Red Mosquito

I don't like Backspacer very much, but I wouldn't necessarily blame that on the band not putting in any effort.

I just think they wrote a bunch of songs I didn't enjoy and chose an overall musical theme for the record that I don't feel plays to their strengths.

cutuphalfdead wrote:

stip wrote:

Strat wrote:

WtOB? wrote:

theplatypus wrote:

turned2black wrote:

bluestate wrote:I sometimes wonder if there are any pearl jam fans on RM or if I've just mistakenly entered the wrong forum.

I'm still a pretty big fan, I just don't like the last two albums. I think if you look at the band objectively there has been a pretty nasty artistic decline. I wear PJ t-shirts a couple times a week, I'm a member of Ten Club and patrol a PJ message board. What else do I need to do to be a Pearl Jam fan?

While I'm with you on preferring everything that came before Avocado, I think it's problematic to say there has objectively been an artistic decline. There's been, objectively, a decrease in output of new music, and there's been, objectively, a decrease in touring, but Avocado and Backspacer are both very deliberate records that a lot of people really like. I don't believe in any objective measure you could apply to those albums to conclude that they're of lesser artistic merit than anything that came before.

Objectively, Eddie Vedder has stated numerous times that he put less effort and thought into the lyrics and music for Backspacer due to having less time now he has a family. So you can draw portraits all your life, then decide to do a stickman and it holds as much artistic merit as your previous work because you chose to do it?

I think that is an over simplification of what Vedder has talked about with his approach to the Backspacer material.

even if that wasn't the case there were also other albums that other members of the band were less invested in. Jeff and no code, for instance

Let's be real though, who's song-writing has a bigger impact on the overall sound of a Pearl Jam record, Jeff or Ed?

well that's true, for sure

turned2black wrote:

theplatypus wrote:

turned2black wrote:

bluestate wrote:I sometimes wonder if there are any pearl jam fans on RM or if I've just mistakenly entered the wrong forum.

I'm still a pretty big fan, I just don't like the last two albums. I think if you look at the band objectively there has been a pretty nasty artistic decline. I wear PJ t-shirts a couple times a week, I'm a member of Ten Club and patrol a PJ message board. What else do I need to do to be a Pearl Jam fan?

While I'm with you on preferring everything that came before Avocado, I think it's problematic to say there has objectively been an artistic decline. There's been, objectively, a decrease in output of new music, and there's been, objectively, a decrease in touring, but Avocado and Backspacer are both very deliberate records that a lot of people really like. I don't believe in any objective measure you could apply to those albums to conclude that they're of lesser artistic merit than anything that came before.

I think most deliberate attempts to "return to form" or tread old sounds like Avocado and Backspacer have inherently less artistic merit. How can it not? You are not really creating new sounds and ideas, you are simply trying to tweak an already established sound.

Also, were has the quality control been? Avocado in particular there seemed to be none. From the production (in general) to the art work to Ed's tossed off vocals, it lacked any sort of cohesiveness. How could a song like Inside Job pass the smell test? That Life Wasted video is something I would expect from a high school art class not Pearl Jam. How does it pass any sort of quality control standard.

You're implying a few things that I take issue with, namely:
1- that Avocado and Backspacer are attempts to "tread old sounds". I think this is debatable. I can't find much on either record that suggests they're cynically trying to reproduce an older song, save for maybe "Amongst the Waves" sounding like it's trying too hard to be one of those big fist-pumpers from the olden days. Even then, it's not like every Pearl Jam song prior to 2006 is a unique snowflake, or like they hadn't revisited an approach, arrangement or chord progression before.
2- that Pearl Jam have ever really "created new sounds". "Tweaking an already established sound" is what modern rock music is, and as idiosyncratic and off-kilter as you can make it, it all operates within a clear template laid out by many musicians generations past.
3- that "creating new sounds" is somehow the measure of artistic merit. If this were true, most of the music we listen to would be deemed creatively bankrupt, and dubstep would be at the forefront of culture.

I think being "objective" about the artistic quality of music-- if you're not approaching it from an academic standpoint, like jazz as an athletic showcase for instrumentalists and composers-- is damn near impossible without falling into the trap of "I don't like it, which means it's objectively inferior." In the case of Pearl Jam, it's clear to me that, after Riot Act, there's a conscious shift towards a different style of songwriting; there's a push outward towards melody, towards aggressiveness, towards hooks, away from the murkiness and introspection of the two previous albums. In that regard, they've been successful. I prefer the murkiness, but the only thing I can ascertain objectively is that they've continued to do what they've been doing for 20+ years: make rock music.

theplatypus wrote: In that regard, they've been successful. I prefer the murkiness, but the only thing I can ascertain objectively is that they've continued to do what they've been doing for 20+ years: make rock music.

i've never agreed with you more completely.

also, patterns.

Birds in Hell wrote:I don't like Backspacer very much, but I wouldn't necessarily blame that on the band not putting in any effort.

I just think they wrote a bunch of songs I didn't enjoy and chose an overall musical theme for the record that I don't feel plays to their strengths.

BTW where did the Moonlander thread go?

stip wrote:I think the life wasted stuff (and the inside art in general) was done by some reasonably famous sculptor, wasn't it?

Jeff Ament wrote:The packaging is really good this time

http://www.thecultureshock.com/index.ph ... &Itemid=49

Blenheim Augustine wrote:http://www.thecultureshock.com/index.ph ... &Itemid=49

Great interview (and one I've never seen before), cheers.

The packaging is really good this time

theplatypus wrote:

turned2black wrote:

theplatypus wrote:

turned2black wrote:

bluestate wrote:I sometimes wonder if there are any pearl jam fans on RM or if I've just mistakenly entered the wrong forum.

I'm still a pretty big fan, I just don't like the last two albums. I think if you look at the band objectively there has been a pretty nasty artistic decline. I wear PJ t-shirts a couple times a week, I'm a member of Ten Club and patrol a PJ message board. What else do I need to do to be a Pearl Jam fan?

While I'm with you on preferring everything that came before Avocado, I think it's problematic to say there has objectively been an artistic decline. There's been, objectively, a decrease in output of new music, and there's been, objectively, a decrease in touring, but Avocado and Backspacer are both very deliberate records that a lot of people really like. I don't believe in any objective measure you could apply to those albums to conclude that they're of lesser artistic merit than anything that came before.

I think most deliberate attempts to "return to form" or tread old sounds like Avocado and Backspacer have inherently less artistic merit. How can it not? You are not really creating new sounds and ideas, you are simply trying to tweak an already established sound.

Also, were has the quality control been? Avocado in particular there seemed to be none. From the production (in general) to the art work to Ed's tossed off vocals, it lacked any sort of cohesiveness. How could a song like Inside Job pass the smell test? That Life Wasted video is something I would expect from a high school art class not Pearl Jam. How does it pass any sort of quality control standard.

You're implying a few things that I take issue with, namely:
1- that Avocado and Backspacer are attempts to "tread old sounds". I think this is debatable. I can't find much on either record that suggests they're cynically trying to reproduce an older song, save for maybe "Amongst the Waves" sounding like it's trying too hard to be one of those big fist-pumpers from the olden days. Even then, it's not like every Pearl Jam song prior to 2006 is a unique snowflake, or like they hadn't revisited an approach, arrangement or chord progression before.
2- that Pearl Jam have ever really "created new sounds". "Tweaking an already established sound" is what modern rock music is, and as idiosyncratic and off-kilter as you can make it, it all operates within a clear template laid out by many musicians generations past.
3- that "creating new sounds" is somehow the measure of artistic merit. If this were true, most of the music we listen to would be deemed creatively bankrupt, and dubstep would be at the forefront of culture.

I think being "objective" about the artistic quality of music-- if you're not approaching it from an academic standpoint, like jazz as an athletic showcase for instrumentalists and composers-- is damn near impossible without falling into the trap of "I don't like it, which means it's objectively inferior." In the case of Pearl Jam, it's clear to me that, after Riot Act, there's a conscious shift towards a different style of songwriting; there's a push outward towards melody, towards aggressiveness, towards hooks, away from the murkiness and introspection of the two previous albums. In that regard, they've been successful. I prefer the murkiness, but the only thing I can ascertain objectively is that they've continued to do what they've been doing for 20+ years: make rock music.

Great post.

theplatypus wrote:

turned2black wrote:

theplatypus wrote:

turned2black wrote:

bluestate wrote:I sometimes wonder if there are any pearl jam fans on RM or if I've just mistakenly entered the wrong forum.

I'm still a pretty big fan, I just don't like the last two albums. I think if you look at the band objectively there has been a pretty nasty artistic decline. I wear PJ t-shirts a couple times a week, I'm a member of Ten Club and patrol a PJ message board. What else do I need to do to be a Pearl Jam fan?

While I'm with you on preferring everything that came before Avocado, I think it's problematic to say there has objectively been an artistic decline. There's been, objectively, a decrease in output of new music, and there's been, objectively, a decrease in touring, but Avocado and Backspacer are both very deliberate records that a lot of people really like. I don't believe in any objective measure you could apply to those albums to conclude that they're of lesser artistic merit than anything that came before.

I think most deliberate attempts to "return to form" or tread old sounds like Avocado and Backspacer have inherently less artistic merit. How can it not? You are not really creating new sounds and ideas, you are simply trying to tweak an already established sound.

Also, were has the quality control been? Avocado in particular there seemed to be none. From the production (in general) to the art work to Ed's tossed off vocals, it lacked any sort of cohesiveness. How could a song like Inside Job pass the smell test? That Life Wasted video is something I would expect from a high school art class not Pearl Jam. How does it pass any sort of quality control standard.

You're implying a few things that I take issue with, namely:
1- that Avocado and Backspacer are attempts to "tread old sounds". I think this is debatable. I can't find much on either record that suggests they're cynically trying to reproduce an older song, save for maybe "Amongst the Waves" sounding like it's trying too hard to be one of those big fist-pumpers from the olden days. Even then, it's not like every Pearl Jam song prior to 2006 is a unique snowflake, or like they hadn't revisited an approach, arrangement or chord progression before.
2- that Pearl Jam have ever really "created new sounds". "Tweaking an already established sound" is what modern rock music is, and as idiosyncratic and off-kilter as you can make it, it all operates within a clear template laid out by many musicians generations past.
3- that "creating new sounds" is somehow the measure of artistic merit. If this were true, most of the music we listen to would be deemed creatively bankrupt, and dubstep would be at the forefront of culture.

I think being "objective" about the artistic quality of music-- if you're not approaching it from an academic standpoint, like jazz as an athletic showcase for instrumentalists and composers-- is damn near impossible without falling into the trap of "I don't like it, which means it's objectively inferior." In the case of Pearl Jam, it's clear to me that, after Riot Act, there's a conscious shift towards a different style of songwriting; there's a push outward towards melody, towards aggressiveness, towards hooks, away from the murkiness and introspection of the two previous albums. In that regard, they've been successful. I prefer the murkiness, but the only thing I can ascertain objectively is that they've continued to do what they've been doing for 20+ years: make rock music.

I sometimes find myself having problemss with your posts, but this is very fair and well thought out. Completely agree, accept that I actually like the move away from "murkiness", if only b/c I think that that is where they are at right now and it just adds some neat variety to their catalogue. I think they are looking at each album not necessarily as a way to top what they've done in the past, but as a way to build and add a different flavor to their body of work, using the pre-established sounds that rock music works within nowadays. They didn't have much upbeat optimistic punchy fun stuff before, now they have a complete album of it w/ Backspacer, and I can't say it's a complete ripoff of anyone either. Also, if anyone is looking for new sounds, PJ has never been the place for that (much less rock music in general).

While I agree that there isn't much you can objectively say about Backspacer's quality vs. the earlier records, I don't see why people respond strongly to people even speculating about it. If you think the quality of the records nosedived somewhat post-Riot Act (or post-whatever album), it makes sense that you would wonder why that was, maybe even thinking that the band was putting less into it, and getting an inferior record as a result.

we can all agree that we are exited about next thursday then?

Also, nice to have you back here Tuolumne.

VinylGuy wrote:we can all agree that we are exited about next thursday then?

No. B/c the songs come out on Tuesdays.

B wrote:

VinylGuy wrote:we can all agree that we are exited about next thursday then?

No. B/c the songs come out on Tuesdays.

remember, south america is two days off from the rest of us

Heathen wrote:

The packaging is really good this time

Yeah.. he's pretty wrong.

B wrote:

VinylGuy wrote:we can all agree that we are exited about next thursday then?

No. B/c the songs come out on Tuesdays.

i fucked up.

B wrote:

let the hatred begin!

B wrote:

This would make a nice cat toy.

After listening to some of Stone's solo efforts, I'd like to hear more of his voice on a PJ album. Dueling leads, more impactful backing vocals, maybe another single lead vocal.