Red Mosquito

I merely said that "Here are 5 articles talking about good gigs" is no rebuttal to my reasoned OPINION that the majority of recent performances I HAVE RECENTLY HEARD from Pearl Jam are not good.

Anyway, no hard feelings stip I was just provoked by that "Getaway" video. What frustrates me is that the solutions for what I see as PJ's maybe-not-so-recent faults would be easy to get rid of if they just... wanted to. It's frustrating that they're not reaching. But if you enjoy the hell out of what they are now, I really envy that. As someone who never really made any effort to have a forum schtick, I just post what I think and feel, there it is.

stip wrote:I too enjoy discounting evidence that detracts from sweeping generalizations made by embittered fans

Few bands have better illustrated how thoroughly decided by predetermined storylines music press tends to be.

PJ rose from the ashes of predictable media.

I am 85% sure neither of you read any of those links

stip wrote:I too enjoy discounting evidence that detracts from sweeping generalizations made by embittered fans

Your definition of evidence seems to be "well someone wrote this".

Wrong. someone who AGREES with me wrote this

stip wrote:I too enjoy discounting evidence that detracts from sweeping generalizations made by embittered fans

"Evidence"= reviews? lol

The only real factual evidence here is the boots, which you're the one discounting because they go against some weird metaphysical concept of "the concert experience" you've built in your head.

stip wrote:I am 85% sure neither of you read any of those links

And I am 85% sure you've never read any others.

Find me a downright negative Rolling Stones, Bruce Springsteen, Neil Young, or Paul McCartney review. Find me a truly negative Van Halen reunion professional review. It stands to reason that even the greatest live act with the best music ever will still occasionally miss, or that the writer just won't appreciate what they saw. So show me those articles.

Shit I responded in the wrong thread

theplatypus wrote:

stip wrote:I too enjoy discounting evidence that detracts from sweeping generalizations made by embittered fans

"Evidence"= reviews? lol

The only real factual evidence here is the boots, which you're the one discounting because they go against some weird metaphysical concept of "the concert experience" you've built in your head.

I look forward to the day when we just watch webcasts of our favorite bands and negate the need to actually go see them. Nothing will be lost

The best part about glitter and doom was that I no longer need to go see tom waits. I have a bootleg.

stip wrote:I am 85% sure neither of you read any of those links

I've read all of those articles before.

Well I was going to attribute most of that 15% to you

I should go listen to the Uniondale show. It was my all time favorite show and I have zero doubt listening to it will reproduce my experience perfectly

I basically want PJ to sound like Reading 2006 *all the time*. Shit was hot fire that night.

I'm looking forward to the 4th post of that series.

stip wrote:The best part about glitter and doom was that I no longer need to go see tom waits. I have a bootleg.

If the performance came off like a trainwreck in the live album, it was certainly a trainwreck in person. You're just not listening hard enough 'cause you're so pumped to be there. But you don't get to say "they're a great live band." That's demonstrably untrue.

Shit, sometimes the bootlegs sound even better than the actual shows. That was certainly the case with the show I saw last year. And it has nothing to do with the performance itself, but the fact that I can hear it more clearly because their live sound mix is mush.

I've never made a sex tape before but I have it on good authority I watching it is just as good as making it