Red Mosquito

i don't think I would either.

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 agree with this. I think there's a chance of LB sounding slightly better with some production wizadary, as i already think the song is ok/good but there's no way it's ever gonna be anything over a 4(and that would be pushing it maybe) as nothings gonna change the fact i really don't like the verses. FD however, unless theres a whole lotta music we cant hear or they change it up a lot is probably gonna stay at the bottom for me.

When a song is kickass though, it'd come through on even questionable quality (unless we're talking completely horrenduos). This is the first time they played sad ( i think lost dogs was already out, but still) It sounds a lot emptier because ed's not playing guitar, mike's doing something odd and the quality is fuzzy, but I can still tell its a song i like.

can you? its a song you already knew, so your brain will also fill in the gaps potentailly left in the performance

there are really 9 pj songs I heard live before a studio version

NFY--didnt like nearly as much as album veresion
whipping--liked live right off the bat
betterman--ditto
satan's bed-ditto
Red Mosquito--this was another song I couldn't wait to hear on an album
Brain of J--was fine, but greatly improved on the record
Lukin--never cared much live, slightly better on album
Nothing as it seems---night and day
I am mine--ditto


so of those 9 songs less than half really gave any indication of how much I would come to care for the final product

I really liked Got Some a lot when I heard it live before the album. And NFY, too. But I think those two and LB & FD are the only four I've heard live before the studio cuts... at least I can't think of any more.

oh I forgot the last two albums

Gone--improved from the demo version, which I don't like
Got Some--improved a bit from Conan


not sure if I should include eddie solo songs

stip wrote:can you? its a song you already knew, so your brain will also fill in the gaps potentailly left in the performance

Maybe, but i can tell i like the vocals, and i can tell i like the main riff and generally thats all i really need. Generally. It'd be pretty hard to fuck that up, unless there's some bizzare production choices. Something like push me pull me sounds very different live to studio.

I'm a recent fan though so i don't really have anything to go by. Maybe i should quietly exit the discussion.

well no one is denying that you might decide you love a song based on the initial studio performance. Whipping, satan's bed, betterman, and red mosquito were all love at first sight for me. actually the studio satan's bed is a step down for me.

all some of us are saying is that even in the presence of the basic structure of the song once you hear the final studio version, with polished takes, atmosphere, the extra flourishes, etc you might suddenly find yoursef sold on a song that you had already heard live, because the basic structure of the song will look different presented in the light it was intended to be viewed in

Or not. could be you just won't like it.

So basically

digster wrote: there's really nothing to do but wait and see.

stupidmop wrote:So basically

digster wrote: there's really nothing to do but wait and see.

pretty much.

I know this is just one example but look at what an abortion the polished studio version of Speed of Sound turned into. The Fixer could have been a cool song too before the hatchet job Ed did to it. Sometimes more lasers and fixin aren't a good thing.

Hearing and liking a song live and subsequently liking the studio cut is still far more likely to me than hearing a song live, thinking its average and forgettable, then being wowed by the studio version. I can't even really think of a time that has happened with me for Pearl Jam. I hate to be a debbie downer but if we as fans were reasonably going to be able to expect a quality album this time around those songs needed to have popped off live. Instead, they were a piss break at best.

And since this thread is supposed to be about Cold Confession and LIR, what if those demos or rough recordings were completely meh? Would we all be waiting with bated breath at the sonic treasures BOB and Ed could unlock with the studio versions? I'm not convinced Ed or the band really have a clue based on the production problems the last two albums had...

stip wrote:

stupidmop wrote:So basically

digster wrote: there's really nothing to do but wait and see.

pretty much.

Leash and Animal were awesome before Vs was released. As were all the Dave A live versions of Vitalogy tracks. I hold little hope for LB or FD.

Now back to CC and LiR. Both awesome and clearly tracked with release potential. Lost Dog II can't come any quicker for me.

Stip you've left out Comatose and The Fixer too. The first was played live as 'Crapshoot Rapture', and we heard the second from a rough recording of the video shoot.

verb_to_trust wrote:And since this thread is supposed to be about Cold Confession and LIR, what if those demos or rough recordings were completely meh? Would we all be waiting with bated breath at the sonic treasures BOB and Ed could unlock with the studio versions? I'm not convinced Ed or the band really have a clue based on the production problems the last two albums had...

Did the last album have any production 'problems' as such? Or did we just not like it?

Whenever PJ play new songs live, they tend to be quite faithful to the studio versions. Those expecting LB or FD to be markedly different in studio are likely to be disappointed. I am in the camp that thinks they don't need to be. I really, really like LB and think FD is an ok song. FD might be able to rise a bit with some added studio atmosphere but if you didn't like the song live at all, it's unlikely you'll go gaga over the studio cut.

I've always found PJ have been a terrific band live when it comes to replicating or exceeding performances of their studio songs around the time those songs are released. Some songs which have been difficult to replicate live like No Way are the exceptions, not the rule. Listen to Black, Jeremy, Evenflow, etc. from the 92 tour or even the 94/95 performances and they are awesome. They started to go down drastically around 98. With Vs, again the 93/94 or 95 performances cannot be matched by those in 98 or later. A lot of this has to do with Ed's vocals which simply changed over this time period. If we talk of latter day PJ, Self Titled songs played on that Letterman show were amazing. Close to or better in some cases than the studio cuts. With Backspacer, again the early live performances were very good and at least close to the studio cuts. Lowering the key is a choice Ed has to make at his age to sustain a long tour. It's one thing singing in the studio where you do it just a handful of times but doing it again and again on tour takes a heavy toll.

A few years later, they tend to change the songs up either vocally or tempo wise or both. Some of this has to do with Ed's voice changing over the years and some with the choices they make live. I personally think they don't care as much for playing the older songs now because they are somewhat bored of them. I could be wrong. Maybe they just get lazy with them and give it more effort when playing something fresh.

Yes, but how 'awesome' are new songs the band performs now? I would argue far less awesome, because they're generally far less awesome live than they were in the early 90s. I just don't get this defence of their live playing or their accurate performance of new songs based on early 90s performances of early 90s songs.

Edit: you've sort of addressed that, even if I'm not really convinced.

The new songs, if you don't like them, are not much better live. My point is that there is not much difference between the studio versions and live performances when they tour around the time that the songs are released. If you don't like Backspacer in the studio, you won't like it live. It's not because they are a suck-ass live band, it's because you don't like the songs. I personally love Backspacer; it's my 4th favourite PJ album after the first three. I don't believe the song quality is of the same level as Vitalogy, Ten or Vs. But I think it's better overall than anything that's come since.

Yeah, but I *did* like the Backspacer songs. Most of them still sucked live.

And yes, they often are a suck-ass band live. Sorry. I feel like a lot of people are living in denial about this simple fact. If I say 'Wait to hear LB and FD in the studio before you write them off', I'm speaking as someone who will write off a PJ live performance just like that these days.