Re: Sleeping By Myself
Posted: Mon October 07, 2013 10:15 pm
theplatypus wrote:"Definitely not terrible!"harmless wrote:THANK GOD FOR PJ'S "NOT TERRIBLE" SONGS
- theplatypus, from the Internet
theplatypus wrote:"Definitely not terrible!"harmless wrote:THANK GOD FOR PJ'S "NOT TERRIBLE" SONGS
- theplatypus, from the Internet
Exactly. It's just a bit meh.mray10 wrote:A perfectly fine full band rendition of the song, but wholly unnecessary on the album.
Hmm. I get what you're saying. I'm using personal taste as opposed to fitting on an album.harmless wrote:I'm not sure how it's any more unnecessary than anything else. Is anyone hearing any coherence to this thing that getting rid of one or two tracks would enhance?
stupidmop wrote:I kind of love it. *shrug*
I prefer the quiter bit before it kicks in, but then just when the kicking in gets too annoying, it changes to ukulele. Woop.
Ain't it?Mike wrote:My fears regarding this song were completely unnecessary. This is pretty cool.
Yeah, and for me when you're releasing a "new" version of an already known/released song ... there better be a really good reason. I just don't see that reason here. Its' not adding anything to a coherent album narrative and it's not so amazingly good or different or new that it demands to be heard.Juvenal wrote:Hmm. I get what you're saying. I'm using personal taste as opposed to fitting on an album.harmless wrote:I'm not sure how it's any more unnecessary than anything else. Is anyone hearing any coherence to this thing that getting rid of one or two tracks would enhance?
Oh hell yeah, it is. I just hope it will stay this good with repeated listens. TIME WILL TEEEELLLharmless wrote:Ain't it?Mike wrote:My fears regarding this song were completely unnecessary. This is pretty cool.
Where is this "coherent album narrative"?mray10 wrote:Yeah, and for me when you're releasing a "new" version of an already known/released song ... there better be a really good reason. I just don't see that reason here. Its' not adding anything to a coherent album narrative and it's not so amazingly good or different or new that it demands to be heard.Juvenal wrote:Hmm. I get what you're saying. I'm using personal taste as opposed to fitting on an album.harmless wrote:I'm not sure how it's any more unnecessary than anything else. Is anyone hearing any coherence to this thing that getting rid of one or two tracks would enhance?
Really, this is what B-sides are for.
That was my point. There's not one, so it's not like this track is here because it does anything for the record.harmless wrote:Where is this "coherent album narrative"?mray10 wrote:Yeah, and for me when you're releasing a "new" version of an already known/released song ... there better be a really good reason. I just don't see that reason here. Its' not adding anything to a coherent album narrative and it's not so amazingly good or different or new that it demands to be heard.Juvenal wrote:Hmm. I get what you're saying. I'm using personal taste as opposed to fitting on an album.harmless wrote:I'm not sure how it's any more unnecessary than anything else. Is anyone hearing any coherence to this thing that getting rid of one or two tracks would enhance?
Really, this is what B-sides are for.
Yeah but they're all so different; which tracks *do* do anything for the record. That's what I meant. There's no coherent narrative precisely because not a single song feels part of a coherent tracklist. So I don't get the idea that it's good, but shouldn't be on here. None of the songs *belong* on here.mray10 wrote:That was my point. There's not one, so it's not like this track is here because it does anything for the record.harmless wrote:Where is this "coherent album narrative"?mray10 wrote:Yeah, and for me when you're releasing a "new" version of an already known/released song ... there better be a really good reason. I just don't see that reason here. Its' not adding anything to a coherent album narrative and it's not so amazingly good or different or new that it demands to be heard.Juvenal wrote:Hmm. I get what you're saying. I'm using personal taste as opposed to fitting on an album.harmless wrote:I'm not sure how it's any more unnecessary than anything else. Is anyone hearing any coherence to this thing that getting rid of one or two tracks would enhance?
Really, this is what B-sides are for.
harmless wrote:Yeah but they're all so different; which tracks *do* do anything for the record. That's what I meant. There's no coherent narrative precisely because not a single song feels part of a coherent tracklist. So I don't get the idea that it's good, but shouldn't be on here. None of the songs *belong* on here.mray10 wrote:That was my point. There's not one, so it's not like this track is here because it does anything for the record.harmless wrote:Where is this "coherent album narrative"?mray10 wrote:Yeah, and for me when you're releasing a "new" version of an already known/released song ... there better be a really good reason. I just don't see that reason here. Its' not adding anything to a coherent album narrative and it's not so amazingly good or different or new that it demands to be heard.Juvenal wrote:Hmm. I get what you're saying. I'm using personal taste as opposed to fitting on an album.harmless wrote:I'm not sure how it's any more unnecessary than anything else. Is anyone hearing any coherence to this thing that getting rid of one or two tracks would enhance?
Really, this is what B-sides are for.
They're good. Not quite the brush work I wanted, but they're good and tasteful. They work. And I like the louder snare stabs, giving the whole thing a Kings of Leon feel.Mike wrote:Are these the shuffling drums you wanted, harmless? I dig them.