Red Mosquito

harmless wrote:

digster wrote:He seemed more annoyed or frustrated (and this is with reading into it a little bit) with the time it took to make the record, rather than seemingly anything about the record itself. I'm interested in this idea that they saw what they were doing two years ago and decided to press pause, but according to O'Brien those songs are on the record also. It's not like they were cast aside.

My thought is that possibly we have a few Backspacer-esque songs recorded before, but that wasn't *all* they wanted the album to be, so they called it off while they figured out what else they wanted from it. It would be OK to get an album with dark and light tones on it, imo.

Those first sessions are probably where Ole came from. Then they hit the brakes when Ed saw people not receiving it well in Vancouver.

Tuolumne wrote:

harmless wrote:

digster wrote:He seemed more annoyed or frustrated (and this is with reading into it a little bit) with the time it took to make the record, rather than seemingly anything about the record itself. I'm interested in this idea that they saw what they were doing two years ago and decided to press pause, but according to O'Brien those songs are on the record also. It's not like they were cast aside.

My thought is that possibly we have a few Backspacer-esque songs recorded before, but that wasn't *all* they wanted the album to be, so they called it off while they figured out what else they wanted from it. It would be OK to get an album with dark and light tones on it, imo.

I can't think that with 5 songwriters in the band and with all those other projects that there was any shortage of material they wanted to record w/ BoB. I think they're well past the 'let's record everything we have' and make the rest b-sides and rarities. When a band is 10 albums in, they want to be very specific about what they want to spend their time on. They've already touched upon a load of stuff up until this point in their careers. You're right in that they may have just wanted to figure it all out prior to taking anything to BoB. They had that session in early 2012 and it took them a year before going back in w/ BoB. But I think Ed's injury and the Soundgarden album had alot to do with why it took even a little longer.

Surely a band is going to be in a different headspace a year and a half later. So we can hope that if nothing else, there will be variety on this one.

Weren't those Jeff interviews from early this year? Where he was saying he's ready to go, waiting for the call ect? Or were they from last year sometime? Doesn't sound like they were all on the same page, at least for a while.

Yes I'm speculating for speculations sake.

bodysnatcher wrote:
Those first sessions are probably where Ole came from. Then they hit the brakes when Ed saw people not receiving it well in Vancouver.

...just because it never gets old.

bodysnatcher wrote:

harmless wrote:

digster wrote:He seemed more annoyed or frustrated (and this is with reading into it a little bit) with the time it took to make the record, rather than seemingly anything about the record itself. I'm interested in this idea that they saw what they were doing two years ago and decided to press pause, but according to O'Brien those songs are on the record also. It's not like they were cast aside.

My thought is that possibly we have a few Backspacer-esque songs recorded before, but that wasn't *all* they wanted the album to be, so they called it off while they figured out what else they wanted from it. It would be OK to get an album with dark and light tones on it, imo.

Those first sessions are probably where Ole came from. Then they hit the brakes when Ed saw people not receiving it well in Vancouver.

Very possibly. I feel as if most of PJ's fans aren't card-carrying punksters, but I'm not sure if Ed knows that.

harmless wrote:

Tuolumne wrote:

harmless wrote:

digster wrote:He seemed more annoyed or frustrated (and this is with reading into it a little bit) with the time it took to make the record, rather than seemingly anything about the record itself. I'm interested in this idea that they saw what they were doing two years ago and decided to press pause, but according to O'Brien those songs are on the record also. It's not like they were cast aside.

My thought is that possibly we have a few Backspacer-esque songs recorded before, but that wasn't *all* they wanted the album to be, so they called it off while they figured out what else they wanted from it. It would be OK to get an album with dark and light tones on it, imo.

I can't think that with 5 songwriters in the band and with all those other projects that there was any shortage of material they wanted to record w/ BoB. I think they're well past the 'let's record everything we have' and make the rest b-sides and rarities. When a band is 10 albums in, they want to be very specific about what they want to spend their time on. They've already touched upon a load of stuff up until this point in their careers. You're right in that they may have just wanted to figure it all out prior to taking anything to BoB. They had that session in early 2012 and it took them a year before going back in w/ BoB. But I think Ed's injury and the Soundgarden album had alot to do with why it took even a little longer.

Surely a band is going to be in a different headspace a year and a half later. So we can hope that if nothing else, there will be variety on this one.

I hope we don't get variety but unfortunately it's the most likely scenario with this band.

stupidmop wrote:Weren't those Jeff interviews from early this year? Where he was saying he's ready to go, waiting for the call ect? Or were they from last year sometime? Doesn't sound like they were all on the same page, at least for a while.

Yes I'm speculating for speculations sake.

Yeah I remember that. But I guess BO'B just thinks of them as 'the band' as a collective. So 'the band' didn't want to go in for a year and a half. There were probably differing feelings and tensions, but BO'B didn't necessarily hear about that.

Tuolumne wrote:
I also found it interesting what he says about mixing up in Seattle. Were they not altogether mixing during Backspacer?

Yeah, I caught that. Mixing has been an issue the last few albums. Maybe the band finally got the message that they needed to follow the process through to the end. I also took that as a good sign.

And yes we are really in agreement although it sounds like you have a lot more interest in the journey. I agree that a band's dynamics are endlessly fascinating. I was so enamored with the Beatles as a kid that I could get myself in a headspace where I was in the studio with them recording. It helps that there are so many accounts and details available to dive into that history. With Pearl Jam sometimes it seems like when the layers are peeled away it destroys the mystic. Do we really want to know that Ed doesn't understand the recording process well enough to know when his albums are being poorly produced / mixed? How did Vitalogy and No Code happen in the first place if Ed and BOB are incompetent in the ears department? We need more biography (not the hagiography of PJ20) and less message board conjecture.

Heathen wrote:

harmless wrote:

Tuolumne wrote:

harmless wrote:

digster wrote:He seemed more annoyed or frustrated (and this is with reading into it a little bit) with the time it took to make the record, rather than seemingly anything about the record itself. I'm interested in this idea that they saw what they were doing two years ago and decided to press pause, but according to O'Brien those songs are on the record also. It's not like they were cast aside.

My thought is that possibly we have a few Backspacer-esque songs recorded before, but that wasn't *all* they wanted the album to be, so they called it off while they figured out what else they wanted from it. It would be OK to get an album with dark and light tones on it, imo.

I can't think that with 5 songwriters in the band and with all those other projects that there was any shortage of material they wanted to record w/ BoB. I think they're well past the 'let's record everything we have' and make the rest b-sides and rarities. When a band is 10 albums in, they want to be very specific about what they want to spend their time on. They've already touched upon a load of stuff up until this point in their careers. You're right in that they may have just wanted to figure it all out prior to taking anything to BoB. They had that session in early 2012 and it took them a year before going back in w/ BoB. But I think Ed's injury and the Soundgarden album had alot to do with why it took even a little longer.

Surely a band is going to be in a different headspace a year and a half later. So we can hope that if nothing else, there will be variety on this one.

I hope we don't get variety but unfortunately it's the most likely scenario with this band.

I don't mind variety, as long as the tones can sit next to one another and as long as all the songs are good and they tell a story together. Variety isn't inconsistency, necessarily, although you're right, PJ often seem to conflate the two. I guess you wouldn't like a lack of variety if it meant several of the kind of song you hate.

Heathen wrote:

harmless wrote:

Tuolumne wrote:

harmless wrote:

digster wrote:He seemed more annoyed or frustrated (and this is with reading into it a little bit) with the time it took to make the record, rather than seemingly anything about the record itself. I'm interested in this idea that they saw what they were doing two years ago and decided to press pause, but according to O'Brien those songs are on the record also. It's not like they were cast aside.

My thought is that possibly we have a few Backspacer-esque songs recorded before, but that wasn't *all* they wanted the album to be, so they called it off while they figured out what else they wanted from it. It would be OK to get an album with dark and light tones on it, imo.

I can't think that with 5 songwriters in the band and with all those other projects that there was any shortage of material they wanted to record w/ BoB. I think they're well past the 'let's record everything we have' and make the rest b-sides and rarities. When a band is 10 albums in, they want to be very specific about what they want to spend their time on. They've already touched upon a load of stuff up until this point in their careers. You're right in that they may have just wanted to figure it all out prior to taking anything to BoB. They had that session in early 2012 and it took them a year before going back in w/ BoB. But I think Ed's injury and the Soundgarden album had alot to do with why it took even a little longer.

Surely a band is going to be in a different headspace a year and a half later. So we can hope that if nothing else, there will be variety on this one.

I hope we don't get variety but unfortunately it's the most likely scenario with this band.

Cue stone: there's some fast ones, some slow ones, it sounds like pearl jam.

Woop.....de......doo?

Though I honestly don't care as long as the songs are good.

harmless wrote:

stupidmop wrote:Weren't those Jeff interviews from early this year? Where he was saying he's ready to go, waiting for the call ect? Or were they from last year sometime? Doesn't sound like they were all on the same page, at least for a while.

Yes I'm speculating for speculations sake.

Yeah I remember that. But I guess BO'B just thinks of them as 'the band' as a collective. So 'the band' didn't want to go in for a year and a half. There were probably differing feelings and tensions, but BO'B didn't necessarily hear about that.

Tension good.

Not listening to BOB good.

All signs point to a veritable lightning bolt of an album.

stupidmop wrote:

Heathen wrote:

harmless wrote:

Tuolumne wrote:

harmless wrote:

digster wrote:He seemed more annoyed or frustrated (and this is with reading into it a little bit) with the time it took to make the record, rather than seemingly anything about the record itself. I'm interested in this idea that they saw what they were doing two years ago and decided to press pause, but according to O'Brien those songs are on the record also. It's not like they were cast aside.

My thought is that possibly we have a few Backspacer-esque songs recorded before, but that wasn't *all* they wanted the album to be, so they called it off while they figured out what else they wanted from it. It would be OK to get an album with dark and light tones on it, imo.

I can't think that with 5 songwriters in the band and with all those other projects that there was any shortage of material they wanted to record w/ BoB. I think they're well past the 'let's record everything we have' and make the rest b-sides and rarities. When a band is 10 albums in, they want to be very specific about what they want to spend their time on. They've already touched upon a load of stuff up until this point in their careers. You're right in that they may have just wanted to figure it all out prior to taking anything to BoB. They had that session in early 2012 and it took them a year before going back in w/ BoB. But I think Ed's injury and the Soundgarden album had alot to do with why it took even a little longer.

Surely a band is going to be in a different headspace a year and a half later. So we can hope that if nothing else, there will be variety on this one.

I hope we don't get variety but unfortunately it's the most likely scenario with this band.

Cue stone: there's some fast ones, some slow ones, it sounds like pearl jam.

Woop.....de......doo?

Though I honestly don't care as long as the songs are good.

Yeah, I think that interview was the time I started to get disproportionately angry at this band. They kept sounding in interviews like they didn't give a shit in the slightest, had no vision. We'll find out if that was true, but the fact that they spend long periods of time saying nothing about the music, and then say bland and meaningless nonsense when they do talk about it, is very frustrating. We only have the music to give us any clues either way, because even when the band sound totally enthusiastic it seems like they're lying ('Best material we've ever done!').

harmless wrote:

Heathen wrote:

harmless wrote:

Tuolumne wrote:

harmless wrote:

digster wrote:He seemed more annoyed or frustrated (and this is with reading into it a little bit) with the time it took to make the record, rather than seemingly anything about the record itself. I'm interested in this idea that they saw what they were doing two years ago and decided to press pause, but according to O'Brien those songs are on the record also. It's not like they were cast aside.

My thought is that possibly we have a few Backspacer-esque songs recorded before, but that wasn't *all* they wanted the album to be, so they called it off while they figured out what else they wanted from it. It would be OK to get an album with dark and light tones on it, imo.

I can't think that with 5 songwriters in the band and with all those other projects that there was any shortage of material they wanted to record w/ BoB. I think they're well past the 'let's record everything we have' and make the rest b-sides and rarities. When a band is 10 albums in, they want to be very specific about what they want to spend their time on. They've already touched upon a load of stuff up until this point in their careers. You're right in that they may have just wanted to figure it all out prior to taking anything to BoB. They had that session in early 2012 and it took them a year before going back in w/ BoB. But I think Ed's injury and the Soundgarden album had alot to do with why it took even a little longer.

Surely a band is going to be in a different headspace a year and a half later. So we can hope that if nothing else, there will be variety on this one.

I hope we don't get variety but unfortunately it's the most likely scenario with this band.

I don't mind variety, as long as the tones can sit next to one another and as long as all the songs are good and they tell a story together. Variety isn't inconsistency, necessarily, although you're right, PJ often seem to conflate the two. I guess you wouldn't like a lack of variety if it meant several of the kind of song you hate.

Yeah I guess I want consistency more than lack of variety.

And to be honest at this point there is no big difference between a full album of songs I hate or an album with a few okay songs and a couple I hate.

Heathen wrote:

harmless wrote:

Heathen wrote:

harmless wrote:

Tuolumne wrote:

harmless wrote:

digster wrote:He seemed more annoyed or frustrated (and this is with reading into it a little bit) with the time it took to make the record, rather than seemingly anything about the record itself. I'm interested in this idea that they saw what they were doing two years ago and decided to press pause, but according to O'Brien those songs are on the record also. It's not like they were cast aside.

My thought is that possibly we have a few Backspacer-esque songs recorded before, but that wasn't *all* they wanted the album to be, so they called it off while they figured out what else they wanted from it. It would be OK to get an album with dark and light tones on it, imo.

I can't think that with 5 songwriters in the band and with all those other projects that there was any shortage of material they wanted to record w/ BoB. I think they're well past the 'let's record everything we have' and make the rest b-sides and rarities. When a band is 10 albums in, they want to be very specific about what they want to spend their time on. They've already touched upon a load of stuff up until this point in their careers. You're right in that they may have just wanted to figure it all out prior to taking anything to BoB. They had that session in early 2012 and it took them a year before going back in w/ BoB. But I think Ed's injury and the Soundgarden album had alot to do with why it took even a little longer.

Surely a band is going to be in a different headspace a year and a half later. So we can hope that if nothing else, there will be variety on this one.

I hope we don't get variety but unfortunately it's the most likely scenario with this band.

I don't mind variety, as long as the tones can sit next to one another and as long as all the songs are good and they tell a story together. Variety isn't inconsistency, necessarily, although you're right, PJ often seem to conflate the two. I guess you wouldn't like a lack of variety if it meant several of the kind of song you hate.

Yeah I guess I want consistency more than lack of variety.

And to be honest at this point there is no big difference between a full album of songs I hate or an album with a few okay songs and a couple I hate.

#

I think a lot of people feel like they can be down with an album if it has some great songs on it. I want an entire album of good songs, with nothing I hate on it. I just want something I can press play on and leave it without skipping.

MemoFromTurner wrote:

harmless wrote:

stupidmop wrote:Weren't those Jeff interviews from early this year? Where he was saying he's ready to go, waiting for the call ect? Or were they from last year sometime? Doesn't sound like they were all on the same page, at least for a while.

Yes I'm speculating for speculations sake.

Yeah I remember that. But I guess BO'B just thinks of them as 'the band' as a collective. So 'the band' didn't want to go in for a year and a half. There were probably differing feelings and tensions, but BO'B didn't necessarily hear about that.

Tension good.

Not listening to BOB good.

All signs point to a veritable lightning bolt of an album.

Except for two of the three songs we've heard already



Jk

Kinda

stupidmop wrote:

MemoFromTurner wrote:

harmless wrote:

stupidmop wrote:Weren't those Jeff interviews from early this year? Where he was saying he's ready to go, waiting for the call ect? Or were they from last year sometime? Doesn't sound like they were all on the same page, at least for a while.

Yes I'm speculating for speculations sake.

Yeah I remember that. But I guess BO'B just thinks of them as 'the band' as a collective. So 'the band' didn't want to go in for a year and a half. There were probably differing feelings and tensions, but BO'B didn't necessarily hear about that.

Tension good.

Not listening to BOB good.

All signs point to a veritable lightning bolt of an album.

Except for two of the three songs we've heard already



Jk

Kinda

Club me with facts. I'm all about

Seriously though:

MYM.

Lightning Bolt and Future Days. Uh, I dunno. I still have hope they can pull these off in the studio.

MemoFromTurner wrote:

stupidmop wrote:

MemoFromTurner wrote:

harmless wrote:

stupidmop wrote:Weren't those Jeff interviews from early this year? Where he was saying he's ready to go, waiting for the call ect? Or were they from last year sometime? Doesn't sound like they were all on the same page, at least for a while.

Yes I'm speculating for speculations sake.

Yeah I remember that. But I guess BO'B just thinks of them as 'the band' as a collective. So 'the band' didn't want to go in for a year and a half. There were probably differing feelings and tensions, but BO'B didn't necessarily hear about that.

Tension good.

Not listening to BOB good.

All signs point to a veritable lightning bolt of an album.

Except for two of the three songs we've heard already



Jk

Kinda

Club me with facts. I'm all about

Seriously though:

MYM.

Lightning Bolt and Future Days. Uh, I dunno. I still have hope they can pull these off in the studio.

More of Boom's organ, less of BO'B's piano (and preferably proper piano as opposed to keyboard) = FD as a fine song.

Lightning Bolt needs to sound like a blend of Wishlist (intro), Evacuation (annoying chorus and weird pushes), and the emotion of Unthought Known without the contrivance.

i remain confident, perhaps for no reason, that LB will sound great on the album because they named the album after it

MemoFromTurner wrote:

stupidmop wrote:

MemoFromTurner wrote:

harmless wrote:

stupidmop wrote:Weren't those Jeff interviews from early this year? Where he was saying he's ready to go, waiting for the call ect? Or were they from last year sometime? Doesn't sound like they were all on the same page, at least for a while.

Yes I'm speculating for speculations sake.

Yeah I remember that. But I guess BO'B just thinks of them as 'the band' as a collective. So 'the band' didn't want to go in for a year and a half. There were probably differing feelings and tensions, but BO'B didn't necessarily hear about that.

Tension good.

Not listening to BOB good.

All signs point to a veritable lightning bolt of an album.

Except for two of the three songs we've heard already



Jk

Kinda

Club me with facts. I'm all about

Seriously though:

MYM.

Lightning Bolt and Future Days. Uh, I dunno. I still have hope they can pull these off in the studio.

Same hear basically. Except I don't have much hope for future days improving for me. But we'll see

stip wrote:i remain confident, perhaps for no reason, that LB will sound great on the album because they named the album after it

I wonder what the odds are, if s/t had become the concept album that it almost was, that it would have been named Gone.