Red Mosquito

I've never known why the phrase 'riot act' denotes volume to some people.

Do you guys have the term "read him/her the Riot Act" in the UK?

Yes we do. It just doesn't suggest anger to me... or rather, doesn't necessarily. Riot Act has a teeth-clenched anger.

Don't put your heart out on your sleeve when your remarks are off-the-cuff.

I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS ARG

harmless wrote:Yes we do. It just doesn't suggest anger to me... or rather, doesn't necessarily. Riot Act has a teeth-clenched anger.

OK, I'll rephrase this: why does anger denote musical volume? I mean, it did when I was sixteen and listened to Korn. Not so much now.

harmless wrote:OK, I'll rephrase this: why does anger denote musical volume?

Now this is something I've wondered too.

Lament wrote:

harmless wrote:OK, I'll rephrase this: why does anger denote musical volume?

Now this is something I've wondered too.

I'M ANGRY!

digster wrote:I still think it's more in their hands what they want the record to be than any producer; look at Riot Act and S/T. Same guy produced them, and in terms of presentation, you'd be hard-pressed to find two PJ records further apart.

This is a real interesting point that is lost in all the post-Riot Act negativity (which I certainly participate in). It was the same people who were employed to do the same jobs on both of these records (production, engineering, mixing). The only exception was some mixing by BoB on Riot Act.

Clearly, decisions were made on S/T differently than they were on Riot Act (assuredly directed by the band). The production direction on S/T had a noble goal in mind (raw, straight-ahead rock), but was woefully misguided in its execution. Looking back, it really was a bad call to use the same guy that made Riot Act sound so intricate, layered, and full to try attempt the stripped rock-centric sound on S/T. The songs didn't match the strengths that were demonstrated on Riot Act.

The S/T album had the makings of an all-time classic, but there were two major swings and misses.

#1- The thematic element of the record could have easily been turned into a cohesive narrative. It would have been the perfect time for PJ to do something like this, I'll never understand why they didn't just make this a concept album that had a connecting story.

#2- For a rock-centric album to work, there must be distinctly audible guitar sources, clear from each other, and crisp in their presentation . If the guitars on S/T had sounded anywhere like the guitars on Vitalogy/No Code, the songs would have been lifted tremendously. As it turned out, there was just a muddled mess of "raw" music. This is a function of the strengths of the album production personnel. If Kaspar and his engineers had made Riot Act so beautifully, how could they have been expected to craft an entirely different sound on the next record?

digster wrote:

stip wrote:

digster wrote:I certainly don't think the production's doing them any favors, but I wouldn't say that it's all that's keeping them from reaching, or getting into the same neighborhood, as their earlier heights. Have to say in regards to Getaway; the decision to do a borderline sarcastic pop sensibility in the verses is really the only thing keeping that from power chord PJ-by-numbers. I wouldn't call it a classic, but it's certainly in the upper half of best LB tracks because of it. It doesn't work perfectly, but it feels inspired, at least.

I think mym, whole nothing new, is still excellent in its execution, and is made to feel fresh with the call to arms introspection in the second chorus and the call and response outro. My fathers son and infallible essentially feel new. So does sleeping by myself, actually. Even swallowed whole. And lightning bolt feels to me like the song Eddie has been trying to write for a long time, and musically it is terrific. And pendulum returns to a creative space they barely began to explore before walking away

That's well over half the album that, at least in terms of song craft feels inspired. And yellow moon, while the most familiar of all these songs, is still quite moving.

I'd definitely say they improved upon the last record, maybe the last two. I don't think their issue on this record is bad songwriting (for the most part). I just don't find it to be particularly compelling. I feel like it's not too bad, it could be worse, and maybe that's just not enough for me from PJ not to feel a little somewhat disappointed. I didn't dislike it, but I haven't really had any drive to listen to that particular record for some months. I think that's different than Backspacer, where I thought the songs were, in large part, bad. But I don't want to make it seem like I think the record's a piece of shit or anything.

I think part of it, for me, is that although bands always seem to inevitably degrade in consistency of quality as they age, PJ should have more in them than they've shown, even compared to their peers that have been around a similar length of time. They've made great, good, mediocre and poor albums, but it seems like they've been in the shallow end of the pool for quite a while.

I agree with you. Except that i think songwriting to be anything above mediocre should be compelling. I mean i think it's one of the basic requirements.
I think their "sound" became uninteresting. It's an issue of aesthetics IMO. I don't think song writing is always the issue in the sense that it isn't limiting enough on it's own. I think the band the way it is now lacks a certain good taste when it comes to songs (as opposite to their isolated parts in them).
I think they lost a lot of their identity by settling on a rock by the lowest common denominator kind of aesthetic.
I wonder if they are holding each other back in a way. I see many like Stone's and Jeff's solo records and the little solo work Ed does seems to suggest he dumbs down for PJ.

harmless wrote:

harmless wrote:Yes we do. It just doesn't suggest anger to me... or rather, doesn't necessarily. Riot Act has a teeth-clenched anger.

OK, I'll rephrase this: why does anger denote musical volume? I mean, it did when I was sixteen and listened to Korn. Not so much now.

Anger doesn't have to, but the title, the art, and I think the general frame of mind of many people had them primed for an album that was punching through a brick wall, not running up to one and getting depressed about the fact that it is in the way

stip wrote:

harmless wrote:

harmless wrote:Yes we do. It just doesn't suggest anger to me... or rather, doesn't necessarily. Riot Act has a teeth-clenched anger.

OK, I'll rephrase this: why does anger denote musical volume? I mean, it did when I was sixteen and listened to Korn. Not so much now.

Anger doesn't have to, but the title, the art, and I think the general frame of mind of many people had them primed for an album that was punching through a brick wall, not running up to one and getting depressed about the fact that it is in the way

Clever metaphor, but I don't think that in this case it was a flaw that they didn't get what they anticipated. I can only speak for myself but some of my angriest moments are also some of my quietest, most depressed moments.

You're right that not getting what you want isn't a flaw in the album. But it does explain why people would be disappointed.

harmless wrote:I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS ARG

IT'S A QUOTE STOP YELLING

theplatypus wrote:

harmless wrote:I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS ARG

IT'S A QUOTE STOP YELLING

harmless wrote:

theplatypus wrote:

harmless wrote:I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS ARG

IT'S A QUOTE STOP YELLING

Is that lostdog1079?

This needs

To get

Bottom-

paged