Red Mosquito

theplatypus wrote:

bluestate wrote:There are a few things that I've discovered recently about Backspacer that surprised me a bit:

1) It's the first PJ album to reach #1 on Billboard 200 since No Code
2) It's the highest rated PJ album on metacritic (dating back to Binaural) based on overall score (79/100)
3) And the highest rated PJ album on metacritic (dating back to Binaural) based on user score (9.0/10)
4) It's the only PJ album on metacritic (once again, only dating back to Binaural) to receive a perfect 100/100 - LA Times

Considering the general negativity from the fanbase with regards to Backspacer, they must've done something right because the greater music community has received it with very open arms

This is what I keep bringing up when people talk about how "badly received" Backspacer was. It really wasn't. Like it or not, it wasn't.

I don't think it was badly-received. I tend to just disagree with stip when he talks about it being a well-received, critically acclaimed records. My overall point is that I just don't think critics give a shit about PJ records anymore, certainly not enough to chart the trajectory of their career.

theplatypus wrote:

bluestate wrote:There are a few things that I've discovered recently about Backspacer that surprised me a bit:

1) It's the first PJ album to reach #1 on Billboard 200 since No Code
2) It's the highest rated PJ album on metacritic (dating back to Binaural) based on overall score (79/100)
3) And the highest rated PJ album on metacritic (dating back to Binaural) based on user score (9.0/10)
4) It's the only PJ album on metacritic (once again, only dating back to Binaural) to receive a perfect 100/100 - LA Times

Considering the general negativity from the fanbase with regards to Backspacer, they must've done something right because the greater music community has received it with very open arms

This is what I keep bringing up when people talk about how "badly received" Backspacer was. It really wasn't. Like it or not, it wasn't.

The problem is that these numbers are then turned into

Yeah, most of the music fans just loved it

digster wrote:

theplatypus wrote:

bluestate wrote:There are a few things that I've discovered recently about Backspacer that surprised me a bit:

1) It's the first PJ album to reach #1 on Billboard 200 since No Code
2) It's the highest rated PJ album on metacritic (dating back to Binaural) based on overall score (79/100)
3) And the highest rated PJ album on metacritic (dating back to Binaural) based on user score (9.0/10)
4) It's the only PJ album on metacritic (once again, only dating back to Binaural) to receive a perfect 100/100 - LA Times

Considering the general negativity from the fanbase with regards to Backspacer, they must've done something right because the greater music community has received it with very open arms

This is what I keep bringing up when people talk about how "badly received" Backspacer was. It really wasn't. Like it or not, it wasn't.

I don't think it was badly-received. I tend to just disagree with stip when he talks about it being a well-received, critically acclaimed records. My overall point is that I just don't think critics give a shit about PJ records anymore, certainly not enough to chart the trajectory of their career.

Like it or not it was well-received and critically acclaimed. It was even grammy nominated for Best Rock Album .

Heathen wrote:

theplatypus wrote:

bluestate wrote:There are a few things that I've discovered recently about Backspacer that surprised me a bit:

1) It's the first PJ album to reach #1 on Billboard 200 since No Code
2) It's the highest rated PJ album on metacritic (dating back to Binaural) based on overall score (79/100)
3) And the highest rated PJ album on metacritic (dating back to Binaural) based on user score (9.0/10)
4) It's the only PJ album on metacritic (once again, only dating back to Binaural) to receive a perfect 100/100 - LA Times

Considering the general negativity from the fanbase with regards to Backspacer, they must've done something right because the greater music community has received it with very open arms

This is what I keep bringing up when people talk about how "badly received" Backspacer was. It really wasn't. Like it or not, it wasn't.

The problem is that these numbers are then turned into

Yeah, most of the music fans just loved it

well, music fans outside the pearl jam world!

im sorry they prefer this album to, let say, Binaural. But actually, who cares right?

Thejambi wrote:

digster wrote:

theplatypus wrote:

bluestate wrote:There are a few things that I've discovered recently about Backspacer that surprised me a bit:

1) It's the first PJ album to reach #1 on Billboard 200 since No Code
2) It's the highest rated PJ album on metacritic (dating back to Binaural) based on overall score (79/100)
3) And the highest rated PJ album on metacritic (dating back to Binaural) based on user score (9.0/10)
4) It's the only PJ album on metacritic (once again, only dating back to Binaural) to receive a perfect 100/100 - LA Times

Considering the general negativity from the fanbase with regards to Backspacer, they must've done something right because the greater music community has received it with very open arms

This is what I keep bringing up when people talk about how "badly received" Backspacer was. It really wasn't. Like it or not, it wasn't.

I don't think it was badly-received. I tend to just disagree with stip when he talks about it being a well-received, critically acclaimed records. My overall point is that I just don't think critics give a shit about PJ records anymore, certainly not enough to chart the trajectory of their career.

Like it or not it was well-received and critically acclaimed. It was even grammy nominated for Best Rock Album .

At what point does metacritic tell us something is critically acclaimed? Especially compared to the Binaural album, which has way less reviews on it. It's not even possible to make a comparison.

Basically, an aggregrate website for this is good for two things; to tell if something has been critically deemed a masterpiece or a bomb. With PJ, it seems as if they've been getting the same middling-to-positive critical reviews on Backspacer that they have for the past ten years (and I'd speculate, for the majority of their career). I think people trying to read more into it than that are overextending it's usage.

VinylGuy wrote:

Heathen wrote:

theplatypus wrote:

bluestate wrote:There are a few things that I've discovered recently about Backspacer that surprised me a bit:

1) It's the first PJ album to reach #1 on Billboard 200 since No Code
2) It's the highest rated PJ album on metacritic (dating back to Binaural) based on overall score (79/100)
3) And the highest rated PJ album on metacritic (dating back to Binaural) based on user score (9.0/10)
4) It's the only PJ album on metacritic (once again, only dating back to Binaural) to receive a perfect 100/100 - LA Times

Considering the general negativity from the fanbase with regards to Backspacer, they must've done something right because the greater music community has received it with very open arms

This is what I keep bringing up when people talk about how "badly received" Backspacer was. It really wasn't. Like it or not, it wasn't.

The problem is that these numbers are then turned into

Yeah, most of the music fans just loved it

well, music fans outside the pearl jam world!

but that's just not true, or, at least, you absolutely can't come to that conclusion based on these numbers

sometimes I think digster might be my second account

And plus, stuff like thinking about sales solely by the numbers doesn't really take into account any context about the albums themselves. Take Binaural and Backspacer, the types of albums they are and the first singles they led off with. I'm sure even the biggest defender of Backspacer would admit that there are many reasons the latter album would sell more that have nothing to do with quality.

digster wrote:

Thejambi wrote:

digster wrote:

theplatypus wrote:

bluestate wrote:There are a few things that I've discovered recently about Backspacer that surprised me a bit:

1) It's the first PJ album to reach #1 on Billboard 200 since No Code
2) It's the highest rated PJ album on metacritic (dating back to Binaural) based on overall score (79/100)
3) And the highest rated PJ album on metacritic (dating back to Binaural) based on user score (9.0/10)
4) It's the only PJ album on metacritic (once again, only dating back to Binaural) to receive a perfect 100/100 - LA Times

Considering the general negativity from the fanbase with regards to Backspacer, they must've done something right because the greater music community has received it with very open arms

This is what I keep bringing up when people talk about how "badly received" Backspacer was. It really wasn't. Like it or not, it wasn't.

I don't think it was badly-received. I tend to just disagree with stip when he talks about it being a well-received, critically acclaimed records. My overall point is that I just don't think critics give a shit about PJ records anymore, certainly not enough to chart the trajectory of their career.

Like it or not it was well-received and critically acclaimed. It was even grammy nominated for Best Rock Album .

At what point does metacritic tell us something is critically acclaimed? Especially compared to the Binaural album, which has way less reviews on it. It's not even possible to make a comparison.

Basically, an aggregrate website for this is good for two things; to tell if something has been critically deemed a masterpiece or a bomb. With PJ, it seems as if they've been getting the same middling-to-positive critical reviews on Backspacer that they have for the past ten years (and I'd speculate, for the majority of their career). I think people trying to read more into it than that are overextending it's usage.

I am in no way saying any of this validates Backspacer as a "good" album. However the reviews were overwhelmingly positive for it. It had a good chart run and produced two very successful singles. Getting major award nominations ( regardless of what you may think of it) is also further vindication that the album was received well. To many it seemed like a refreshing take on Pearl Jam. Fresh fun and full of energy.

Heathen wrote:but for the 1000th time, almost everything gets "overwhelmingly positive" reviews, in general and particularly on metacritic

that is what critically acclaimed is

VinylGuy wrote:BS was the first record a lot of my friends who, just known PJ form Ten and maybe Yield, love. Its the first one were they actually went to buy and care. Its very respected outside the PJ community.

Its great record.

It definitely had a way of resonating with people who weren't "music people," necessarily--for people who are content enough to listen to whatever is on (and who mainly just listen to the radio in their own time), most of Backspacer is probably a little easier to digest on that passing, uncritical level than most of Pearl Jam's material, especially the albums from No Code on. I certainly knew a handful of people like this. But calling it "respected outside the PJ community" is probably a little off-base--it's not like there's some non-Pearl Jam-affiliated general populace with a completely separate, equally meticulous list of all-time greatest records which features Backspacer and a bunch of Kelly Clarkson albums. I think more accurate would be to say that some of its songs have managed to find their places in the lives of people who don't really give much consideration as to whether or not music is deserving of "respect" in the first place, which is kind of a neat thing but I don't know that it necessarily signals some kind of transcendental move on the band's part.

Getting good reviews once you get into Pearl Jam's phase of their career is kinda like those athletes who are long past their prime but still serviceable so they keep getting named to All-Star teams. That's the biggest shift in the perception of Pearl Jam and the reaction to their work in the last ten years. When S/T came out, they seemed to be greeted with a collective "Welcome to the status of living legends!" from the major rock publication and general music fans of the world. Pearl Jam is like Springsteen, U2, Radiohead, Prince, and a numerous others now; artists like these will very rarely get bad reviews from major publications. I don't doubt that an album like Riot Act or Binaural would be greeted much more favorably today than it was in 2002 merely based on the general perception of Pearl Jam in 2013. That's not to say that the albums are either all good or all bad; it's just that the things that tend to go into reviews of bands at this point in their career are pretty meaningless, and to me tend to make reviews of said albums pretty worthless. I think for artists like this you can get a far better read on an album by looking at the fan base's long-term view of it than you can from seeing what someone in a major newspaper or magazine wrote about it when it came out.

Remember that SPIN review of "Ukulele Songs" where the guy wrote how great it would be to hear "Can't Keep" rearranged as a Pearl Jam song?

Kevin Davis wrote:Remember that SPIN review of "Ukulele Songs" where the guy wrote how great it would be to hear "Can't Keep" rearranged as a Pearl Jam song?

Wow. I just searched for and read it. That's a pretty impressive error for a four sentence review.

Lament wrote:Getting good reviews once you get into Pearl Jam's phase of their career is kinda like those athletes who are long past their prime but still serviceable so they keep getting named to All-Star teams. That's the biggest shift in the perception of Pearl Jam and the reaction to their work in the last ten years. When S/T came out, they seemed to be greeted with a collective "Welcome to the status of living legends!" from the major rock publication and general music fans of the world. Pearl Jam is like Springsteen, U2, Radiohead, Prince, and a numerous others now; artists like these will very rarely get bad reviews from major publications. I don't doubt that an album like Riot Act or Binaural would be greeted much more favorably today than it was in 2002 merely based on the general perception of Pearl Jam in 2013. That's not to say that the albums are either all good or all bad; it's just that the things that tend to go into reviews of bands at this point in their career are pretty meaningless, and to me tend to make reviews of said albums pretty worthless. I think for artists like this you can get a far better read on an album by looking at the fan base's long-term view of it than you can from seeing what someone in a major newspaper or magazine wrote about it when it came out.

There is probably a fair bit of truth to this

Thejambi wrote:
I am in no way saying any of this validates Backspacer as a "good" album. However the reviews were overwhelmingly positive for it. It had a good chart run and produced two very successful singles. Getting major award nominations ( regardless of what you may think of it) is also further vindication that the album was received well. To many it seemed like a refreshing take on Pearl Jam. Fresh fun and full of energy.

If 79 is overwhelmingly positive, according to metacritic, than was S/T received the same way? It's a 74, a little bit down from that score.

I mean, I have to say that I've never seen or heard of anyone outside of the PJ fold that gave a shit about Backspacer. That's not a knock on the record, per se. I've never really encountered anyone that gave a shit about any record they released last decade; they're just not a band known for their studio releases anymore. If they get press now, I'd argue it's overwhelmingly for their live act.

digster wrote:

Thejambi wrote:
I am in no way saying any of this validates Backspacer as a "good" album. However the reviews were overwhelmingly positive for it. It had a good chart run and produced two very successful singles. Getting major award nominations ( regardless of what you may think of it) is also further vindication that the album was received well. To many it seemed like a refreshing take on Pearl Jam. Fresh fun and full of energy.

If 79 is overwhelmingly positive, according to metacritic, than was S/T received the same way? It's a 74, a little bit down from that score.

I mean, I have to say that I've never seen or heard of anyone outside of the PJ fold that gave a shit about Backspacer. That's not a knock on the record, per se. I've never really encountered anyone that gave a shit about any record they released last decade; they're just not a band known for their studio releases anymore. If they get press now, I'd argue it's overwhelmingly for their live act.

I'm not even sure what the argument is anymore.

digster wrote:

Thejambi wrote:
I am in no way saying any of this validates Backspacer as a "good" album. However the reviews were overwhelmingly positive for it. It had a good chart run and produced two very successful singles. Getting major award nominations ( regardless of what you may think of it) is also further vindication that the album was received well. To many it seemed like a refreshing take on Pearl Jam. Fresh fun and full of energy.

If 79 is overwhelmingly positive, according to metacritic, than was S/T received the same way? It's a 74, a little bit down from that score.

I mean, I have to say that I've never seen or heard of anyone outside of the PJ fold that gave a shit about Backspacer. That's not a knock on the record, per se. I've never really encountered anyone that gave a shit about any record they released last decade; they're just not a band known for their studio releases anymore. If they get press now, I'd argue it's overwhelmingly for their live act.

no one argues that Backspacer was an important cultural phenomena. But saying that a record is a failure, especially an 'objective' failure, which gets tossed around a fair bit with backspacer, invites one to look at things like critical reception, commercial reception, singles, awards, etc.

and s/t is 5 points off. that is a lot on a hundred point scale, especially since half those points are never used.

King animal received a 70 total, for instance