Red Mosquito

given2trade wrote:

theplatypus wrote:

hlniv wrote:

warehouse wrote:

Heathen wrote:

warehouse wrote:when people here try to distinguish the first half of pearl jam's career vs the second, do people purposely look over what happened at roskilde in 2000? it seems to me if you are trying to narrow down when pearl jam "changed", seeing a bunch of fans die in front of them would be the most likely place.

In retrospect, these fans were lucky to not have to witness the post-riot act moneygrab.

not only isnt this funny, its borderline offensive. i know people here constantly try to be witty and whatnot, but this was a terrible attempt

Yeah, that's just poor taste

Those people died, Heathen.

It's just too soon; the statue of limitations is however long it was before Mel Brooks made The Producers after Hitler's death. Too lazy to look.

About 12 days

But how will we ever know how many songs they really were writing? They have't released b-sides. It's my belief that they just want the albums to speak for themselves and I think they were leery of having b-sides outshine and getting alot of extra attention. They just wanted the albums to speak for themselves, I believe.

The 28 months following the end of the band’s tour in support of Vs included the Vitalogy and No Code sessions, Mirrorball, the Dead Man Walking stuff, the Three Fish record, the Mad Season record, the start of work on the second Brad record (the first one came out either just before or during the Vs tour), and the initial work on some tracks that would end up appearing on Yield and Binaural, plus a half dozen b-sides and outtakes, give or take. That's two years, four months.

That's a hell of a lot of development-oriented music process going on, by people who are still out to prove something to themselves or to others, and it's a mighty stretchy set of sounds...even if it might not be entirely elastic.

McParadigm wrote:

But how will we ever know how many songs they really were writing? They have't released b-sides. It's my belief that they just want the albums to speak for themselves and I think they were leery of having b-sides outshine and getting alot of extra attention. They just wanted the albums to speak for themselves, I believe.

The 28 months following the end of the band’s tour in support of Vs included the Vitalogy and No Code sessions, Mirrorball, the Dead Man Walking stuff, the Three Fish record, the Mad Season record, the start of work on the second Brad record (the first one came out either just before or during the Vs tour), and the initial work on some tracks that would end up appearing on Yield and Binaural, plus a half dozen b-sides and outtakes, give or take. That's two years, four months.

That's a hell of a lot of development-oriented music process going on, by people who are still out to prove something to themselves or to others, and it's a mighty stretchy set of sounds...even if it might not be entirely elastic.

We are in agreement here. That is definitely the richest creative period in the band's history. What I resent is the whole notion that they currently are in some PJ-on-ice mode where they can barely bother to get out of bed in the morning. They may not be as consistently creative as they were then, but the drop-off has been greatly exaggerated around here.

Tuolumne wrote:We are in agreement here. That is definitely the richest creative period in the band's history. What I resent is the whole notion that they currently are in some PJ-on-ice mode where they can barely bother to get out of bed in the morning. They may not be as consistently creative as they were then, but the drop-off has been greatly exaggerated around here.

I believe that they are probably very passionate people...just not about creating new Pearl Jam music.

McParadigm wrote:

Tuolumne wrote:We are in agreement here. That is definitely the richest creative period in the band's history. What I resent is the whole notion that they currently are in some PJ-on-ice mode where they can barely bother to get out of bed in the morning. They may not be as consistently creative as they were then, but the drop-off has been greatly exaggerated around here.

I believe that they are probably very passionate people...just not about creating new Pearl Jam music.

I think it's a difference in group dynamics and creative process moreso than passion. Take Vitalogy and No Code. Do you think Stone and Jeff were passionate during that time? They pretty openly talk about their dismay during this period, as does Mike. That's 3 of 5 members who weren't digging the band and explicitly acknowledge that they were in the doldrums or just turned off by the band altogether. This was ED's most furtive period, but you can easily argue that a MAJORITY of the band wasn't feeling the Pearl Jam thing at this time. Some were wondering if that was going to be it for them. Now, we may not be in Ed's dominant period, but the 5 band members are more into it. If there's problems, it could be the frequency of their songwriting, or what i believe, just a different group dynamic and just a different overall schedule. To me, the ebbs and flows of this band are more due to the inherent nature of having 5 distinct members rather than some collective "moneygrab" BS. It's just the nature of groups.

pearl jam

they should've never fired Jack

EJ wrote:they should've never fired Jack

and Dave A never should have quit

Dave Krusen should have never been an alcoholic

Andy Wood should have never been a junkie

Strat wrote:Andy Wood should have never been a junkie

Too soon, man.

Eddie Vedder should have just not been a stoner and realized who his real daddy was long ago. None of this would have happened.

Jeff should have never pissed off Mark Arm.

Tuolumne wrote:

McParadigm wrote:

Tuolumne wrote:We are in agreement here. That is definitely the richest creative period in the band's history. What I resent is the whole notion that they currently are in some PJ-on-ice mode where they can barely bother to get out of bed in the morning. They may not be as consistently creative as they were then, but the drop-off has been greatly exaggerated around here.

I believe that they are probably very passionate people...just not about creating new Pearl Jam music.

I think it's a difference in group dynamics and creative process moreso than passion. Take Vitalogy and No Code. Do you think Stone and Jeff were passionate during that time? They pretty openly talk about their dismay during this period, as does Mike. That's 3 of 5 members who weren't digging the band and explicitly acknowledge that they were in the doldrums or just turned off by the band altogether. This was ED's most furtive period, but you can easily argue that a MAJORITY of the band wasn't feeling the Pearl Jam thing at this time. Some were wondering if that was going to be it for them. Now, we may not be in Ed's dominant period, but the 5 band members are more into it. If there's problems, it could be the frequency of their songwriting, or what i believe, just a different group dynamic and just a different overall schedule. To me, the ebbs and flows of this band are more due to the inherent nature of having 5 distinct members rather than some collective "moneygrab" BS. It's just the nature of groups.

Speaking from personal experience in bands, being into it is not synonymous with being happy about it.

All of this is inherently speculative, so I just don't really see why suggesting that they've gotten a bit lazier in their approach is any more or less possible than all of the other blind guesses people throw out about why the quality of their work may have faltered.

McParadigm wrote:

But how will we ever know how many songs they really were writing? They have't released b-sides. It's my belief that they just want the albums to speak for themselves and I think they were leery of having b-sides outshine and getting alot of extra attention. They just wanted the albums to speak for themselves, I believe.

The 28 months following the end of the band’s tour in support of Vs included the Vitalogy and No Code sessions, Mirrorball, the Dead Man Walking stuff, the Three Fish record, the Mad Season record, the start of work on the second Brad record (the first one came out either just before or during the Vs tour), and the initial work on some tracks that would end up appearing on Yield and Binaural, plus a half dozen b-sides and outtakes, give or take. That's two years, four months.

That's a hell of a lot of development-oriented music process going on, by people who are still out to prove something to themselves or to others, and it's a mighty stretchy set of sounds...even if it might not be entirely elastic.

which is more pliant--mighty stretchy or entirely elastic?

Alex wrote:

McParadigm wrote:

But how will we ever know how many songs they really were writing? They have't released b-sides. It's my belief that they just want the albums to speak for themselves and I think they were leery of having b-sides outshine and getting alot of extra attention. They just wanted the albums to speak for themselves, I believe.

The 28 months following the end of the band’s tour in support of Vs included the Vitalogy and No Code sessions, Mirrorball, the Dead Man Walking stuff, the Three Fish record, the Mad Season record, the start of work on the second Brad record (the first one came out either just before or during the Vs tour), and the initial work on some tracks that would end up appearing on Yield and Binaural, plus a half dozen b-sides and outtakes, give or take. That's two years, four months.

That's a hell of a lot of development-oriented music process going on, by people who are still out to prove something to themselves or to others, and it's a mighty stretchy set of sounds...even if it might not be entirely elastic.

which is more pliant--mighty stretchy or entirely elastic?

I was curious about this as well.

'entirely' is a powerful indicative word, chaps.

hlniv wrote:And yes, i extended the "good 'ol day" timeframe through 2006.

I feel this way too.

Birds in Hell wrote:

hlniv wrote:And yes, i extended the "good 'ol day" timeframe through 2006.

I feel this way too.

Me too. 2006 might have even been their peak as a live band. Possibly.

Thejambi wrote:It's not really being a fan of Pearl Jam right now, as much as it is being a fan of their potential.

I don't think you can say you are a huge fan of a band that you think has been disappointing for 6 years. We are kind of in the "Yeah I love Pearl Jam! Jeremy is great." territory here.

I was disappointed, in one way or another, with the entire No Code through Riot Act run. Clearly not as disappointed as many have been with the last few records, but it never really diminished my fandom. I had my sacred cows, and everything else I went into looking for the songs i felt like adding to my heavy rotation. Usually 5-6 per record during that stretch. Once I stopped resenting the albums for not being Ten or Vitalogy it was easier to appreciate those records for what they were (which I think was hlniv's point in an earlier post)

When you love a band, I mean truly love it, it's like a relationship. Even if the initial passion has cooled, everything they do is still special because it is enhanced by the history you've shared with them, and because it can remind you of why you loved them in the first place. Bad as Me was a really disappointing Tom Waits album, and if every waits album going forward only has 3 or so songs I care about I won't like him any less even if I'm less a fan of what he's doing now. I felt the same way about REM during the Up-Reveal-Around the Sun stretch. And, sometimes, the bands can surprise you with a later career gem (like accelerate). It doesn't need to be different. It doesn't need to be new. It just needs to be good.