Red Mosquito

tragabigzanda wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:it's demonstrably false that "their fans will follow them anywhere", given that most of their fans didn't follow them beyond Vitalogy

The ones who stuck with them are generally still around, yeah?

there were at least two or three mass Exoduses of Pearl Jam fans, by my count; and most of the comments I've read on Facebook atm are basically "I give up on PJ, tickets too high, new single sucks", so arguably there's about to be another reshaping of the fanbase; the idea that we'll "follow them anywhere" comes from someone who won't* follow them anywhere (yourself) and portrays people who like the new single as sheeple, no?

maybe my experience is different because I'm in the UK; I haven't had PJ-loving friends since the 90s

tragabigzanda wrote:

stip wrote:

tragabigzanda wrote:

stip wrote:

E.H. Ruddock wrote:

Anders wrote:With them releasing this as the first single, and naming the album after it, it would be surprising if it’s not an album highlight.

Very worrisome indeed

that it is the title track is intriguing, but it is the best of a sub par series of titles if they really wanted to use one

We have no basis for comparison yet but given its success thus far on the charts it seems like it was a good choice for a radio ready single and the kind of music clip liscensing/promotion they like to do.

DM is an easy listen. thats a good quality for a single

This presumes that producing music to maximize ticket and merch revenues is a valuable end goal. I don’t agree with this view, and feel they’re further devaluing their legacy.

And DM is neither an easy listen, nor is it particularly challenging. It’s just kind of there. Which kind of explains why it’s doing well on modern rock radio.

I did not say maximizing exposure is the end goal behind why songs should be written. But I think it’s pretty relevant when choosing among the music you have to figure out what to release. pearl jam are not an event band anymore - certainly not like what they once were. And if you are proud of your music and want people to find it seems like this is what you’d want out of a lead single.

No, but you seem to acknowledge it’s their goal, which is silly, because their fans will follow them anywhere. They’ve earned the rare position to create whatever they want, and to market it however they want. An inoffensive track, produced in an ear fatiguing manner, and marketed to support the sale of some very expensive concert tickets, is a wholly embarrassing look for the band.

this is a very 1994 post

your assumption that they arent making music they want seems grounded primarily in the fact that they released a song YOU didnt want.

stip wrote:

tragabigzanda wrote:

stip wrote:

tragabigzanda wrote:

stip wrote:

E.H. Ruddock wrote:

Anders wrote:With them releasing this as the first single, and naming the album after it, it would be surprising if it’s not an album highlight.

Very worrisome indeed

that it is the title track is intriguing, but it is the best of a sub par series of titles if they really wanted to use one

We have no basis for comparison yet but given its success thus far on the charts it seems like it was a good choice for a radio ready single and the kind of music clip liscensing/promotion they like to do.

DM is an easy listen. thats a good quality for a single

This presumes that producing music to maximize ticket and merch revenues is a valuable end goal. I don’t agree with this view, and feel they’re further devaluing their legacy.

And DM is neither an easy listen, nor is it particularly challenging. It’s just kind of there. Which kind of explains why it’s doing well on modern rock radio.

I did not say maximizing exposure is the end goal behind why songs should be written. But I think it’s pretty relevant when choosing among the music you have to figure out what to release. pearl jam are not an event band anymore - certainly not like what they once were. And if you are proud of your music and want people to find it seems like this is what you’d want out of a lead single.

No, but you seem to acknowledge it’s their goal, which is silly, because their fans will follow them anywhere. They’ve earned the rare position to create whatever they want, and to market it however they want. An inoffensive track, produced in an ear fatiguing manner, and marketed to support the sale of some very expensive concert tickets, is a wholly embarrassing look for the band.

this is a very 1994 post

your assumption that they arent making music they want seems grounded primarily in the fact that they released a song YOU didnt want.

I was gonna say this too. Sorry, trag

I’m still lost in the fact that if Pearl Jam makes a radio friendly track it is them abandoning their principles, but if Spoon does it, it’s a revelation.

tragabigzanda wrote:Also my comment was stemming largely from the discussion around their past pre-release singles, e.g. they used to release songs that were less radio ready; and that in embracing radio as a driver of ticket sales, they’ve put their stake in the ground of “commerce first.”

thats true of NAIS and Who You and Dance Are for sure, but that list of lead singles (and singles in general) have generally been accessible, radio friendly, etc. 9 of the 12 singles are in the DM vein. And i think in almost all those cases they followed up their left field singles with something designed to draw in listeners and drive them to the the record.

what pearl jam has never needed was juice to move concert tickets

did you just entirely speculate that two members of PJ hate the production on this thing because you do?

tragabigzanda wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:did you just entirely speculate that two members of PJ hate the production on this thing because you do?

No, I speculate because Jeff was the one who brought Tchad into the fold, and who continues to record solo music that has an entirely different production ethos; and because Matt has gone to fairly insane lengths to achieve a masterful rock drum sound, and I’d like to think he knows his current sound doesn’t come close

Matt doesn't have a "masterful drum sound", ever

different band, different production ethos, that's normal for side projects (and I don't think RNDM and whatever his ableist titled band is called are good bands, regardless of nice production, but that's personal)

just because someone is "going to insane lengths" (I don't know what that looked like in Jeff's case) to influence / shift / sway their band one way according to their personal taste (I sympathise, I did this, as do all band members, all the time), it doesn't objectively make what the band as a whole is doing right now bad; Jeff is not the arbiter of good taste for me, given that he's a great musician but I don't like half of his music

that's ridiculous, because that statement was entirely my personal taste (as are all of yours)