Red Mosquito

harmless wrote:

McParadigm wrote:

harmless wrote:Man, this song is really fucking good. Top drawer PJ.

I always just assumed everybody kept their undies and socks in the top drawer, but if that were the case this wouldn't mean what I assume it means.

There are also song drawers, like in the Pentagon or the FBI building or something. Area 51 maybe? I don't know, but there are song drawers.

This post has been forwarded to Socks and Briefs (a division of Homeland Security).

McParadigm wrote:

harmless wrote:

McParadigm wrote:

harmless wrote:Man, this song is really fucking good. Top drawer PJ.

I always just assumed everybody kept their undies and socks in the top drawer, but if that were the case this wouldn't mean what I assume it means.

There are also song drawers, like in the Pentagon or the FBI building or something. Area 51 maybe? I don't know, but there are song drawers.

This post has been forwarded to Socks and Briefs (a division of Homeland Security).

still can't not think of this song when I see "Getaway" on the track list.

dimejinky99 wrote:It's got a meaty tasty groove this one.

Might possibly a top 20 tune

hopefully the band doesn't kill it live by speeding it up, like they do with some other songs that have a good mid tempo 'groove' (evenflow, corduroy, Brain of J etc)

Snap

dimejinky99 wrote:This one right now, is almost at the top of the pile for me.

Scary thing is, it's gonna lose all its appeal if they play it too fast, live.

I officially love this song now. For me, this and MYM are better than anything this band has done since Riot Act, except for Parachutes.

what did you think of that infallible clip?

Haven't heard it, I've stayed clear of clips and waited for full songs.

harmless wrote:All of it. I'm trying to like the music while still thinking BO'B's a dick. I think that he just knows what the general public feeling about PJ is, however superficial and casual it sounds, i.e. "Eddie Vedder's band." Nobody in the general public gives much of a shit about the other musicians, so neither does BO'B.

I'm right where you are. I think BoB is a massive tool. But, I do see him for what he is, a really good industry rock producer who knows how to get a powerful sound. Plus, he's the only one who can truly handle EdVed as a vocalist and get the best out of him. I think your Steve Albini and Jack Endinos of the world are great for "cred" but it doesn't amount much to bringing in an audience. Next album I wish he's just come on in the end and do the vocals, and use another producer to help sort through the ideas and general direction.

His interview reallt grate on me, you get the sense he doesn't really have appreciation for the creative process. What it takes to imagine a song out of thin air and how to keep artistic integrity. He almost seems to look down on that, so the artistry of an album seems to depend on how much the band stands up to him. The right balance could yield amazing results, though.

Tuolumne wrote:

harmless wrote:All of it. I'm trying to like the music while still thinking BO'B's a dick. I think that he just knows what the general public feeling about PJ is, however superficial and casual it sounds, i.e. "Eddie Vedder's band." Nobody in the general public gives much of a shit about the other musicians, so neither does BO'B.

I'm right where you are. I think BoB is a massive tool. But, I do see him for what he is, a really good industry rock producer who knows how to get a powerful sound. Plus, he's the only one who can truly handle EdVed as a vocalist and get the best out of him. I think your Steve Albini and Jack Endinos of the world are great for "cred" but it doesn't amount much to bringing in an audience. Next album I wish he's just come on in the end and do the vocals, and use another producer to help sort through the ideas and general direction.

His interview reallt grate on me, you get the sense he doesn't really have appreciation for the creative process. What it takes to imagine a song out of thin air and how to keep artistic integrity. He almost seems to look down on that, so the artistry of an album seems to depend on how much the band stands up to him. The right balance could yield amazing results, though.

Yep. I guess the thing is, why do they need to "bring in an audience" at this point? You might disagree, but a lot of people see what they're doing currently as ungratefully shitting on the audience they've already developed. They've got any right in the world to do that, but I think some people are feeling abandoned, and quite rightly. Their recent aesthetic choices don't reflect the band they became; they reflect the band that they moved away from. It is what it is. But the recent sales pitches and commercial efforts... it just all seems grating because nobody really believes Pearl Jam are in any way struggling for money. They don't need the money, so this change of aesthetic must amount to a change in values... I'm hoping not but eh, it's getting increasingly hard to believe and some people stopped believing a long time ago.

harmless wrote:

Tuolumne wrote:

harmless wrote:All of it. I'm trying to like the music while still thinking BO'B's a dick. I think that he just knows what the general public feeling about PJ is, however superficial and casual it sounds, i.e. "Eddie Vedder's band." Nobody in the general public gives much of a shit about the other musicians, so neither does BO'B.

I'm right where you are. I think BoB is a massive tool. But, I do see him for what he is, a really good industry rock producer who knows how to get a powerful sound. Plus, he's the only one who can truly handle EdVed as a vocalist and get the best out of him. I think your Steve Albini and Jack Endinos of the world are great for "cred" but it doesn't amount much to bringing in an audience. Next album I wish he's just come on in the end and do the vocals, and use another producer to help sort through the ideas and general direction.

His interview reallt grate on me, you get the sense he doesn't really have appreciation for the creative process. What it takes to imagine a song out of thin air and how to keep artistic integrity. He almost seems to look down on that, so the artistry of an album seems to depend on how much the band stands up to him. The right balance could yield amazing results, though.

Yep. I guess the thing is, why do they need to "bring in an audience" at this point? You might disagree, but a lot of people see what they're doing currently as ungratefully shitting on the audience they've already developed. They've got any right in the world to do that, but I think some people are feeling abandoned, and quite rightly. Their recent aesthetic choices don't reflect the band they became; they reflect the band that they moved away from. It is what it is. But the recent sales pitches and commercial efforts... it just all seems grating because nobody really believes Pearl Jam are in any way struggling for money. They don't need the money, so this change of aesthetic must amount to a change in values... I'm hoping not but eh, it's getting increasingly hard to believe and some people stopped believing a long time ago.

I don't see it that way. The band, as any artist, wants a conversation with it's audience. In my opinion, the message boards being a good example, the conversations are about the same subjects, with the same people, over and over and over again. It's just boring. I think part of being a rock and roll band is to fuck shit up a little bit. They did that most effectively with Vitalogy, and they fucked with people's brains quite a bit with that. Going "commercial" right now is sort of a reverse way of doing that. It gets a very very comfortable fanbase and wakes it up from the doldrums. I'd love to see an 18 year old come in and rave about Getaway or Sirens and ask what Animal sounds like and if he should check it out. There's a difference between pandering and inviting. I think it's okay to invite, it sucks to pander. That sort of thing would bring more life to a band that has always been about being in the mainstream but also challenging it, and if followed up by some weirder stuff next time out, and fucking with a whole new group of people in a new way, I'd call that a huge success.

Well, I think they are pandering. Certainly on recent evidence, dumber lyrics and generally much less effort on song-craft and simply getting together to write songs. The fact that BoB is now on board to *help* them write songs is simply laughable. But that's all been talked to death. You're right, if that's not just how it is from now on, and they're just "fucking shit up", changing it up or whatever, and they've got their deeply intelligent album just around the corner, that's absolutely fine. But not all of the fanbase is going to go through the motions while they're waiting for it. Again, reaching out to a new audience is absolutely fine, but it's not necessary. They would be one of the biggest rock bands in the world with or without that concerted effort to drastically broaden their audience, and it does kind of go against what they said were their past values. I'm not slating them for doing what they want to do, but we're all within our rights to point out the inconsistency. All of this suddenly running towards the commercial-rock Hall of Fame was a surprising right turn.

Pearl Jam never wanted to have a small audience. They have always been a big arena rock band. They were just uncomfortable with what having a huge audience brought along with it. The invasion of privacy, immense publicity and other things that they (Ed especially) just didn't want or know how to deal with at that time. There is no danger of that re-occurring in this day and age. Them moving away from the middle period style of songwriting and back to what I (and others) believe to be their biggest strengths isn't pandering to anyone. They're just not afraid anymore. I don't agree there's anything dumber or less artistic about what they are doing now compared to the middle period. I am also one of those fans who have stuck around and they aren't alienating me with this direction. They're rewarding me for my long wait for something special. I don't see any hypocrisy or inconsistency here. But I maybe in the minority.

Release_Me wrote:Pearl Jam never wanted to have a small audience. They have always been a big arena rock band. They were just uncomfortable with what having a huge audience brought along with it. The invasion of privacy, immense publicity and other things that they (Ed especially) just didn't want or know how to deal with at that time. There is no danger of that re-occurring in this day and age. Them moving away from the middle period style of songwriting and back to what I (and others) believe to be their biggest strengths isn't pandering to anyone. They're just not afraid anymore. I don't agree there's anything dumber or less artistic about what they are doing now compared to the middle period. I am also one of those fans who have stuck around and they aren't alienating me with this direction. They're rewarding me for my long wait for something special. I don't see any hypocrisy or inconsistency here. But I maybe in the minority.

Your thesis is correct - this is more about the band putting a focus on traits they always had rather than trying to pander with a "new" style.

I just don't think they're really going to gain a whole new fanbase at this point. They're 20 years old, and their primary fanbase is hitting their 30's and up. Most people made up their mind, positive or negative, on Pearl Jam a while ago.

Release_Me wrote:Pearl Jam never wanted to have a small audience. They have always been a big arena rock band.

I just don't agree with that, and neither do a lot of people. That's the crux of the matter. They had decades to decide that musical integrity was more important than a giant fanbase. Binaural and Riot Act were the genius culmination of that aesthetic. No Code, and the need to run from a giant fanbase and do something else, might have been the trigger, but they sure as hell stayed on that path for a long time and grew contented with it. By the time S/T came around and they suddenly decided they wanted to be like U2 again, that was very much a surprising decision out of leftfield, and jarring for a lot of fans. They were very suddenly following the opposite trajectory that they'd started following at No Code, and it had been a long time. You can't be surprised that a lot of people weren't prepared to readjust.

This band may have always played large arenas, but they sure as hell haven't always dumbed-down and aimed for the broadest audience, the lowest common denominator, like they did on Backspacer and to a slightly lesser extent on S/T. We'll see whether they add any complexity to Lightning Bolt. It's looking alright so far.

digster wrote:I just don't think they're really going to gain a whole new fanbase at this point. They're 20 years old, and their primary fanbase is hitting their 30's and up. Most people made up their mind, positive or negative, on Pearl Jam a while ago.

Yup. I think this new commercial push for massive success will be ultimately pointless, and I hope they realise it sooner rather than later.

harmless wrote:

Release_Me wrote:Pearl Jam never wanted to have a small audience. They have always been a big arena rock band.

I just don't agree with that, and neither do a lot of people. That's the crux of the matter. They had decades to decide that musical integrity was more important than a giant fanbase. Binaural and Riot Act were the genius culmination of that aesthetic. No Code, and the need to run from a giant fanbase and do something else, might have been the trigger, but they sure as hell stayed on that path for a long time and grew contented with it. By the time S/T came around and they suddenly decided they wanted to be like U2 again, that was very much a surprising decision out of leftfield, and jarring for a lot of fans. They were very suddenly following the opposite trajectory that they'd started following at No Code, and it had been a long time. You can't be surprised that a lot of people weren't prepared to readjust.

Yeah you're never going to make an objective statement about what this band wanted because this band didn't have a consensus within them. Green River disbanded because Jeff and Stone wanted a deal with a mayor label then they went to sign a deal for MLB with the label that had such underground artist signed as Vanessa Williams. We're talking about the same 2 guys who were contemplating on leaving PJ because Vitalogy and No Code weren't popular enough and Stone is the guy who was thrilled with Yield because it was more mainstream. So yeah part of the band wanted to be a mainstream band no matter what the fanbase likes to think.

harmless wrote:

digster wrote:I just don't think they're really going to gain a whole new fanbase at this point. They're 20 years old, and their primary fanbase is hitting their 30's and up. Most people made up their mind, positive or negative, on Pearl Jam a while ago.

Yup. I think this new commercial push for massive success will be ultimately pointless, and I hope they realise it sooner rather than later.

They will never be successful enough at it for it to be relevant outside their hardcore fan base IMO.