Red Mosquito

harmless wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

harmless wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

harmless wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

WtOB? wrote:

harmless wrote:Ed has always self-referenced. I'm OK with it. I'd rather that than him trying to write something with a new subject. Johnny Guitar is the furthest he got.

and i don't want him to go there again. jg was awful. much worse than inside job.

Ed is too boring to be self referencing. Make some interesting shit up, I say.

He's "too boring" and yet you want him to make "interesting shit" up? Good luck with that.

If Ed self-references, he can only be as boring as the original songs imo. Anything that self-references my favourite PJ songs is at least worth giving a go. I also think Johnny Guitar was the best song on Backspacer, but it was most definitely a witty pop song and I wouldn't want it to represent Pearl Jam.

I'm not interested in a rich 50 year old family man's self references. I think the better choice would be to dream up some interesting things to say rather than Future Days type subject matter. Hopefully we get more of that...

What makes you think he'll suddenly come up with new and interesting things to say after the last two albums? I really wish people would stop bringing up the rich 50 year old family man crap.

He's boring an uninteresting to me as a person, that's all. Its not his fault. Younger Eddie was at least interesting. Its okay to fake it through some lyrics at 50 if it means we don't have to listen to love songs to his model wife and kids.

I don't give a shit whether he's 50 and rich, or his wife is a model. Being married and having kids is fucking wonderful and I don't mind if he sings about it. The experience isn't less true because he's rich and his wife is a model. Maybe you'd feel differently if you were a model.

Or maybe if I was one rolled up in blood.

theplatypus wrote:

Birds in Hell wrote:Johnny Guitar is fantastic.

Yes.

Even the placement of the lyrics over the chords: "Johnny Guitar Watson staring at me, riding on three wheels, a woman on his knee" is a fuck yeah! right off the bat.

verb_to_trust wrote:

harmless wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

harmless wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

harmless wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

WtOB? wrote:

harmless wrote:Ed has always self-referenced. I'm OK with it. I'd rather that than him trying to write something with a new subject. Johnny Guitar is the furthest he got.

and i don't want him to go there again. jg was awful. much worse than inside job.

Ed is too boring to be self referencing. Make some interesting shit up, I say.

He's "too boring" and yet you want him to make "interesting shit" up? Good luck with that.

If Ed self-references, he can only be as boring as the original songs imo. Anything that self-references my favourite PJ songs is at least worth giving a go. I also think Johnny Guitar was the best song on Backspacer, but it was most definitely a witty pop song and I wouldn't want it to represent Pearl Jam.

I'm not interested in a rich 50 year old family man's self references. I think the better choice would be to dream up some interesting things to say rather than Future Days type subject matter. Hopefully we get more of that...

What makes you think he'll suddenly come up with new and interesting things to say after the last two albums? I really wish people would stop bringing up the rich 50 year old family man crap.

He's boring an uninteresting to me as a person, that's all. Its not his fault. Younger Eddie was at least interesting. Its okay to fake it through some lyrics at 50 if it means we don't have to listen to love songs to his model wife and kids.

I don't give a shit whether he's 50 and rich, or his wife is a model. Being married and having kids is fucking wonderful and I don't mind if he sings about it. The experience isn't less true because he's rich and his wife is a model. Maybe you'd feel differently if you were a model.

Or maybe if I was one rolled up in blood.

Is that it? He's abandoned all his principles by marrying someone who models underwear for a living?

theplatypus wrote:

Birds in Hell wrote:The music of Inside Job isn't bad.

And I mean, really, who cares about lyrics? They're just words.

The music to "Inside Job" isn't bad, just dull. The harmonic promise of the opening bars resolves in nothing, just musical onanism. It's dragged further down by virtue of Eddie's hammy delivery and those awful fucking lyrics-- there's really no overstating just how bad they are. If you take that away, it's just a bland, inoffensive rock tune, akin to a million others you can find in Bandcamp. It'd be a better song.

I'm not relistening to it to double check, but i think ed's singing might be more of a problem for me than the lyrics. What kind of weird as vocal choice...hes also kinda doing it on army reserve, and theres hints of it on CC.

For instance, Long nights on Into the wild has pretty crappy lyrics i feel, other than the chorus. But everything else about the song is so damn awesome i dont care.

Johnny guitar is the best song on backspacer.

LetMeSleep wrote:

theplatypus wrote:

Birds in Hell wrote:Johnny Guitar is fantastic.

Yes.

as is Big Wave.

Good man.

Birds in Hell wrote:

LetMeSleep wrote:

Birds in Hell wrote:The music of Inside Job isn't bad.

And I mean, really, who cares about lyrics? They're just words.

hahaha too obvious.

It sounds flippant but I do genuinely mean it.

Lyrics rank somewhere below production choices, snare drum sounds and guitar tone in the things I care about in a song. Unless they're unavoidably terrible to the point where I can't help but notice them (which, admittedly, Inside Job is getting pretty close to) I really don't care that much. They're a pretty minor part of a song to me.

For the most part I agree with you. Lyrics mean little to me, usually, unless they're so bad I can't ignore them. But I'm also inconsistent with this, sometimes they bother me more than others, and Inside Job is one of those times.

harmless wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

harmless wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

harmless wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

harmless wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

WtOB? wrote:

harmless wrote:Ed has always self-referenced. I'm OK with it. I'd rather that than him trying to write something with a new subject. Johnny Guitar is the furthest he got.

and i don't want him to go there again. jg was awful. much worse than inside job.

Ed is too boring to be self referencing. Make some interesting shit up, I say.

He's "too boring" and yet you want him to make "interesting shit" up? Good luck with that.

If Ed self-references, he can only be as boring as the original songs imo. Anything that self-references my favourite PJ songs is at least worth giving a go. I also think Johnny Guitar was the best song on Backspacer, but it was most definitely a witty pop song and I wouldn't want it to represent Pearl Jam.

I'm not interested in a rich 50 year old family man's self references. I think the better choice would be to dream up some interesting things to say rather than Future Days type subject matter. Hopefully we get more of that...

What makes you think he'll suddenly come up with new and interesting things to say after the last two albums? I really wish people would stop bringing up the rich 50 year old family man crap.

He's boring an uninteresting to me as a person, that's all. Its not his fault. Younger Eddie was at least interesting. Its okay to fake it through some lyrics at 50 if it means we don't have to listen to love songs to his model wife and kids.

I don't give a shit whether he's 50 and rich, or his wife is a model. Being married and having kids is fucking wonderful and I don't mind if he sings about it. The experience isn't less true because he's rich and his wife is a model. Maybe you'd feel differently if you were a model.

Or maybe if I was one rolled up in blood.

Is that it? He's abandoned all his principles by marrying someone who models underwear for a living?

I don't care that hes married to someone hot and much taller than him, I just think its boring subject matter for a Pearl Jam song.

cutuphalfdead wrote:

Birds in Hell wrote:

LetMeSleep wrote:

Birds in Hell wrote:The music of Inside Job isn't bad.

And I mean, really, who cares about lyrics? They're just words.

hahaha too obvious.

It sounds flippant but I do genuinely mean it.

Lyrics rank somewhere below production choices, snare drum sounds and guitar tone in the things I care about in a song. Unless they're unavoidably terrible to the point where I can't help but notice them (which, admittedly, Inside Job is getting pretty close to) I really don't care that much. They're a pretty minor part of a song to me.

For the most part I agree with you. Lyrics mean little to me, usually, unless they're so bad I can't ignore them. But I'm also inconsistent with this, sometimes they bother me more than others, and Inside Job is one of those times.

Birds in Hell wrote:I don't know, I think looking for meaning in rock lyrics is a fool's errand. I think of vocals as an instrument in themselves: the sounds being made by the voice is what really matters, not what words are being sung.

To me, one of the most cringe inducing things is listening to someone analyze rock lyrics.

I find his lyrics more genuine now then they ever were. He was always a douche.

Thejambi wrote:I find his lyrics more genuine now then they ever were. He was always a douche.

The music is actually decent on that song.

cutuphalfdead wrote:

Birds in Hell wrote:I don't know, I think looking for meaning in rock lyrics is a fool's errand. I think of vocals as an instrument in themselves: the sounds being made by the voice is what really matters, not what words are being sung.

To me, one of the most cringe inducing things is listening to someone analyze rock lyrics.

More than the lyrics themselves, it's how they marry with the song. There are plenty of simple or maybe even wonky lyrics that I love because they work so well in the context of the song. The Beatles are guilty of this quite often.

verb_to_trust wrote:

harmless wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

harmless wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

harmless wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

harmless wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

WtOB? wrote:

harmless wrote:Ed has always self-referenced. I'm OK with it. I'd rather that than him trying to write something with a new subject. Johnny Guitar is the furthest he got.

and i don't want him to go there again. jg was awful. much worse than inside job.

Ed is too boring to be self referencing. Make some interesting shit up, I say.

He's "too boring" and yet you want him to make "interesting shit" up? Good luck with that.

If Ed self-references, he can only be as boring as the original songs imo. Anything that self-references my favourite PJ songs is at least worth giving a go. I also think Johnny Guitar was the best song on Backspacer, but it was most definitely a witty pop song and I wouldn't want it to represent Pearl Jam.

I'm not interested in a rich 50 year old family man's self references. I think the better choice would be to dream up some interesting things to say rather than Future Days type subject matter. Hopefully we get more of that...

What makes you think he'll suddenly come up with new and interesting things to say after the last two albums? I really wish people would stop bringing up the rich 50 year old family man crap.

He's boring an uninteresting to me as a person, that's all. Its not his fault. Younger Eddie was at least interesting. Its okay to fake it through some lyrics at 50 if it means we don't have to listen to love songs to his model wife and kids.

I don't give a shit whether he's 50 and rich, or his wife is a model. Being married and having kids is fucking wonderful and I don't mind if he sings about it. The experience isn't less true because he's rich and his wife is a model. Maybe you'd feel differently if you were a model.

Or maybe if I was one rolled up in blood.

Is that it? He's abandoned all his principles by marrying someone who models underwear for a living?

I don't care that hes married to someone hot and much taller than him, I just think its boring subject matter for a Pearl Jam song.

I don't remember a song in which he ever mentioned his wife's height or bra size. I think you're probably just constantly trolling.

verb_to_trust wrote:

harmless wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

harmless wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

harmless wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

harmless wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

WtOB? wrote:

harmless wrote:Ed has always self-referenced. I'm OK with it. I'd rather that than him trying to write something with a new subject. Johnny Guitar is the furthest he got.

and i don't want him to go there again. jg was awful. much worse than inside job.

Ed is too boring to be self referencing. Make some interesting shit up, I say.

He's "too boring" and yet you want him to make "interesting shit" up? Good luck with that.

If Ed self-references, he can only be as boring as the original songs imo. Anything that self-references my favourite PJ songs is at least worth giving a go. I also think Johnny Guitar was the best song on Backspacer, but it was most definitely a witty pop song and I wouldn't want it to represent Pearl Jam.

I'm not interested in a rich 50 year old family man's self references. I think the better choice would be to dream up some interesting things to say rather than Future Days type subject matter. Hopefully we get more of that...

What makes you think he'll suddenly come up with new and interesting things to say after the last two albums? I really wish people would stop bringing up the rich 50 year old family man crap.

He's boring an uninteresting to me as a person, that's all. Its not his fault. Younger Eddie was at least interesting. Its okay to fake it through some lyrics at 50 if it means we don't have to listen to love songs to his model wife and kids.

I don't give a shit whether he's 50 and rich, or his wife is a model. Being married and having kids is fucking wonderful and I don't mind if he sings about it. The experience isn't less true because he's rich and his wife is a model. Maybe you'd feel differently if you were a model.

Or maybe if I was one rolled up in blood.

Is that it? He's abandoned all his principles by marrying someone who models underwear for a living?

I don't care that hes married to someone hot and much taller than him, I just think its boring subject matter for a Pearl Jam song.

But she as a model has never been subject matter for him. He has always had love songs. Did Oceans or Wishlist bother you?

cutuphalfdead wrote:

Birds in Hell wrote:I don't know, I think looking for meaning in rock lyrics is a fool's errand. I think of vocals as an instrument in themselves: the sounds being made by the voice is what really matters, not what words are being sung.

To me, one of the most cringe inducing things is listening to someone analyze rock lyrics.

Better stay off TSIS front page in about 2 months...

durdencommatyler wrote:

cutuphalfdead wrote:

Birds in Hell wrote:I don't know, I think looking for meaning in rock lyrics is a fool's errand. I think of vocals as an instrument in themselves: the sounds being made by the voice is what really matters, not what words are being sung.

To me, one of the most cringe inducing things is listening to someone analyze rock lyrics.

More than the lyrics themselves, it's how they marry with the song. There are plenty of simple or maybe even wonky lyrics that I love because they work so well in the context of the song. The Beatles are guilty of this quite often.

There are exceptions, of course. What I should have said was: One of the most cringe inducing things is listening to someone analyze Pearl Jam lyrics.

verb_to_trust wrote:

cutuphalfdead wrote:

Birds in Hell wrote:I don't know, I think looking for meaning in rock lyrics is a fool's errand. I think of vocals as an instrument in themselves: the sounds being made by the voice is what really matters, not what words are being sung.

To me, one of the most cringe inducing things is listening to someone analyze rock lyrics.

Better stay off TSIS front page in about 2 months...

I don't know how I get along with stip.

harmless wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

harmless wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

harmless wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

harmless wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

harmless wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

WtOB? wrote:

harmless wrote:Ed has always self-referenced. I'm OK with it. I'd rather that than him trying to write something with a new subject. Johnny Guitar is the furthest he got.

and i don't want him to go there again. jg was awful. much worse than inside job.

Ed is too boring to be self referencing. Make some interesting shit up, I say.

He's "too boring" and yet you want him to make "interesting shit" up? Good luck with that.

If Ed self-references, he can only be as boring as the original songs imo. Anything that self-references my favourite PJ songs is at least worth giving a go. I also think Johnny Guitar was the best song on Backspacer, but it was most definitely a witty pop song and I wouldn't want it to represent Pearl Jam.

I'm not interested in a rich 50 year old family man's self references. I think the better choice would be to dream up some interesting things to say rather than Future Days type subject matter. Hopefully we get more of that...

What makes you think he'll suddenly come up with new and interesting things to say after the last two albums? I really wish people would stop bringing up the rich 50 year old family man crap.

He's boring an uninteresting to me as a person, that's all. Its not his fault. Younger Eddie was at least interesting. Its okay to fake it through some lyrics at 50 if it means we don't have to listen to love songs to his model wife and kids.

I don't give a shit whether he's 50 and rich, or his wife is a model. Being married and having kids is fucking wonderful and I don't mind if he sings about it. The experience isn't less true because he's rich and his wife is a model. Maybe you'd feel differently if you were a model.

Or maybe if I was one rolled up in blood.

Is that it? He's abandoned all his principles by marrying someone who models underwear for a living?

I don't care that hes married to someone hot and much taller than him, I just think its boring subject matter for a Pearl Jam song.

I don't remember a song in which he ever mentioned his wife's height or bra size. I think you're probably just constantly trolling.

You weren't listening closely enough to BOB's electric piano....

durdencommatyler wrote:

cutuphalfdead wrote:

Birds in Hell wrote:I don't know, I think looking for meaning in rock lyrics is a fool's errand. I think of vocals as an instrument in themselves: the sounds being made by the voice is what really matters, not what words are being sung.

To me, one of the most cringe inducing things is listening to someone analyze rock lyrics.

More than the lyrics themselves, it's how they marry with the song. There are plenty of simple or maybe even wonky lyrics that I love because they work so well in the context of the song. The Beatles are guilty of this quite often.

We are obviously talking within a certain skill level with PJ lyrics. But it reached its peak at Vitalogy and stayed good till Riot Act. Rock is rock. As long as lyrics don't embarrass me they're OK.