Red Mosquito

oneway23 wrote:Just because people don't have experience in what to listen for doesn't mean it's not a vital aspect of the end result.

wow



there's no such thing as an objective "what to listen for" because this isn't an aural exam; some of us have very fine-tuned, critical, musicians' ears, but a wide range in taste for production styles; we wanted to hear Pearl Jam perform instrumentally at the top of their game again, we got that, we're happy, and we don't care that it's glossy; none of this means we don't possess some objective skill in our ear holes, it just means we prioritise different things

I’ve lurked on this forum for 10+ years but some of the hyperbole surrounding this song has inspired me to register and post.

I am as excited as anyone for a new Pearl Jam album. One of the greatest bands of all time and I’d choose that hill to die one.

That said, the praise being heaped upon this song seems incongruent to this forum in general. The reason I have enjoyed reading the posts and opinions here is because there’s been legitimate criticism stemming from people who generally love the band and it’s music.

I understand music is subjective, but someone posted something about not hearing You Are on this tour anymore because Dark Matter is an upgrade. I listened to Dark Matter then You Are back to back, and it’s not even close how the latter is so much better than the former in any metric. Hell as I’m writing this Get Right, Green Disease and Help, Help rolled on in my headphones. Dark Matter wouldn’t supplant any of these songs. I will admit that I think Vitalogy - Riot Act are the creative pinnacle of the band, and rival the catalog of just about anyone.


Here’s to new Pearl Jam! I just hope that we don’t succumb to recency bias. It’s a good song but let’s not kid ourselves people.

I meant the band "upgraded" the song by reusing its unique tremolo, so they wont play two songs using a similar effect. (and dark matter will be played at every show.)

I listened to riot act in the car today, and its perfect.

welcome.

"I like that there are different opinions being thrown around, but could we perhaps keep the opinions that differ from my own to a minimum? Thanks"

Haha. RM succumbing to recency bias.

I kid. I like this track more than half of Gigaton.

Some of the songs mentioned could never reach Dark Matter in quality. No recency bias.

LetMeSleep wrote:I kid. I like this track more than half of Gigaton.

I agree with hat.

Ms Harmless wrote:

oneway23 wrote:Just because people don't have experience in what to listen for doesn't mean it's not a vital aspect of the end result.

wow



there's no such thing as an objective "what to listen for" because this isn't an aural exam; some of us have very fine-tuned, critical, musicians' ears, but a wide range in taste for production styles; we wanted to hear Pearl Jam perform instrumentally at the top of their game again, we got that, we're happy, and we don't care that it's glossy; none of this means we don't possess some objective skill in our ear holes, it just means we prioritise different things

This is a complete mischaracterization of what I've said.

When I said, "what to listen for", I meant understanding why certain elements of the song may be bothersome to some, I didn't say, "If you can't hear something wrong, you're inadequate" and that everyone needs to hear what I hear. Big distinction there.

Ms Harmless gets told to calm down a lot, and it's always well received. You did the right thing.

Oooo the sneak edit. Those are rare.

Ello Sailor wrote:Oooo the sneak edit. Those are rare.

Remind me to never rob a bank with you....It's cold under this bus!

LetMeSleep wrote:Haha. RM succumbing to recency bias.

The hype train around here when people heard Getaway was so out of control the steam engine flew straight over the chasm.

oneway23 wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:

oneway23 wrote:Just because people don't have experience in what to listen for doesn't mean it's not a vital aspect of the end result.

wow



there's no such thing as an objective "what to listen for" because this isn't an aural exam; some of us have very fine-tuned, critical, musicians' ears, but a wide range in taste for production styles; we wanted to hear Pearl Jam perform instrumentally at the top of their game again, we got that, we're happy, and we don't care that it's glossy; none of this means we don't possess some objective skill in our ear holes, it just means we prioritise different things

This is a complete mischaracterization of what I've said.

When I said, "what to listen for", I meant understanding why certain elements of the song may be bothersome to some, I didn't say, "If you can't hear something wrong, you're inadequate" and that everyone needs to hear what I hear. Big distinction there.

I understand, I just disagree

Ms Harmless wrote:

oneway23 wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:

oneway23 wrote:Just because people don't have experience in what to listen for doesn't mean it's not a vital aspect of the end result.

wow



there's no such thing as an objective "what to listen for" because this isn't an aural exam; some of us have very fine-tuned, critical, musicians' ears, but a wide range in taste for production styles; we wanted to hear Pearl Jam perform instrumentally at the top of their game again, we got that, we're happy, and we don't care that it's glossy; none of this means we don't possess some objective skill in our ear holes, it just means we prioritise different things

This is a complete mischaracterization of what I've said.

When I said, "what to listen for", I meant understanding why certain elements of the song may be bothersome to some, I didn't say, "If you can't hear something wrong, you're inadequate" and that everyone needs to hear what I hear. Big distinction there.

I understand, I just disagree

If you truly understood the point of my post, you would see that there's nothing to agree or disagree with...

Some people care about bass, some care about....gasp, DRUMS...some lyrics, others...production....some write snarky retorts about these things and some write novels....It's all valid...We're all just waiting.

the reason I characterised this argument (not you personally) this way is that those making it seem to think that if they keep explaining what they mean, it'll somehow recruit other people into the "you're right, it sounds terrible" fold; I don't think anyone has any trouble *understanding* why you or Trag might not like the sound, it's definitely a choice, but it's hardly a choice only Pearl Jam has made, and it's not the worst any classic rock band has sounded since... what was it, 1992?

oneway23 wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:

oneway23 wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:

oneway23 wrote:Just because people don't have experience in what to listen for doesn't mean it's not a vital aspect of the end result.

wow



there's no such thing as an objective "what to listen for" because this isn't an aural exam; some of us have very fine-tuned, critical, musicians' ears, but a wide range in taste for production styles; we wanted to hear Pearl Jam perform instrumentally at the top of their game again, we got that, we're happy, and we don't care that it's glossy; none of this means we don't possess some objective skill in our ear holes, it just means we prioritise different things

This is a complete mischaracterization of what I've said.

When I said, "what to listen for", I meant understanding why certain elements of the song may be bothersome to some, I didn't say, "If you can't hear something wrong, you're inadequate" and that everyone needs to hear what I hear. Big distinction there.

I understand, I just disagree

If you truly understood the point of my post, you would see that there's nothing to agree or disagree with...

Some people care about bass, some care about....gasp, DRUMS...some lyrics, others...production....some write snarky retorts about these things and some write novels....It's all valid...We're all just waiting.

I'm agreeing with you; I'm disagreeing with most of Trag's hyperbole (which is what I'm assuming you're defending, at least in part)

we're definitely waiting

*sigh*

Ms Harmless wrote:the reason I characterised this argument (not you personally) this way is that those making it seem to think that if they keep explaining what they mean, it'll somehow recruit other people into the "you're right, it sounds terrible" fold; I don't think anyone has any trouble *understanding* why you or Trag might not like the sound, it's definitely a choice, but it's hardly a choice only Pearl Jam has made, and it's not the worst any classic rock band has sounded since... what was it, 1992?

I hear you, but, I don't think I've tried to explain anything about why I disagree with any production choices here..I'm merely advocating for those who wish to discuss such things, that's all.
If that wasn't clear, I'll raise my hand there.

I saw people getting annoyed at Trag (among others) for talking about it, but, no one gets annoyed at people writing essays over any other aspect of the song, and, to me, it's all equally valid.

Maybe people just don't like listening to me or Trag in general? LOL

In any case, it's all done in the name of killing time until we can start dissecting the next one, yeah?

oneway23 wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:the reason I characterised this argument (not you personally) this way is that those making it seem to think that if they keep explaining what they mean, it'll somehow recruit other people into the "you're right, it sounds terrible" fold; I don't think anyone has any trouble *understanding* why you or Trag might not like the sound, it's definitely a choice, but it's hardly a choice only Pearl Jam has made, and it's not the worst any classic rock band has sounded since... what was it, 1992?

I hear you, but, I don't think I've tried to explain anything about why I disagree with any production choices here..I'm merely advocating for those who wish to discuss such things, that's all.
If that wasn't clear, I'll raise my hand there.

I saw people getting annoyed at Trag (among others) for talking about it, but, no one gets annoyed at people writing essays over any other aspect of the song, and, to me, it's all equally valid.

Maybe people just don't like listening to me or Trag in general? LOL

In any case, it's all done in the name of killing time until we can start dissecting the next one, yeah?

yeah, no worries... truce (is that how you spell that?); when my brain is conflicting with another brain over a subject I have a tendency to conflate anyone else adjacent to them and just kinda smoosh you

still, the worst a major rock band has sounded since 92 IS a wild thing to say