and Ten are the albums they probably can't make now. Or at least not make with any degree of artistic integrity.

It's like everyone wants them to make darker songs, but then the album name they throwaround is Yield? I'm just trying to understand this, forgive my repetition.

For the first point, is it possible for Lightning Bolt to be similar to any album yet? I mean, I'd say they seem a little like Backspacer, but who knows what the rest of the record will be like. That being said, I don't hear anything so far matching the quality of Yield, but I don't necessarily need that. They made GREAT records in the career, and it's unfair to view each album as a failure if it doesn't measure up to them. But I don't think it's too much to ask for a quality record.

As for the second point, this idea that 'people just want darker songs' is a bit of a strawman. People want good songs more than anything else. The fact that everyone loves Yield should prove to you that people are willing to accept and love optimistic songs on an optimistic record. If the desire for darker songs comes up, I think it's mainly because the majority (not all) of PJ's best work came out of that admittedly vague headspace. It doesn't need to.

There's more in this post I don't agree with (i.e. "nothing out of the ordinary" on Yield), but most of that is, I guess, besides the point of what's being argued.

Lament wrote:

Release_Me wrote:

Lament wrote:

harmless wrote:

Lament wrote:

Thejambi wrote:I love the fall back to "they aren't trying and they don't care" observation because they haven't made music that you like. Let's all stop fooling ourselves that Pearl Jam music was ever really that complicated or innovative. They were never a band looking to redefine or push the boundary's of rock and to think that they should be now and criticize them for it is asinine.

I think it's emotionally easier for people to tell themselves "They're not awesome because they don't want to be awesome" than to accept that they may just not be as good of a band as they were ten years ago. People want to hold on to the idea that they could make an album like Yield if they REALLY wanted to, but they just don't.

Don't or can't? You seem to be wanting to say 'can't' here.

No, I mean "don't." It probably would have been clearer if I had said "but they just don't want to." It's still in the context of what the theoretical fan in question wants to believe.

This is kind of where I get lost. The album which they supposedly can't make now is Yield? To me, that's kind of absurd because that's the album LB most reminds me of. Yield is probably PJ's earliest attempt to make poppier, more anthemic songs with positive or at least uplifting themes. I just don't think they did a very good job of it overall, a few great songs notwithstanding. Even those were very basic songs, nothing out of the ordinary as far as song structures are concerned. Vitalogy, Vs and Ten are the albums they probably can't make now. Or at least not make with any degree of artistic integrity.

It's like everyone wants them to make darker songs, but then the album name they throwaround is Yield? I'm just trying to understand this, forgive my repetition.

You can fill in any of the first five albums if it makes my point easier for you to understand. It's not a Yield-specific argument, I just picked that because it is an immensely popular album among people who are attached to the band. The point is still that it's easier for people to believe the band could still make a great record but they just choose not to. A lot of people who aren't fans of the last two records want to believe that they weren't the best the band could do at that moment in time, when in fact they probably were much closer to the best they had in them at that stage than any of those fans would want to admit. Hence the frequency of the "They're just being lazy" argument (even though there definitely are instances where it carries some validity).

Wait, are you arguing for the notion that they could make better albums and just choose not to, or against it? I think you've done both.

JimX6 wrote:

harmless wrote:To which they'd surely reply "Fuck you, we play for us". See the irony?

true, but it seems like bull shit now. why give a crap about easier lyrics and catchier choruses when you don't care who likes your band?

Riot Act was "fuck you we play for ourselves"

Backspacer and what we've heard from LB (aside from MYM so far) was "Hey remember us? We still make music"

it's sad..

It depends on whether your perception is really that they think they're a) bringing vast swathes of new fans to the band at this point and their 'populism' is working, or b) they have wives and kids now, and enough money to tour and make music when they like, and to make that music as easily, quickly and care-free as they like around other more important commitments. If it's the latter (and I think it is) then that's probably the hardest version of 'punk' to swallow for us fans. They've become so 'fuck you' about everything that they don't even care about us much anymore. I mean, what's the point of a 'Fuck what you want, we play what we like' attitude, if we're going to like everything they play? That's the giant irony of punk, and the reason why a lot of people find the punk 'attitude' to be meaningless punk posturing. Everyone is writing songs that they want people to like, otherwise they wouldn't bother.

Lament wrote:

Release_Me wrote:

Lament wrote:

harmless wrote:

Lament wrote:

Thejambi wrote:I love the fall back to "they aren't trying and they don't care" observation because they haven't made music that you like. Let's all stop fooling ourselves that Pearl Jam music was ever really that complicated or innovative. They were never a band looking to redefine or push the boundary's of rock and to think that they should be now and criticize them for it is asinine.

I think it's emotionally easier for people to tell themselves "They're not awesome because they don't want to be awesome" than to accept that they may just not be as good of a band as they were ten years ago. People want to hold on to the idea that they could make an album like Yield if they REALLY wanted to, but they just don't.

Don't or can't? You seem to be wanting to say 'can't' here.

No, I mean "don't." It probably would have been clearer if I had said "but they just don't want to." It's still in the context of what the theoretical fan in question wants to believe.

This is kind of where I get lost. The album which they supposedly can't make now is Yield? To me, that's kind of absurd because that's the album LB most reminds me of. Yield is probably PJ's earliest attempt to make poppier, more anthemic songs with positive or at least uplifting themes. I just don't think they did a very good job of it overall, a few great songs notwithstanding. Even those were very basic songs, nothing out of the ordinary as far as song structures are concerned. Vitalogy, Vs and Ten are the albums they probably can't make now. Or at least not make with any degree of artistic integrity.

It's like everyone wants them to make darker songs, but then the album name they throwaround is Yield? I'm just trying to understand this, forgive my repetition.

You can fill in any of the first five albums if it makes my point easier for you to understand. It's not a Yield-specific argument, I just picked that because it is an immensely popular album among people who are attached to the band. The point is still that it's easier for people to believe the band could still make a great record but they just choose not to. A lot of people who aren't fans of the last two records want to believe that they weren't the best the band could do at that moment in time, when in fact they probably were much closer to the best they had in them at that stage than any of those fans would want to admit. Hence the frequency of the "They're just being lazy" argument (even though there definitely are instances where it carries some validity).

Pearl Jam is a band that never really established and maintained what it's sound was apart from a punk/hard rock/classic rock blend. What more often or not dictates what Pearl Jam sounds like is the state of being on mostly Ed at the time. Ed is pissed it's an aggressive angry album. If Ed is contemplative and confused its a moodier album.
The band has always created out of the moment and made music that they thought was appropriate for it. The fact of the matter is the members all seem to be in really good places and the music is reflective of that. They want to make record people can enjoy without necessarily going to dark places. I just don't think Ed feels or need to be the voice for anyone as much as he maybe tried to be though the 90's.

No matter what they do some will like it some will hate it. The musicianship throughout S/T is very good as well as Backspacer. One feels like it was working towards old Pearl Jam while the other was something new and both get trashed on.

harmless wrote:Wait, are you arguing for the notion that they could make better albums and just choose not to, or against it? I think you've done both.

I'm arguing that there is an emotional reason why people use the "They're just being lazy" argument against the band's later work.

I believe people are prone to accuse them of being lazy because it's emotionally easier than just accepting that the albums which a lot of people don't like are actually the best work they're capable of at this point. Some people find it easier to say "They choose not to be as awesome as they used to be," because they don't want to admit "They're not capable of being as awesome as they used to be."

My personal take (which I haven't explicitly gone into) is that they're just not capable of creating consistently excellent material the same way they were in their prime. There are flashes of the old brilliance that make them worth still following, but no part of me believes they will make another album as creatively rewarding as Vitalogy or No Code ever again. Which is fine. Most bands don't at this point in their career.

harmless wrote:

JimX6 wrote:

harmless wrote:To which they'd surely reply "Fuck you, we play for us". See the irony?

true, but it seems like bull shit now. why give a crap about easier lyrics and catchier choruses when you don't care who likes your band?

Riot Act was "fuck you we play for ourselves"

Backspacer and what we've heard from LB (aside from MYM so far) was "Hey remember us? We still make music"

it's sad..

It depends on whether your perception is really that they think they're a) bringing vast swathes of new fans to the band at this point and their 'populism' is working, or b) they have wives and kids now, and enough money to tour and make music when they like, and to make that music as easily, quickly and care-free as they like around other more important commitments. If it's the latter (and I think it is) then that's probably the hardest version of 'punk' to swallow for us fans. They've become so 'fuck you' about everything that they don't even care about us much anymore. I mean, what's the point of a 'Fuck what you want, we play what we like' attitude, if we're going to like everything they play? That's the giant irony of punk, and the reason why a lot of people find the punk 'attitude' to be meaningless punk posturing. Everyone is writing songs that they want people to like, otherwise they wouldn't bother.

Good point! perhaps its a combination? They have families to support so making more radio friendly music will secure good lives for their children. So they care about fans.. just not catering to fans of the more obscure stylings?

JimX6 wrote:

harmless wrote:

JimX6 wrote:

harmless wrote:To which they'd surely reply "Fuck you, we play for us". See the irony?

true, but it seems like bull shit now. why give a crap about easier lyrics and catchier choruses when you don't care who likes your band?

Riot Act was "fuck you we play for ourselves"

Backspacer and what we've heard from LB (aside from MYM so far) was "Hey remember us? We still make music"

it's sad..

It depends on whether your perception is really that they think they're a) bringing vast swathes of new fans to the band at this point and their 'populism' is working, or b) they have wives and kids now, and enough money to tour and make music when they like, and to make that music as easily, quickly and care-free as they like around other more important commitments. If it's the latter (and I think it is) then that's probably the hardest version of 'punk' to swallow for us fans. They've become so 'fuck you' about everything that they don't even care about us much anymore. I mean, what's the point of a 'Fuck what you want, we play what we like' attitude, if we're going to like everything they play? That's the giant irony of punk, and the reason why a lot of people find the punk 'attitude' to be meaningless punk posturing. Everyone is writing songs that they want people to like, otherwise they wouldn't bother.

Good point! perhaps its a combination? They have families to support so making more radio friendly music will secure good lives for their children. So they care about fans.. just not catering to fans of the more obscure stylings?

Yeah, I think so. I mean, Ed is pretty obsessed with his children and maybe a big part of his career now is the thought he can give them a huge inheritance?

I would rather they be authentic than "go to dark places" b/c that's what's expected of them.

Might be hit or miss musically but at least it's honest.

harmless wrote:

JimX6 wrote:

harmless wrote:To which they'd surely reply "Fuck you, we play for us". See the irony?

true, but it seems like bull shit now. why give a crap about easier lyrics and catchier choruses when you don't care who likes your band?

Riot Act was "fuck you we play for ourselves"

Backspacer and what we've heard from LB (aside from MYM so far) was "Hey remember us? We still make music"

it's sad..

It depends on whether your perception is really that they think they're a) bringing vast swathes of new fans to the band at this point and their 'populism' is working, or b) they have wives and kids now, and enough money to tour and make music when they like, and to make that music as easily, quickly and care-free as they like around other more important commitments. If it's the latter (and I think it is) then that's probably the hardest version of 'punk' to swallow for us fans. They've become so 'fuck you' about everything that they don't even care about us much anymore. I mean, what's the point of a 'Fuck what you want, we play what we like' attitude, if we're going to like everything they play? That's the giant irony of punk, and the reason why a lot of people find the punk 'attitude' to be meaningless punk posturing. Everyone is writing songs that they want people to like, otherwise they wouldn't bother.

They're so punk, they're not even punk anymore!


Most of the weirdness/ not radio friendly shit on thier album was eds response to being overly popular, they don't really have that problem anymore.

But I think they're creating the music they wanna be creating at this point, I doubt eds discarding amazing complex songs saying ' no no we can't do that, that's not gonna make us any money'.If at some point they wanted to do an album full of weird shit I'm sure they would, but it'd be because they wanted to make that music, not because they wanted to challenge peoples perception of the band, I don't think they (/ed) care enough about that anymore. I realise I'm talking about them making weird songs as opposed to them making 'good' songs, but my point still stands, they think thier New stuff is good, they wouldn't release it otherwise. 'This is a load of shit, but it'll bring the mulah' ' I could make this sappy acoustic ballad more interesting, but people will eat it up as is so fuck it' ' mike lay a lame 80's solo over this, people will love it, lamer, laaammer, there you go'

I'll only start believing they're lazy fucks who only care about music when they start releasing shit that sounds likes Ten part 2 complete with angst, daddy issues and reverb. They know people are still after that shit.

I may have countered my own point at some point during these ramblings but yeah.

Surely, like most rock musicians, it is simply the fact that after 20 years the well of creativity is fairly dry and we are being served the sludgy bits of crap from a bucket that takes far to long to go up and down. I think the second problem is that Ed's voice made the band what it was and it is no longer what it was - for the first ten years, his voice could make some pretty basic chords and music sound amazing but things were different then, all is different now.

Blenheim Augustine wrote:Surely, like most rock musicians, it is simply the fact that after 20 years the well of creativity is fairly dry and we are being served the sludgy bits of crap from a bucket that takes far to long to go up and down. I think the second problem is that Ed's voice made the band what it was and it is no longer what it was - for the first ten years, his voice could make some pretty basic chords and music sound amazing but things were different then, all is different now.

I'd say this is a bit harsh and then I'd say if I felt all they were delivering was sludgy bits of crap I'd certainly stop listening. But to each their own.

stupidmop wrote:

harmless wrote:

JimX6 wrote:

harmless wrote:To which they'd surely reply "Fuck you, we play for us". See the irony?

true, but it seems like bull shit now. why give a crap about easier lyrics and catchier choruses when you don't care who likes your band?

Riot Act was "fuck you we play for ourselves"

Backspacer and what we've heard from LB (aside from MYM so far) was "Hey remember us? We still make music"

it's sad..

It depends on whether your perception is really that they think they're a) bringing vast swathes of new fans to the band at this point and their 'populism' is working, or b) they have wives and kids now, and enough money to tour and make music when they like, and to make that music as easily, quickly and care-free as they like around other more important commitments. If it's the latter (and I think it is) then that's probably the hardest version of 'punk' to swallow for us fans. They've become so 'fuck you' about everything that they don't even care about us much anymore. I mean, what's the point of a 'Fuck what you want, we play what we like' attitude, if we're going to like everything they play? That's the giant irony of punk, and the reason why a lot of people find the punk 'attitude' to be meaningless punk posturing. Everyone is writing songs that they want people to like, otherwise they wouldn't bother.

They're so punk, they're not even punk anymore!


Most of the weirdness/ not radio friendly shit on thier album was eds response to being overly popular, they don't really have that problem anymore.

But I think they're creating the music they wanna be creating at this point, I doubt eds discarding amazing complex songs saying ' no no we can't do that, that's not gonna make us any money'.If at some point they wanted to do an album full of weird shit I'm sure they would, but it'd be because they wanted to make that music, not because they wanted to challenge peoples perception of the band, I don't think they (/ed) care enough about that anymore. I realise I'm talking about them making weird songs as opposed to them making 'good' songs, but my point still stands, they think thier New stuff is good, they wouldn't release it otherwise. 'This is a load of shit, but it'll bring the mulah' ' I could make this sappy acoustic ballad more interesting, but people will eat it up as is so fuck it' ' mike lay a lame 80's solo over this, people will love it, lamer, laaammer, there you go'

I'll only start believing they're lazy fucks who only care about music when they start releasing shit that sounds likes Ten part 2 complete with angst, daddy issues and reverb. They know people are still after that shit.

I may have countered my own point at some point during these ramblings but yeah.

Lament wrote:

harmless wrote:Wait, are you arguing for the notion that they could make better albums and just choose not to, or against it? I think you've done both.

I'm arguing that there is an emotional reason why people use the "They're just being lazy" argument against the band's later work.

I believe people are prone to accuse them of being lazy because it's emotionally easier than just accepting that the albums which a lot of people don't like are actually the best work they're capable of at this point. Some people find it easier to say "They choose not to be as awesome as they used to be," because they don't want to admit "They're not capable of being as awesome as they used to be."

My personal take (which I haven't explicitly gone into) is that they're just not capable of creating consistently excellent material the same way they were in their prime. There are flashes of the old brilliance that make them worth still following, but no part of me believes they will make another album as creatively rewarding as Vitalogy or No Code ever again. Which is fine. Most bands don't at this point in their career.

This is exactly how I feel. I'm ok with it also. No band does that, makes a 10th album as good as their first few. The vehichle of PJ has become formatted. I don't expect much, I bet their will be flashes as you said. I rather like MYM for some reason a lot. Let's face it, back in the day music was their number 1 priority. It was life or death so to speak. Now, it's way WAY down the list as it should be. If it was still number 1 with them having wives and kids I would be upset and think less of them. Whomever doesn't put their families first really I lose respect for. I'm glad where they are in their lives. I'm happy for them. They don't owe me anything, they've given me so much. So, I suspect 3-4 good songs and moments. I still enjoy them live, worts and all. I've just execpted them for them right now.