Red Mosquito

OK, I'm personally talking about songwriting more than performance quality. For all I know, that performance of Future Days may be a shell of the studio version, or it may blow it to pieces. But that song is still that song, that melody is still that melody, and those lyrics are still those lyrics. I couldn't doubt that there have been some crappy performances of great songs in the band's history, but I don't think hearing a crappy performance of Corduroy makes me think less about the songwriting behind Corduroy.

Again, I'm not saying a studio version couldn't turn a two-star song into a two and a half. But I think it would be hard-pressed to make it a great one if the building blocks of the song are particularly shoddy.

digster wrote:OK, I'm personally talking about songwriting more than performance quality. For all I know, that performance of Future Days may be a shell of the studio version, or it may blow it to pieces. But that song is still that song, that melody is still that melody, and those lyrics are still those lyrics. I couldn't doubt that there have been some crappy performances of great songs in the band's history, but I don't think hearing a crappy performance of Corduroy makes me think less about the songwriting behind Corduroy.

Again, I'm not saying a studio version couldn't turn a two-star song into a two and a half. But I think it would be hard-pressed to make it a great one if the building blocks of the song are particularly shoddy.

this seems reasonable to me. well said.

digster wrote:OK, I'm personally talking about songwriting more than performance quality. For all I know, that performance of Future Days may be a shell of the studio version, or it may blow it to pieces. But that song is still that song, that melody is still that melody, and those lyrics are still those lyrics. I couldn't doubt that there have been some crappy performances of great songs in the band's history, but I don't think hearing a crappy performance of Corduroy makes me think less about the songwriting behind Corduroy.

You wouldn't be saying that if you didn't have the benefit of having heard the studio version of Corduroy.

digster wrote:Again, I'm not saying a studio version couldn't turn a two-star song into a two and a half. But I think it would be hard-pressed to make it a great one if the building blocks of the song are particularly shoddy.

I've not said anything against this, although I'd raise your half a point to a whole point, maybe a point and a half. And I don't hate the songs we have. If I did, I would probably think that no amount of studio wizardry could improve them. I still wouldn't know until I'd heard it.

well, obviously we can't make the comparison until we've heard both versions, harmless. "keep calm" and all that...

durdencommatyler wrote:Not really. I love the studio cut. But I loved that SNL performance, too.

well hate is too strong, but I was hardly excited for the song

harmless wrote:

digster wrote:OK, I'm personally talking about songwriting more than performance quality. For all I know, that performance of Future Days may be a shell of the studio version, or it may blow it to pieces. But that song is still that song, that melody is still that melody, and those lyrics are still those lyrics. I couldn't doubt that there have been some crappy performances of great songs in the band's history, but I don't think hearing a crappy performance of Corduroy makes me think less about the songwriting behind Corduroy.

You wouldn't be saying that if you didn't have the benefit of having heard the studio version of Corduroy.

digster wrote:Again, I'm not saying a studio version couldn't turn a two-star song into a two and a half. But I think it would be hard-pressed to make it a great one if the building blocks of the song are particularly shoddy.

I've not said anything against this, although I'd raise your half a point to a whole point, maybe a point and a half. And I don't hate the songs we have. If I did, I would probably think that no amount of studio wizardry could improve them. I still wouldn't know until I'd heard it.

I'm with you. I think a full point or more is possible. If you hate the song I doubt you'll love it, but if you don't like it you might find it decent, decent might become good, etc.

FD was a kinda pretty, kinda bland, kinda forgettable song, but one in which there is a lot of space for little accents and flourishes in the studio to make it more interesting, for the recording to make it sound full. They may not do these things, but the weaknesses in FD seem like ones that are particularly amenable to studio fleshing out. We'll see. They could do nothing with it

stip wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:Not really. I love the studio cut. But I loved that SNL performance, too.

well hate is too strong, but I was hardly excited for the song

I was a budding Pearl Jam fan and that performance almost deterred me.

stip wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:Not really. I love the studio cut. But I loved that SNL performance, too.

well hate is too strong, but I was hardly excited for the song

I can see that. I think it was just right place/time for me. Angry fifteen year old, still dealing with Kurt's death and everything, and problems at home. I needed something that felt like it was mine and not someone else's. I needed someone to yell that sentiment for me. And while I ultimately like the studio cut more, at the time, I was really into that SNL performance. It had me pretty pumped up.

digster wrote:OK, I'm personally talking about songwriting more than performance quality. For all I know, that performance of Future Days may be a shell of the studio version, or it may blow it to pieces. But that song is still that song, that melody is still that melody, and those lyrics are still those lyrics. I couldn't doubt that there have been some crappy performances of great songs in the band's history, but I don't think hearing a crappy performance of Corduroy makes me think less about the songwriting behind Corduroy.

Again, I'm not saying a studio version couldn't turn a two-star song into a two and a half. But I think it would be hard-pressed to make it a great one if the building blocks of the song are particularly shoddy.

I don't disagree necessarily. You make a lot of strong, valid points. I guess for me... I look at something like Mind Your Manners. Because it's the most recent case we have of a new studio cut and fresh live version. Yes, the songwriting is essentially the same. But the live version suffers, for me, because of some of the things they can't do as well on stage. Like the call and response. It sounds really forced and kinda silly live (at least in the Wrigley show, which is the only live version I've heard). If I hadn't heard the studio version I'd say MYM was a really mediocre rocker. But I LOVE the overdubs, the vocal layering and the call and response stuff in the studio version. Even that bridge/chorus section ("Self realized and metaphysically redeemed) sounds so much better on tape because of the way the next vocal line cuts into the previous vocal line. It's a really cool effect, I think. And life it just sounds muddy and sloppy.

MYM is a four star song leaning toward five for me. But that live version is a three, at best.

Thejambi wrote:Parachutes. I absolutely hated that song off of the album. The recording and vocals both sound like trash to me. Hearing it live, even though it is pretty much the same song, totally transformed my feelings towards it. It gave me a totally different frame of reference that helped me get past the album versions short comings.

Not For You. I hated it when i first heard it (SNL 94). I thought it was loud, abrasive and annoying. When i got Vitalogy I actually liked it a hell of a lot more. All the little things were more audible and dynamic. The little things elevated it and the overall tone was more appealing to me.

Oh man, that Not For You performance on SNL in 94 rocked my socks! I taped it on the VCR, played it back and recorded it on my little boom box to make my own little bootleg tape for my car.

I like the studio version, too, but man, surprised to hear that you hated the SNL performance.

durdencommatyler wrote:

digster wrote:OK, I'm personally talking about songwriting more than performance quality. For all I know, that performance of Future Days may be a shell of the studio version, or it may blow it to pieces. But that song is still that song, that melody is still that melody, and those lyrics are still those lyrics. I couldn't doubt that there have been some crappy performances of great songs in the band's history, but I don't think hearing a crappy performance of Corduroy makes me think less about the songwriting behind Corduroy.

Again, I'm not saying a studio version couldn't turn a two-star song into a two and a half. But I think it would be hard-pressed to make it a great one if the building blocks of the song are particularly shoddy.

I don't disagree necessarily. You make a lot of strong, valid points. I guess for me... I look at something like Mind Your Manners. Because it's the most recent case we have of a new studio cut and fresh live version. Yes, the songwriting is essentially the same. But the live version suffers, for me, because of some of the things they can't do as well on stage. Like the call and response. It sounds really forced and kinda silly live (at least in the Wrigley show, which is the only live version I've heard). If I hadn't heard the studio version I'd say MYM was a really mediocre rocker. But I LOVE the overdubs, the vocal layering and the call and response stuff in the studio version. Even that bridge/chorus section ("Self realized and metaphysically redeemed) sounds so much better on tape because of the way the next vocal line cuts into the previous vocal line. It's a really cool effect, I think. And life it just sounds muddy and sloppy.

MYM is a four star song leaning toward five for me. But that live version is a three, at best.

I think it just comes down to what you think about the live versions of the songs. If you think there are some problems that could be solved with a little fixin' I see where you're coming from. If, like me, the problem is with the foundation rather than the decorations, it's going to be a harder wall to climb.

But this is coming from someone who doesn't really think the studio Mind Your Manners is all that different from the live version. Sure, the latter is rawer (it's, after all, live), but it pretty much catches what the song is, how it's constructed and what it's emotion is.

digster wrote:I think it just comes down to what you think about the live versions of the songs. If you think there are some problems that could be solved with a little fixin' I see where you're coming from. If, like me, the problem is with the foundation rather than the decorations, it's going to be a harder wall to climb.

But this is coming from someone who doesn't really think the studio Mind Your Manners is all that different from the live version. Sure, the latter is rawer (it's, after all, live), but it pretty catches what the song is, how it's constructed and what it's doing.

Yep. Totally agree with that first part. And it does show how the song is constructed and what it's doing. But when you're not a musician that fundamental stuff isn't always as obvious or important.

Coach wrote:

Thejambi wrote:Parachutes. I absolutely hated that song off of the album. The recording and vocals both sound like trash to me. Hearing it live, even though it is pretty much the same song, totally transformed my feelings towards it. It gave me a totally different frame of reference that helped me get past the album versions short comings.

Not For You. I hated it when i first heard it (SNL 94). I thought it was loud, abrasive and annoying. When i got Vitalogy I actually liked it a hell of a lot more. All the little things were more audible and dynamic. The little things elevated it and the overall tone was more appealing to me.

Oh man, that Not For You performance on SNL in 94 rocked my socks! I taped it on the VCR, played it back and recorded it on my little boom box to make my own little bootleg tape for my car.

I like the studio version, too, but man, surprised to hear that you hated the SNL performance.

I like it now. I was only 11 then and my taste in music was much more melodic. I didn't own any Pearl Jam and I think I only knew Jeremy, Black, Daughter and Alive. Not For You was really unlike anything i heard from them at that point. I bought Vitalogy thinking that Starseed (which i loved and heard on the radio alot) was another new PJ song. Since I liked those older PJ songs i figured NFY was an anomaly. I liked it alot better on the CD initially but still stuck to Nothingman, Betterman, Corduroy and Immortality. As I listened to it more i started to really enjoy the "darker" and more intense songs. I ended up getting Vs. and Ten throughout 95 and never looked back. so really Our Lady Peace made me a Pearl Jam fan where that NFY performance almost ended it before it began.

Thejambi wrote:

Coach wrote:

Thejambi wrote:Parachutes. I absolutely hated that song off of the album. The recording and vocals both sound like trash to me. Hearing it live, even though it is pretty much the same song, totally transformed my feelings towards it. It gave me a totally different frame of reference that helped me get past the album versions short comings.

Not For You. I hated it when i first heard it (SNL 94). I thought it was loud, abrasive and annoying. When i got Vitalogy I actually liked it a hell of a lot more. All the little things were more audible and dynamic. The little things elevated it and the overall tone was more appealing to me.

Oh man, that Not For You performance on SNL in 94 rocked my socks! I taped it on the VCR, played it back and recorded it on my little boom box to make my own little bootleg tape for my car.

I like the studio version, too, but man, surprised to hear that you hated the SNL performance.

I like it now. I was only 11 then and my taste in music was much more melodic. I didn't own any Pearl Jam and I think I only knew Jeremy, Black, Daughter and Alive. Not For You was really unlike anything i heard from them at that point. I bought Vitalogy thinking that Starseed (which i loved and heard on the radio alot) was another new PJ song. Since I liked those older PJ songs i figured NFY was an anomaly. I liked it alot better on the CD initially but still stuck to Nothingman, Betterman, Corduroy and Immortality. As I listened to it more i started to really enjoy the "darker" and more intense songs. I ended up getting Vs. and Ten throughout 95 and never looked back. so really Our Lady Peace made me a Pearl Jam fan where that NFY performance almost ended it before it began.

Wow, well glad it all worked out. Yeah, I was 17 when NFY was performed on SNL and I already had Ten, Vs. and was just so excited to hear a new tune that I really liked. Ed's voice sounded so different and I had never seen him play the guitar until that night....I thought all he did was sing.

I think No Way is the perfect example of a song sounding much better in the studio. Maybe it's because they haven't played it enough in concert, but I kind of doubt you can re-create that sound live.

Rob wrote:I think No Way is the perfect example of a song sounding much better in the studio. Maybe it's because they haven't played it enough in concert, but I kind of doubt you can re-create that sound live.

Most Yield stuff sounds awful live. If I'd heard the new GTF fly live before the album version, I wouldn't have given that album version much of a chance at all.

Well, there's fifteen years between how they play GTF now vs. the album release. Why would there be that much difference with a song they just finished in the studio?

digster wrote:Well, there's fifteen years between how they play GTF now vs. the album release. Why would there be that much difference with a song they just finished in the studio?

Because they really don't play live very well. The fact they play these songs several BPM too fast has nothing to do with years. I don't care how old you are, the wrong tempo is the wrong tempo and if they got it right then, they can get it right now. We have no idea how fucked up these live versions are (or indeed, how much worse the studio versions will be).

You're right; there's really nothing to do but wait and see. It's worth noting, however, that those early Backspacer versions of the song hewed pretty closely to their studio counterparts, in tempo and arrangement.

I'll give you that, apart from two caveats: 1) the horrendous amount of down-tuning for those songs because they were recorded in a key too high for Ed to sing in, and 2) the fact that the Backspacer songs still sounded much better on the album, given the layering of instruments, vocals and effects created by our favourite producer. Again, I wouldn't like any of the Backspacer songs based on live versions alone.