Page 13 of 169
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Tue November 05, 2013 9:27 pm
by Mine
harmless wrote:
I have some sympathy with that argument. But if you're going down that road, you could argue that basically every song in the world is "catchy" as long as it gives you an eargasm, which basically ends all debate on it.
I agree but every argument about music has a similar fate when taken to the extreme.
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Tue November 05, 2013 10:00 pm
by harmless
Mine wrote:harmless wrote:
I have some sympathy with that argument. But if you're going down that road, you could argue that basically every song in the world is "catchy" as long as it gives you an eargasm, which basically ends all debate on it.
I agree but every argument about music has a similar fate when taken to the extreme.
Indeed.
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Tue November 05, 2013 10:04 pm
by hlniv
So, then....
Pearl Jam went for the moneygrab in 2005 because they wanted commercial success through writing songs that pleased the fanbase following the post-Yield years of debatable new artistic expression and a tiring political stance.
Is that right?
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Tue November 05, 2013 10:06 pm
by McParadigm
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Tue November 05, 2013 10:08 pm
by harmless
hlniv wrote:So, then....
Pearl Jam went for the moneygrab in 2005 because they wanted commercial success through writing songs that pleased the fanbase following the post-Yield years of debatable new artistic expression and a tiring political stance.
Is that right?
I'm sure IlluminEddie will want to quibble with the details, but that's basically it yeah.
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Tue November 05, 2013 10:13 pm
by hlniv
harmless wrote:hlniv wrote:So, then....
Pearl Jam went for the moneygrab in 2005 because they wanted commercial success through writing songs that pleased the fanbase following the post-Yield years of debatable new artistic expression and a tiring political stance.
Is that right?
I'm sure IlluminEddie will want to quibble with the details, but that's basically it yeah.
OK good. Glad that's settled
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Tue November 05, 2013 10:25 pm
by BurtReynolds
I disagree!
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Tue November 05, 2013 11:36 pm
by stip
BurtReynolds wrote:I disagree!
Oh noes! Who will settle this?!
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Wed November 06, 2013 1:30 am
by Sgt. Crackpot
stip wrote:BurtReynolds wrote:I disagree!
Oh noes! Who will settle this?!
There shall be a battle,
to the death....

Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Wed November 06, 2013 4:00 am
by tragabigzanda
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Wed November 06, 2013 4:03 am
by Strat
ITS NOT MATTS FAULT THE BAND PLAYS FASTER
I am listening to an ed solo show right now (fuck you kat) and ed is sprinting his way through Thumbing My way
Ugh, I hate that the temp shit is poured onto Matt.
Sorry, carry on.
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Wed November 06, 2013 4:21 am
by tragabigzanda
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Wed November 06, 2013 4:23 am
by Strat
tragabigzanda wrote:Strat wrote:ITS NOT MATTS FAULT THE BAND PLAYS FASTER
I am listening to an ed solo show right now (fuck you kat) and ed is sprinting his way through Thumbing My way
Ugh, I hate that the temp shit is poured onto Matt.
Sorry, carry on.
Fair enough, but surely you agree that he plays the mellow songs too hard?
Like what? I would say he comes crashing in to Wishlist far too heavy but the only reason it is noticeable is because of how quiet it is on Yield. I would say he is fucking perfect on of the girl, pendulum and more that i haven't taken the past few seconds to think about...
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Wed November 06, 2013 4:41 am
by hankholetsgo
Strat wrote:ITS NOT MATTS FAULT THE BAND PLAYS FASTER
I am listening to an ed solo show right now (fuck you kat) and ed is sprinting his way through Thumbing My way
Ugh, I hate that the temp shit is poured onto Matt.
Sorry, carry on.
This. It's certainly not Matt.
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Wed November 06, 2013 4:45 am
by Strat
Also, its not ED. Its the band. Its playing live. its being drunk. Its being in a band for a million years. And....its FINE.
Seacrest out.
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Wed November 06, 2013 4:51 am
by verb_to_trust
This made for some great toilet reading. Thanks guys.
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Wed November 06, 2013 4:55 am
by Birds in Hell
Strat wrote:Also, its not ED. Its the band. Its playing live. its being drunk. Its being in a band for a million years. And....its FINE.
Seacrest out.
I'm pretty much onboard with Strat here.
Once you know songs inside and out, it's natural to end up playing them faster, especially in front of an enthusiastic audience. I'd say that's pretty commonplace for most rock bands.
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Wed November 06, 2013 5:12 am
by digster
I don't think Matt's taking the band anywhere they don't want to go, but I do think a byproduct of the way the dynamics they play live have changed since he came onboard is that they run through songs considerably faster. I mean, they were playing them faster than studio versions in the 90's, too, but I'd think it wasn't to the degree they do it with Matt.
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Wed November 06, 2013 11:39 am
by tragabigzanda
Re: Post-Riot Act Moneygrab
Posted: Wed November 06, 2013 12:29 pm
by harmless
digster wrote:I don't think Matt's taking the band anywhere they don't want to go, but I do think a byproduct of the way the dynamics they play live have changed since he came onboard is that they run through songs considerably faster. I mean, they were playing them faster than studio versions in the 90's, too, but I'd think it wasn't to the degree they do it with Matt.
Matt didn't play all the songs too fast in the first few years of him joining the band. LO2L sounds perfectly fine. He even plays "Even Flow" pretty much right.