Page 10 of 114

Re: Running

Posted: Thu March 21, 2024 4:22 pm
by oneway23
Bridge is killer, agreed

Re: Dark Matter: Official Album Thread

Posted: Thu March 21, 2024 4:22 pm
by wease
tommy wrote:
Huell wrote:
tree_ wrote:
Huell wrote:
tommy wrote:
Huell wrote:Just listened… this makes Superblood Wolfmoon sound like something from Binaural… this band is a creatively burnt out piece of carbon from a previous artistic chemical reaction that they channelled so well up to Riot Act. It sounds so goddamn forced while also having no clever ideas. Have they ever released a rocker with the riff so boring? It’s sounds like filler content music with Ed Vedder shoved up its ass while he gnashes and snares all recorded by a toddler who pushed all the levers to MAX. Fucking hell
Anything you don't like about it?

It’s not too chintzy I suppose!

But then again that could be a negative too
He actually says ''not like about it". It was a sarcastic jab. You should be less honest, he thinks. I guess he feels sorry for them.

I was a bit over the top. I get vestibular migraines and don’t usually listen to music this maxxed out anymore. I think I find that production or mastering too harsh to enjoy. I loved Gigaton too and hoped they would build on that songwriting but the dynamics here don’t sound well arranged or by a band locking into a groove. It sounds like a green day riff that way explained to the rest of the band and Ed giving his damndest to give it life.

I do think this album is shaping up to be the Avocado to Gigaton's Riot Act.
What if this album is the Riot Act to Gigaton’s Binaural?

Re: Running

Posted: Thu March 21, 2024 4:22 pm
by Strat
also big fan of the intro/distorted bass. Very IDLES :)

Re: Running

Posted: Thu March 21, 2024 4:23 pm
by Thejambi
I’ll give Trag this one. The production 100% is getting in the way of this song.

Re: Running

Posted: Thu March 21, 2024 4:24 pm
by stip
tragabigzanda wrote:(stip's 8000-word missive that's longer than the song itself in 3, 2, 1...)

Friday night at the earliest, I'm afraid. Still haven't heard it

Re: Running

Posted: Thu March 21, 2024 4:24 pm
by Vindicator
Lukin is a DIFFERENT kind of word salad. In a good way. He's screaming on Lukin. He's letting it rip. It's different to an Ole / Superblood spritz word salad.

Re: Running

Posted: Thu March 21, 2024 4:24 pm
by Ms Harmless
oneway23 wrote:They should have called this album Dark Magnetic
Death Magnatter

Re: Running

Posted: Thu March 21, 2024 4:25 pm
by liebzz
Yeah I liked this song. Agreed it probably isn’t single material in the way they are selling Waiting For Stevie or wreckage. Those who said Earthlings are pretty on the nose.

Re: Running

Posted: Thu March 21, 2024 4:25 pm
by Release_Me
I'm liking this as much as I could hope to like a 2 minute punk rock style song from PJ. It has never been my favourite type of song from them, so I'm kind of glad I enjoy it as much as I do. Prefer it to similar songs on previous albums (Big Wave, Supersonic, etc.).

Looking forward to the rest of the album now that we have 2 of the punk-ish ones out of the way. I never loved Lukin much either and I think Ed sounds better in Running overall. I like the vocal melody and the bridge in particular. Yet, I think making the bridge the chorus may not have worked as well. The bridge is nice in contrast to the frenetic parts of the song, in my opinion.

Re: Running

Posted: Thu March 21, 2024 4:25 pm
by Jaeti
This gets three stars.

Re: Running

Posted: Thu March 21, 2024 4:25 pm
by stip
stip wrote:
tragabigzanda wrote:(stip's 8000-word missive that's longer than the song itself in 3, 2, 1...)

Friday night at the earliest, I'm afraid. Still haven't heard it
tree_ wrote:we should feed stips other write-ups into ChatGPT and predict what he might say about this new song

Or sooner

Re: Running

Posted: Thu March 21, 2024 4:26 pm
by Ms Harmless
Vindicator wrote:Lukin is a DIFFERENT kind of word salad. In a good way. He's screaming on Lukin. He's letting it rip. It's different to an Ole / Superblood type spritz
he can't scream that way anymore, I think this is the part of the equation he isn't choosing

Re: Running

Posted: Thu March 21, 2024 4:26 pm
by Strat
Thejambi wrote:I’ll give Trag this one. The production 100% is getting in the way of this song.
i cant hear a single CYmbal or Crash ring out :(

Re: Running

Posted: Thu March 21, 2024 4:27 pm
by McParadigm
Honestly if you can get behind hobbit punk what even are you

Re: Running

Posted: Thu March 21, 2024 4:28 pm
by Mike
In an unexpected pivot from their grunge-laden, introspective pathways, Pearl Jam has plunged into the punk sphere with their latest single, "Running." Known for their evocative storytelling and Eddie Vedder's unmistakable baritone that has defined a generation, the band’s foray into the fast-paced, frenetic world of punk comes as both a shock and a thrill to fans and critics alike. However, the endeavor, while ambitious, is significantly undercut by the production choices helmed by Andrew Watt, leading to a release that feels more like a stumble than the intended sprint.

"Running" opens with a jolt of electric energy, a manic guitar riff that immediately sets the stage for what promises to be a high-octane ride. The introduction is pure punk ethos — quick, dirty, and unapologetically brash. Vedder’s vocals soon join the fray, delivering lines with a rapid-fire intensity that we've seldom heard from him. It's a fresh and exhilarating experience hearing his voice in this new context, riding the wave of a tempo that relentlessly pushes forward. The lyrics, a muddled blend of rebellion and introspection, seem to bridge the gap between Pearl Jam’s storied past and their punk experimentations.

However, the initial excitement quickly gives way to the realization that something is amiss in the sonic landscape of "Running." The production, led by Andrew Watt, known for his work with a diverse range of artists from Justin Bieber to Ozzy Osbourne, unfortunately, does not do justice to Pearl Jam’s punk endeavor. There’s a palpable tension between the raw energy the band brings to the table and the polished sheen that Watt’s production imposes on the track. The result is a sound that feels constrained, as if the song’s inherent punk spirit is struggling to break free from a cocoon of overproduction.

The guitar tracks, which should be the raw, beating heart of any punk song, are buried under layers of unnecessary effects, robbing them of their visceral impact. Matt Cameron's drums, which should provide a frenetic backbone to the track, are oddly muted, lacking the punch and crispness needed to drive the song’s manic energy forward. The bass, courtesy of Jeff Ament, fares slightly better, managing to cut through the mix with moments of clarity that harken back to the genre's garage band roots. Yet, these moments are fleeting, often drowned out by an overuse of synthesizers and sound effects that feel out of place in a punk track.

Vedder’s vocals, while energetically delivered, are another casualty of the production. At times, his voice seems to fight against the mix, struggling for air amidst a sea of reverb and compression. The raw edge and emotional depth that are hallmarks of Vedder’s delivery are lost, leaving the listener longing for the unfiltered passion that Pearl Jam is capable of delivering.

Lyrically, "Running" attempts to capture a sense of urgency and disillusionment with the status quo, themes that resonate deeply in the punk genre. However, the impact of these messages is blunted by the production choices, leaving the listener to wonder what could have been if the song had been allowed to embrace its raw, unpolished roots.

In conclusion, "Running" represents a bold but flawed experiment for Pearl Jam. The decision to explore the punk genre showcases the band’s willingness to take risks and step outside their comfort zone, a commendable trait for artists three decades into their career. However, the potential of this spirited endeavor is undermined by production choices that stifle the song’s energy rather than amplifying it. As "Running" crosses the finish line, it leaves behind a trail of what-ifs — a glimpse of a band capable of reinventing themselves, yet constrained by the very production meant to elevate their sound.

Re: Running

Posted: Thu March 21, 2024 4:29 pm
by oneway23
Strat wrote:
Thejambi wrote:I’ll give Trag this one. The production 100% is getting in the way of this song.
i cant hear a single CYmbal or Crash ring out :(
No decay or reverb tails at all on both songs so far...air-tight production, sounds like maybe no ambient mics so far? Is that off-base?

Re: Running

Posted: Thu March 21, 2024 4:30 pm
by Ms Harmless
Release_Me wrote:I'm liking this as much as I could hope to like a 2 minute punk rock style song from PJ. It has never been my favourite type of song from them, so I'm kind of glad I enjoy it as much as I do. Prefer it to similar songs on previous albums (Big Wave, Supersonic, etc.).

Looking forward to the rest of the album now that we have 2 of the punk-ish ones out of the way. I never loved Lukin much either and I think Ed sounds better in Running overall. I like the vocal melody and the bridge in particular. Yet, I think making the bridge the chorus may not have worked as well. The bridge is nice in contrast to the frenetic parts of the song, in my opinion.
this is exactly where I am on it

the bridge is a wide-open breath of fresh air that lifts the song and I don't need to hear it twice in a 2 minute song; that bridge in a 4 minute song would be a different story, it would feel like they just skirted over the best part of the song (incidentally I kind of feel like that about the "darkness comes in waves..." part of Life Wasted; it's utter gorgeousness in a sea of just fine)

Re: Running

Posted: Thu March 21, 2024 4:30 pm
by VinylGuy
listening again

yeah, the intro is great. Jeff is the man.

I actually like what the guitars are doing, specially how intense they are. This song is fucking intense yes.

The bridge is awesome AF, and im warming up with the solo.

The last 30 seconds are LOUD, i love it

I really want to see them play it live.

Re: Running

Posted: Thu March 21, 2024 4:31 pm
by Strat
Mike wrote:In an unexpected pivot from their grunge-laden, introspective pathways, Pearl Jam has plunged into the punk sphere with their latest single, "Running." Known for their evocative storytelling and Eddie Vedder's unmistakable baritone that has defined a generation, the band’s foray into the fast-paced, frenetic world of punk comes as both a shock and a thrill to fans and critics alike. However, the endeavor, while ambitious, is significantly undercut by the production choices helmed by Andrew Watt, leading to a release that feels more like a stumble than the intended sprint.

"Running" opens with a jolt of electric energy, a manic guitar riff that immediately sets the stage for what promises to be a high-octane ride. The introduction is pure punk ethos — quick, dirty, and unapologetically brash. Vedder’s vocals soon join the fray, delivering lines with a rapid-fire intensity that we've seldom heard from him. It's a fresh and exhilarating experience hearing his voice in this new context, riding the wave of a tempo that relentlessly pushes forward. The lyrics, a muddled blend of rebellion and introspection, seem to bridge the gap between Pearl Jam’s storied past and their punk experimentations.

However, the initial excitement quickly gives way to the realization that something is amiss in the sonic landscape of "Running." The production, led by Andrew Watt, known for his work with a diverse range of artists from Justin Bieber to Ozzy Osbourne, unfortunately, does not do justice to Pearl Jam’s punk endeavor. There’s a palpable tension between the raw energy the band brings to the table and the polished sheen that Watt’s production imposes on the track. The result is a sound that feels constrained, as if the song’s inherent punk spirit is struggling to break free from a cocoon of overproduction.

The guitar tracks, which should be the raw, beating heart of any punk song, are buried under layers of unnecessary effects, robbing them of their visceral impact. Matt Cameron's drums, which should provide a frenetic backbone to the track, are oddly muted, lacking the punch and crispness needed to drive the song’s manic energy forward. The bass, courtesy of Jeff Ament, fares slightly better, managing to cut through the mix with moments of clarity that harken back to the genre's garage band roots. Yet, these moments are fleeting, often drowned out by an overuse of synthesizers and sound effects that feel out of place in a punk track.

Vedder’s vocals, while energetically delivered, are another casualty of the production. At times, his voice seems to fight against the mix, struggling for air amidst a sea of reverb and compression. The raw edge and emotional depth that are hallmarks of Vedder’s delivery are lost, leaving the listener longing for the unfiltered passion that Pearl Jam is capable of delivering.

Lyrically, "Running" attempts to capture a sense of urgency and disillusionment with the status quo, themes that resonate deeply in the punk genre. However, the impact of these messages is blunted by the production choices, leaving the listener to wonder what could have been if the song had been allowed to embrace its raw, unpolished roots.

In conclusion, "Running" represents a bold but flawed experiment for Pearl Jam. The decision to explore the punk genre showcases the band’s willingness to take risks and step outside their comfort zone, a commendable trait for artists three decades into their career. However, the potential of this spirited endeavor is undermined by production choices that stifle the song’s energy rather than amplifying it. As "Running" crosses the finish line, it leaves behind a trail of what-ifs — a glimpse of a band capable of reinventing themselves, yet constrained by the very production meant to elevate their sound.
Whats this from?

Re: Running

Posted: Thu March 21, 2024 4:32 pm
by Mike
thats my secret