Page 167 of 176
Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!
Posted: Sat August 31, 2013 2:10 am
by philpritchard
cutuphalfdead wrote:philpritchard wrote:cutuphalfdead wrote:philpritchard wrote:cutuphalfdead wrote:Most songs, the music can exist as its own piece of art without the lyrics, even if the lyrics are really good and important.
The lyrics can exist as their own piece of art without the music, even if the music is really good and important.
I never said they couldn't.
I never said you said they couldn't.
Let's just agree that wins is a stupid stat and quit while we're ahead.
Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!
Posted: Sat August 31, 2013 2:10 am
by harmless
However much we disagree, I hope we all agree that PJ really would not be good at an instrumental album.
Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!
Posted: Sat August 31, 2013 2:13 am
by epilogue
harmless wrote:However much we disagree, I hope we all agree that PJ really would not be good at an instrumental album.
Stone might, though.
Moonlander has some great music on it.
Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!
Posted: Sat August 31, 2013 2:13 am
by philpritchard
harmless wrote:However much we disagree, I hope we all agree that PJ really would not be good at an instrumental album.
I also wouldn't want to read a book of Pearl Jam poetry or a silent Pearl Jam documentary.
Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!
Posted: Sat August 31, 2013 2:14 am
by Birds in Hell
stip wrote:Songs can just be wordless vocalizations.
This is all vocals are, for the most part, just with a few extra bits thrown in. It's just noises.
I find more mood and depth of meaning in choices of melody, chord progression, etc.
Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!
Posted: Sat August 31, 2013 2:17 am
by Buby
I'm sorry, I'm a PJ super fan, but come on...
We're speculating to death songs we have not heard (sans 3 and 1/2) based purelly on song titles, and artwork.
We should all grab a beer (no coronas please) and enjoy the wait.
Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!
Posted: Sat August 31, 2013 2:19 am
by philpritchard
Buby wrote:
I'm sorry, I'm a PJ super fan, but come on...
We're speculating to death songs we have not heard (sans 3 and 1/2) based purelly on song titles, and artwork.
We should all grab a beer (no coronas please) and enjoy the wait.
Wait, this is the Lightning Bolt songs thread?
Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!
Posted: Sat August 31, 2013 2:24 am
by Buby
philpritchard wrote:Buby wrote:
I'm sorry, I'm a PJ super fan, but come on...
We're speculating to death songs we have not heard (sans 3 and 1/2) based purelly on song titles, and artwork.
We should all grab a beer (no coronas please) and enjoy the wait.
Wait, this is the Lightning Bolt songs thread?
Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!
Posted: Sat August 31, 2013 2:27 am
by epilogue
YEAH YEAH YEAH
Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!
Posted: Sat August 31, 2013 2:30 am
by mastaflatch
Birds in Hell wrote:stip wrote:Songs can just be wordless vocalizations.
This is all vocals are, for the most part, just with a few extra bits thrown in. It's just noises.
I find more mood and depth of meaning in choices of melody, chord progression, etc.
me too, to a certain extent though. atrocious lyrics can easily ruin a song.
i mean, Monkberry Moon Delight by McCartney is a good example of how lyrics can be pretty secondary to one's appreciation of a song. the singer's dedication is also a key there (in 60s r'n'b or in several older blues songs, infectuous pop ditties, etc.) - if you churn out trite or ordinary lyrics, you've got to believe it. when Bob Dylan throws out nonsense, the listener
gets it because of the inflections (which is just as meaningful as actual themes), the relish in which the singer devours the words, the story (or lack thereof). most of my favorite singers aren't great singers - they're phenomenal interprets and songwriters, they let their humanity shine through their voice, they aren't trying to win a fucking grammy or to be their former selves or whatever they should be up to according to the latest trend.
Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!
Posted: Sat August 31, 2013 2:32 am
by E.H. Ruddock
pretty excited for the new album
Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!
Posted: Sat August 31, 2013 3:14 am
by Dr. Van Nostrand
E.H. Ruddock wrote:pretty excited for the new album
Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!
Posted: Sat August 31, 2013 3:17 am
by evenslow
Dr. Van Nostrand wrote:E.H. Ruddock wrote:pretty excited for the new album
Guys, we have a tracklist.
Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!
Posted: Sat August 31, 2013 3:21 am
by Dr. Van Nostrand
evenslow wrote:Dr. Van Nostrand wrote:E.H. Ruddock wrote:pretty excited for the new album
Guys, we have a tracklist.
And it looks good
Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!
Posted: Sat August 31, 2013 3:22 am
by WtOB?
evenslow wrote:Dr. Van Nostrand wrote:E.H. Ruddock wrote:pretty excited for the new album
Guys, we have a tracklist.
i'd love to see some writing credits.
Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!
Posted: Sat August 31, 2013 3:26 am
by Dr. Van Nostrand
WtOB? wrote:evenslow wrote:Dr. Van Nostrand wrote:E.H. Ruddock wrote:pretty excited for the new album
Guys, we have a tracklist.
i'd love to see some writing credits.
Track lengths will be interesting also
Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!
Posted: Sat August 31, 2013 3:34 am
by Kevin Davis
cutuphalfdead wrote:Birds in Hell wrote: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.
I think the reason you're inconsistent with it is because there doesn't exist a consistent formula for determining how heavily each part of any given song ought to weigh in to your decision to like or not like it--the rules are different for every song, and for every listener. I can't handle all those quote pyramids, so I didn't get the totality of everyone's position, but Stip is right about this at least: Once the lyrics are in there, they're every bit as much a part of the song as anything else, and therefore they are equally fair to criticize. Words generally being mankind's primary mode of communication, is it really that absurd that someone's strongest connection to a song might come from how well a song makes use of those words?
Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!
Posted: Sat August 31, 2013 3:35 am
by WtOB?
Dr. Van Nostrand wrote:WtOB? wrote:evenslow wrote:Dr. Van Nostrand wrote:E.H. Ruddock wrote:pretty excited for the new album
Guys, we have a tracklist.
i'd love to see some writing credits.
Track lengths will be interesting also
Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!
Posted: Sat August 31, 2013 3:59 am
by Norah
Kevin Davis wrote:cutuphalfdead wrote:Birds in Hell wrote: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.
I think the reason you're inconsistent with it is because there doesn't exist a consistent formula for determining how heavily each part of any given song ought to weigh in to your decision to like or not like it--the rules are different for every song, and for every listener. I can't handle all those quote pyramids, so I didn't get the totality of everyone's position, but Stip is right about this at least: Once the lyrics are in there, they're every bit as much a part of the song as anything else, and therefore they are equally fair to criticize. Words generally being mankind's primary mode of communication, is it really that absurd that someone's strongest connection to a song might come from how well a song makes use of those words?
I don't disagree. I guess for the most part, I don't really divorce the lyrics from the rest of the song, as much as I don't really focus on them intently. And I'm talking mostly about my relationship to Pearl Jam songs here (there are plenty of artists where I really pick apart lyrics) but with Pearl Jam they're kind of just there, and unless they really stick out as particularly bad or good for me, I don't really pick them apart.
Re: Lightning Bolt -- guess the tracks!
Posted: Sat August 31, 2013 5:36 am
by Lounge Lizard
Thejambi wrote:Sorry. Sometimes I let my Degree cloud my judgment.
"Fore play opens the door for my bolt to blow its dynamite"
