Red Mosquito

McParadigm wrote:I see no reason why Bob should get that much credit for the Great Sweatpantsing

track11 wrote:I don't think that Pitchfork PJ reviews are "wrong", but you know they are going to be negative. They have their favorites...can I write a negative review about the last National? Sure, I think it is boring, doesn't move the chains from High Violet, etc. It gets an 8.4 "BEST NEW MUSIC" from Pitchfork. Even if I agree with their points on this review, I still think that THE MUSIC IS GOOD. They always spend their time with PJ albums not necessarily evaluating the music but instead critiquing the lack of a move to completely new territory. It is a valid critique, but one they for some reason obsess over with PJ, and I would argue that there is a lot of new territory on LB (for Pearl Jam). Is it groundbreaking? No, but was Riot Act groundbreaking? Binaural? Yield certainly was not. Vitalogy? I don't get why we expect that from this band. They aren't Radiohead and never will be.

stupidmop wrote:I vote in all further discussion current-day pearl jam is referred to as 'The sweatpants Years, as produced by Brenden O'Brien'.

ABNorman wrote:I'm in the "vocal melody is super important" camp. I can appreciate a song with atmosphere, unique instrumentation or other things, but if I'm not singing the melody in my head at random times, it's just not going to stay on the playlist. Pearl Jam's always mostly been about the Ved to me. That's my beef with Yellow Moon: there's nothing in the vocals to hang on to.

That said, there's a good few Pearl Jam songs that people wouldn't consider melodic that I really love, so I'm totally inconsistent on this.

stip wrote:

Heathen wrote:

Mike wrote:Obligatory negative pitchfork review
http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/186 ... ning-bolt/

*mixed

It was a perfectly fine review. They didn't like it much, but it wasn't a hatchet piece

dimejinky99 wrote:Something I've always wondered about. (In relation to SBM mostly)

Where in history did it begin that songs had really sad lyrics or were about heartbreak, and yet come with really happy melodies?

Was it the everly brothers or one of those bands?

Is always wondered about that

Release_Me wrote:

dimejinky99 wrote:Something I've always wondered about. (In relation to SBM mostly)

Where in history did it begin that songs had really sad lyrics or were about heartbreak, and yet come with really happy melodies?

Was it the everly brothers or one of those bands?

Is always wondered about that

I don't know history that well but Elvis Costello kind of perfected it.

Thejambi wrote:The review was pretty good overall. I think he missed the mark on the lyrical content though.

Birds in Hell wrote:This bit was good too:

And “My Father’s Son” is the rare latter-day Pearl Jam rave-up to put the spotlight on bassist Jeff Ament, whose sense of groove—once the cornerstone of the band’s sound—has been deemphasized by band’s ever-growing propensity for straight-ahead, chug-a-lug rockers.

E.H. Ruddock wrote:This may have been brought up already, but this is a pic from the uke songs promo. See the name on the paddleboard?

Ugh, you guys probably already pointed it out on page 10 of that speculation thread.

stip wrote:

Lament wrote:I Am Mine, Light Years, Love Boat Captain, Cropduster, Insignificance, & Grievance all have good to great choruses. Choruses I would take over anything on S/T or Backspacer (and time will tell if Lightning Bolt can be added to that). Choruses that provide emotional climaxes and releases that I look forward to with every listen. Choruses that stick with me without being cloying or overwrought, ones that stay impactful on repeated listens over years & years.

Sonic torture...

Light years is one of my textbook cases of how to suck the emotional weight out of a song. Probably because of the chorus. Cropduster is a good chorus in a song I have no emotional attachment to.

Those other 3 are great, even though I agree with release_me that those two records are unnecessarily ponderous

McParadigm wrote:Guys, are you sure the shaker is loud enough in the chorus of LB?

Fuck.

Thejambi wrote:What did the exclusive digital content end up being?

Blenheim Augustine wrote:

Thejambi wrote:What did the exclusive digital content end up being?

harmless wrote:

Release_Me wrote:

theplatypus wrote:

Release_Me wrote:One thing I never understand is people's hate for Pearl Jam's best choruses. A chorus is the part of the song which is supposed to be most melodic. Something that get's imprinted into the listener's head. You don't cram the most difficult words into a chorus or try to make it musically 'complex'. When you do, you end up with forgettable songs.

I suppose some people hate Pearl Jam's "best choruses" because they don't think they're Pearl Jam's best choruses. I love a good pop chorus, but I don't think Pearl Jam are particularly good pop songwriters. Save for a few notable exceptions ("Betterman" being the first one that comes to mind), I think their most outright pop songs fall flat. "Infallible" is a song with a very ordinary chorus melody. It's not about darkness or complexity. It's just kind of hackneyed.

Furthermore, why do you approach songs like TV adverts? A chorus isn't a sales pitch. It doesn't have to be the most melodic part of a song, it just often is. Shooting for earworm usually results in lightweight dreck, and that's not what interests me about Pearl Jam. Their strengths are elsewhere.

I think they are great songwriters and the albums I love all have great pop songwriting. Like this one. I am not a fan of when they stepped away from this and tried to be 'difficult'. I love Infallible. It's in my top ten ever PJ songs so I just disagree with your assessment. A chorus isn't a sales pitch if it's melodic. It's just good. I don't like sonic torture ala Binaural and Riot Act. Good songwriting for me is all about the melodies. PJ's strengths are their marrying of great melodies with non-pop themes and Ed's vocals. LB has this and that's why I feel it's a great PJ album.

My biggest problem with "Infallible" at this point is not the chorus, but the part where the chorus fizzles out and you just have Ed going yeah yeah yeah over it. The song is two slow, the rhythm too sluggish, to yeah yeah yeah; there's too much space left. I feel as if they need another chorus, almost like the "Ben, the two of us..." refrain of Rats. At this point the song is good, but not great, because that chorus isn't quite getting up there with the rest of the song.