Red Mosquito

stip wrote:

digster wrote:I think there's absolutely no way, shape or form either of these boards can really be indicative of anything. It makes perfect sense that there'd be more people on the official site, and that those people would have a more positive outlook on the band. That's where you buy tickets, buy merch, etc. There's more reasons to be there than just the board.

I think using a much larger primary fan board as opposed to a much smaller secondary fan board is as good a measure as we're going to come up with for gauging broad fan reaction to a band's music.

And if 450 people were logged in at 11:30 on a wed. afternoon (with no tickets on sale) just to buy merchandise then I'm going to go buy stock in 10c.

also you don't need to pay a fanclub memberchip to post here

stip wrote:

digster wrote:I think there's absolutely no way, shape or form either of these boards can really be indicative of anything. It makes perfect sense that there'd be more people on the official site, and that those people would have a more positive outlook on the band. That's where you buy tickets, buy merch, etc. There's more reasons to be there than just the board.

I think using a much larger primary fan board as opposed to a much smaller secondary fan board is as good a measure as we're going to come up with for gauging broad fan reaction to a band's music.

And if 450 people were logged in at 11:30 on a wed. afternoon (with no tickets on sale) just to buy merchandise then I'm going to go buy stock in 10c.

We don't have to pick one. They can both be bad measures. How many thousands of people must there be who have bought every PJ album, go to every show they can, have very positive or negative views of the band's current work, and would never even think of going on a message board?

And your second point isn't what I meant; there's more reasons to be there so naturally there's going to be a larger community, and that larger community is going to tend to be more diehard, everything this band does it great fans.

It does bring up something I've noticed; does it seem to anyone else that, barring that week or two where reviews are coming in on albums, PJ's newer material is really never talked about by critics or anyone? With a band like U2, the fact that they made (what some considered) a dud in No Line on the Horizon was something considered in articles written about them. Other bands have a similar deal, but with PJ, it seems like the need to consider their newer work disappears after about a week or two on the shelves.

Yeah, PJ doesn't really inspire, you know, "thinkpieces".

EXCEPT FOR THIS REALLY GOOD ONE http://jorgefarah.com/2013/07/15/pearl- ... d-excuses/

Nice work with that one.

And yeah, I guess that is the point. I know that no one really gives a shit about long-running band's later work, but it feels like no one gives a shit at all about Pearl Jam's.

It's not surprising. U2, for better or for worse, is an event in a way pearl jam is not. they think of everything they do as a significant cultural moment. Pearl Jam releases records and plays shows. Bracketing the quality of the material, pearl jam has never worked to foster that kind of expectation about their output.You listen to the album, you attend the show, you write about it afterwards, but then you move on, unless you're already committed. Some of that may be an organic reaction, some of that may be a reflection of the band's marketing, and some of is probably due to the fact that I can't think of another band, as successful as pearl jam has been for as long as they've been, that is so tightly chained to their first few records. Pearl Jam records post vitalogy simply do not matter unless you're a pearl jam fan. they have 3 albums, and an impressive live show.

stip wrote: Pearl Jam records post vitalogy simply do not matter unless you're a pearl jam fan. they have 3 albums, and an impressive live show.

That's pretty much what its boiled down to.

That was a good read, Jorge.

Though I don't dislike any of their albums, I agree that the No Code to Lost Dogs run is the Pearl Jam that I still feel connected to and I suppose some part of me misses that band.

The "they made three records a long time ago" story was certainly the norm for a while. And maybe it still carries over a bit, but the perception seems to be shifting towards a careerist angle in the US, as the band becomes more and more of a historical object. And with good reason...

1. The late-career successes of songs like Just Breathe, The Fixer, and Sirens (each of these places among their most-selected tracks on most streaming media sites...Just Breathe ranks above Daughter and Betterman on last.fm, classic radio playlists and, usually, on iTunes' weekly sales) have pushed us a little away from the whole "the band that made Ten" story. Whether or not these tracks have the impact of those early records (obviously not), the simple fact is that having recent genuine late-era successes does have an impact in the way people perceive a band's career.

2. Since the release of the Greatest Hits record, the middle records have become much stronger catalog sellers. Do the Evolution continues to be up there with the aforementioned tracks in terms of streaming plays, Given to Fly is usually close at hand, and Yield is currently approaching 2 million copies sold and is not far behind Vitalogy in terms of catalog sales.

For comparison's sake, some other albums released within the late 80's to early 2000's period by bands who also had much larger successes elsewhere in their catalogs.

Document (REM) - 2.3 million
The Rising (Springsteen) - 2.3
Jar of Flies (Alice in Chains) - 2.3
Recovering the Satellites (Counting Crows) - 2.2
Nimrod (Green Day) - 2.2
Crush (Bon Jovi) - 2.0
Yield - 1.9
Colour and the Shape (actually, this is the Foo Fighters' best selling record) - 1.9
Pop (U2) - 1.7
No Code - 1.7
Self-titled (Alice in Chains) - 1.7
Pinkerton (Weezer) - 1.6
Down on the Upside (Soundgarden) - 1.5
Gish (Smashing Pumpkins) - 1.5
Adore (Smashing Pumpkins) - 1.4
New Adventures in HiFi (REM) - 1.3
Be Here Now (Oasis) - 1.2
Binaural - .85
Ghost of Tom Joad (Springsteen) - .75

I'm not saying that Yield is on a level with the first three in terms of impact, popularity, or success (the US stats on those first three albums is still mind boggling to me)...but I wouldn't claim any of the other albums on that list had the impact that other releases by the same bands had. I'm simpl noting that, as a general rule, they aren't non-entities, either.

McParadigm wrote:the US stats on those first three albums is still mind boggling to me)...

Is it possible that it has something to do with them being reissued as opposite to the rest of their catalogue?

Nope.

I was just asking because as far as i remembered all version are counted together so those reissues would automatically boost the numbers. Ten is obviously a case on it's own.

Mine wrote:I was just asking because as far as i remembered all version are counted together so those reissues would automatically boost the numbers. Ten is obviously a case on it's own.

Vs does good business, but there was barely a blip in sales when the remaster arrived. I just don't think people tended to yearn for a remaster of that record...it had a good sound.

The same goes for Vitalogy. I think the bonus tracks are the main attraction with this kind of reissues.

Agreed. And they had next to nothing.

They should have at least put some of those 94-95 improvs on the Vitalogy one...a few of those were basically songs. Words from Melbourne 95 comes to mind.

McParadigm wrote:The "they made three records a long time ago" story was certainly the norm for a while. And maybe it still carries over a bit, but the perception seems to be shifting towards a careerist angle in the US, as the band becomes more and more of a historical object. And with good reason...

1. The late-career successes of songs like Just Breathe, The Fixer, and Sirens (each of these places among their most-selected tracks on most streaming media sites...Just Breathe ranks above Daughter and Betterman on last.fm, classic radio playlists and, usually, on iTunes' weekly sales) have pushed us a little away from the whole "the band that made Ten" story. Whether or not these tracks have the impact of those early records (obviously not), the simple fact is that having recent genuine late-era successes does have an impact in the way people perceive a band's career.

Fair point. They certainly remind people that the band still exists, if nothing else. the songs do seem to kind of exist in a curious vacuum though. They've had some genuinely big hits in recent years, but they seem to me to be stand alone songs that aren't altering people's impression of the band in any way. pearl jam could release 10 sirens and still be thought of as the band that made jeremy, not the band that made jeremy and sirens. But maybe i'm wrong about that. I'm happy to concede the others will have a better sense of this than I.

McParadigm wrote: 2. Since the release of the Greatest Hits record, the middle records have become much stronger catalog sellers. Do the Evolution continues to be up there with the aforementioned tracks in terms of streaming plays, Given to Fly is usually close at hand, and Yield is currently approaching 2 million copies sold and is not far behind Vitalogy in terms of catalog sales.

For comparison's sake, some other albums released within the late 80's to early 2000's period by bands who also had much larger successes elsewhere in their catalogs.

Document (REM) - 2.3 million
The Rising (Springsteen) - 2.3
Jar of Flies (Alice in Chains) - 2.3
Recovering the Satellites (Counting Crows) - 2.2
Nimrod (Green Day) - 2.2
Crush (Bon Jovi) - 2.0
Yield - 1.9
Colour and the Shape (actually, this is the Foo Fighters' best selling record) - 1.9
Pop (U2) - 1.7
No Code - 1.7
Self-titled (Alice in Chains) - 1.7
Pinkerton (Weezer) - 1.6
Down on the Upside (Soundgarden) - 1.5
Gish (Smashing Pumpkins) - 1.5
Adore (Smashing Pumpkins) - 1.4
New Adventures in HiFi (REM) - 1.3
Be Here Now (Oasis) - 1.2
Binaural - .85
Ghost of Tom Joad (Springsteen) - .75

I'm not saying that Yield is on a level with the first three in terms of impact, popularity, or success (the US stats on those first three albums is still mind boggling to me)...but I wouldn't claim any of the other albums on that list had the impact that other releases by the same bands had. I'm simpl noting that, as a general rule, they aren't non-entities, either.

I guess the question is whether or not sales at those levels are able to alter a perception of a band, or if they're just sort of swept up in the dominant narrative without altering it in any appreciable way. So given to fly or DTE are well read footnotes, rather than a separate chapter.

McParadigm wrote:Agreed. And they had next to nothing.

They should have at least put some of those 94-95 improvs on the Vitalogy one...a few of those were basically songs. Words from Melbourne 95 comes to mind.

well you have to save something for a future reissue

stip wrote:

McParadigm wrote:The "they made three records a long time ago" story was certainly the norm for a while. And maybe it still carries over a bit, but the perception seems to be shifting towards a careerist angle in the US, as the band becomes more and more of a historical object. And with good reason...

1. The late-career successes of songs like Just Breathe, The Fixer, and Sirens (each of these places among their most-selected tracks on most streaming media sites...Just Breathe ranks above Daughter and Betterman on last.fm, classic radio playlists and, usually, on iTunes' weekly sales) have pushed us a little away from the whole "the band that made Ten" story. Whether or not these tracks have the impact of those early records (obviously not), the simple fact is that having recent genuine late-era successes does have an impact in the way people perceive a band's career.

Fair point. They certainly remind people that the band still exists, if nothing else. the songs do seem to kind of exist in a curious vacuum though. They've had some genuinely big hits in recent years, but they seem to me to be stand alone songs that aren't altering people's impression of the band in any way. pearl jam could release 10 sirens and still be thought of as the band that made jeremy, not the band that made jeremy and sirens. But maybe i'm wrong about that. I'm happy to concede the others will have a better sense of this than I.

I was thinking about this. Does the career/legacy building mentality even exist in the recording industry and consequentially does the public even think of a song/record as something "lasting". I mean it seems like it's like with mobile phones - essential - best thing ever - can not not have it - until the next model comes out making the former model irrelevant. Does an impact like the one Ten had even exist any more?

All of these were pretty good. 2X4 and Litho would've been the ones I'd like to have some vocals on, meanwhile I wish I could unhear 10 Billion Years

Severed Hand is a wicked song.

Mine wrote: I was thinking about this. Does the career/legacy building mentality even exist in the recording industry and consequentially does the public even think of a song/record as something "lasting". I mean it seems like it's like with mobile phones - essential - best thing ever - can not not have it - until the next model comes out making the former model irrelevant. Does an impact like the one Ten had even exist any more?

I think it's doubtful. I don't even know how big of hits these songs were. They definitely charted higher than some of their other work, but that fails to take into account the accessibility or lack thereof of the songs, as well as the fact that there's probably less people seeking out mainstream rock these days, and therefore you have to grab a lesser slice of the pie to still be a comparable success. McParadigm seems to be man on the spot with chart info; I'm kind of speculating here.