Red Mosquito

lvc wrote:I would be interested in others' thoughts on this:

As a studio document, I am on record for loving Yield through and through. However, I am consistently disinterested in Yield songs when played live. They don't excite me. I don't know if this is a comment on the songs, the band now vs. then, the increasingly disappointing mix/guitar sounds on bootlegs.

All of them were amazing with Jack, and early on with Matt. Because so many of them have stayed in the set semi-regularly, an element of routine has set in with them, more so IMO than with any of the other albums from this period. Mostly they’ve just gotten too fast, losing nuance as a result.

tommy wrote:

stip wrote:yield is one of the pearl jam records where i think almost every song (exepting pm/pm and no way) translate really well live

What about In Hiding? That song really misses the piano live.

so with the caveat i don’t really listen to boots these are all songs that elicit a huge reaction and that interplay is what I love about love performances on the anthems (and yield is mostly anthem). I probably prefer live In Hiding to the studio

Kevin Davis wrote:

lvc wrote:I would be interested in others' thoughts on this:

As a studio document, I am on record for loving Yield through and through. However, I am consistently disinterested in Yield songs when played live. They don't excite me. I don't know if this is a comment on the songs, the band now vs. then, the increasingly disappointing mix/guitar sounds on bootlegs.

All of them were amazing with Jack, and early on with Matt. Because so many of them have stayed in the set semi-regularly, an element of routine has set in with them, more so IMO than with any of the other albums from this period. Mostly they’ve just gotten too fast, losing nuance as a result.

I think this gets at what I'm missing. Yield is not a record that lends itself to stretching songs out because there aren't much in the way of guitar solos to turn into long jams. My experience with Pearl Jam live comes heavily through bootlegs, not shows. The sense of rote-ness is most marked on older songs that don't get stretched into a longer jam (and much to Eddie's dismay, extended call and response vocally is not interesting to anyone but him) so it's pretty heavily felt on Yield songs. I could and sometimes do listen to multiple live versions of Black in a row and stay interested because it has that element of improvisation baked in.

Maybe I should never have given up on the Dave Matthews Band after all...

lvc wrote:

Kevin Davis wrote:

lvc wrote:I would be interested in others' thoughts on this:

As a studio document, I am on record for loving Yield through and through. However, I am consistently disinterested in Yield songs when played live. They don't excite me. I don't know if this is a comment on the songs, the band now vs. then, the increasingly disappointing mix/guitar sounds on bootlegs.

All of them were amazing with Jack, and early on with Matt. Because so many of them have stayed in the set semi-regularly, an element of routine has set in with them, more so IMO than with any of the other albums from this period. Mostly they’ve just gotten too fast, losing nuance as a result.

I think this gets at what I'm missing. Yield is not a record that lends itself to stretching songs out because there aren't much in the way of guitar solos to turn into long jams. My experience with Pearl Jam live comes heavily through bootlegs, not shows. The sense of rote-ness is most marked on older songs that don't get stretched into a longer jam (and much to Eddie's dismay, extended call and response vocally is not interesting to anyone but him) so it's pretty heavily felt on Yield songs. I could and sometimes do listen to multiple live versions of Black in a row and stay interested because it has that element of improvisation baked in.

Maybe I should never have given up on the Dave Matthews Band after all...

you can always come back! lol