Red Mosquito

verb_to_trust wrote:Aging gracefully was always an option for these guys. Its why guys like Neil Young felt a bond with them in the first place. Unfortunately, that didn't pan out...

I'd love to know what people who have 'aged gracefully' like Neil young think of pj?

Tj wrote:Ed= 93-2000 same Ed
Ed=2000-2006 major shift and we know why. Alot of youthfulness is gone. Major maturity gains.
Ed= Today he different as well appears to be in a personal calm place at peace in ways
Pearl Jam reach a pinnacle in 2000 as a studio band and as a live band.(inmo)
After 2000 they did a commendable job soldiering on, and still do really. Now it is very evident that are very rich 50 year old men. They are what they once railed agaist.
So while some don't like Ed's lyrics in the last few years, half a decade really . I think they fit and are fine they are just measure where he is at. Just Breathe, Santa Cruz or the social issue lyrics and the pot induced stuff Severed Hand, Unthought Known thats where the focus is best. I hope he stays away from writing stuff like Daughter, Why Go, Deep, Sad, Betterman, Off he Goes, and sticks with the crap that we all complain about.

They were millionaires long before they were 50

True to themselves, because they aren't writing songs like Leash and Whipping anymore. just examples
What they rallied agaist. I can not afford to go see Pj in there home state. I could pay 40-60 but not current prices. They could play alot of places in the Western Washington for 50 dollars a head
playing of Obama

stip wrote:

Tj wrote:Ed= 93-2000 same Ed
Ed=2000-2006 major shift and we know why. Alot of youthfulness is gone. Major maturity gains.
Ed= Today he different as well appears to be in a personal calm place at peace in ways
Pearl Jam reach a pinnacle in 2000 as a studio band and as a live band.(inmo)
After 2000 they did a commendable job soldiering on, and still do really. Now it is very evident that are very rich 50 year old men. They are what they once railed agaist.
So while some don't like Ed's lyrics in the last few years, half a decade really . I think they fit and are fine they are just measure where he is at. Just Breathe, Santa Cruz or the social issue lyrics and the pot induced stuff Severed Hand, Unthought Known thats where the focus is best. I hope he stays away from writing stuff like Daughter, Why Go, Deep, Sad, Betterman, Off he Goes, and sticks with the crap that we all complain about.

They were millionaires long before they were 50

This is True I just think as we get older and in a better place we forget what it is like to be the guy that identified with Not For You as well as the guy that wrote it. and having alot of money compounds the problem. The cool thing is Ed was working poor for alot of his early adult life. Compared to someone like Steve Winwood that made it out of the gate gotrich and never looked back.

Tj wrote:True to themselves, because they aren't writing songs like Leash and Whipping anymore. just examples
What they rallied agaist. I can not afford to go see Pj in there home state. I could pay 40-60 but not current prices. They could play alot of places in the Western Washington for 50 dollars a head
playing of Obama

Fair points, can't disagree on those. If by 'playing of Obama' you mean not calling him out on his shit, that is. I really hope theres at least a hint of that on the new album.

Though whipping is a good song ! Even today. And I find some of the lyrics on backspacer (looking at you got some/supersonic) just as cringe worthy as the lyrics on leash, but I've never liked leash so.

Should have read Playing for Obama
They will never call him out they are now jokers and jesters for the libs. If they did I would party like it was 1991. As far as whipping and leash it is not about the song it is about the topics. Got some fits where they are now.

stip wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:Aging gracefully was always an option for these guys. Its why guys like Neil Young felt a bond with them in the first place. Unfortunately, that didn't pan out...

I'd love to know what people who have 'aged gracefully' like Neil young think of pj?

Well, I doubt he listens to Backspacer, for starters.

Where is that Bono quote about being frustrated by the band choosing to suck?

stip wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:Aging gracefully was always an option for these guys. Its why guys like Neil Young felt a bond with them in the first place. Unfortunately, that didn't pan out...

I'd love to know what people who have 'aged gracefully' like Neil young think of pj?

Guys who made some of their most daring, creatively sparked, or challenging records well into what typically represents artistic menopause?

I'm sure they're just super impressed.

stip wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:Aging gracefully was always an option for these guys. Its why guys like Neil Young felt a bond with them in the first place. Unfortunately, that didn't pan out...

I'd love to know what people who have 'aged gracefully' like Neil young think of pj?

I'm a huge fan of a ton of Neil's catalog, but he had some crap in there during the same stage of his career that PJ is in. As did several other artists that found renewed greatness as they got older: Dylan, Springsteen, Plant, to name a few.

I just don't see Neil as self conscious about his music in the way Pearl Jam has become. If Neil has sucked, he has sucked doing exactly what satisfies him as an artist. At this point, Pearl Jam seem to be a collective group of 5 individuals, each of whom are allowed a slice of contribution towards the overall musical product that's purpose at this point is seemingly to drive the brand and pander to the demo who will line up and turn out for their concerts. No member of the band really seems to get off on the product they are putting out musically with the exception of maybe Ed. Do we really think whatever band member gets stuck with 2 writing credits on LIIIGHGHHNING BOOWWLT! is going to feel vested or satisfied as an artist? It would be really interesting to hear individually what album each member of the band probably feels nothing or very little for. I guess the big difference with Neil to me is he has never had to put out an album he wasn't totally invested in as an artist. Harvest didn't have 3 NY song writing credits, he wrote the whole damn thing.

I'm increasingly worried that what we have here is 5 individuals posturing in order to keep the machine rolling. They get together every 4 years or so to force out an album and get together and sleepwalk through unrehearsed, sped up versions of their back catalog on tour (but only in easy and convenient cities)

Or maybe i'm just trolling. We'll find out in a few months.

verb_to_trust wrote:I just don't see Neil as self conscious about his music in the way Pearl Jam has become. If Neil has sucked, he has sucked doing exactly what satisfies him as an artist. At this point, Pearl Jam seem to be a collective group of 5 individuals, each of whom are allowed a slice of contribution towards the overall musical product that's purpose at this point is seemingly to drive the brand and pander to the demo who will line up and turn out for their concerts. No member of the band really seems to get off on the product they are putting out musically with the exception of maybe Ed. Do we really think whatever band member gets stuck with 2 writing credits on LIIIGHGHHNING BOOWWLT! is going to feel vested or satisfied as an artist? It would be really interesting to hear individually what album each member of the band probably feels nothing or very little for. I guess the big difference with Neil to me is he has never had to put out an album he wasn't totally invested in as an artist. Harvest didn't have 3 NY song writing credits, he wrote the whole damn thing.

I'm increasingly worried that what we have here is 5 individuals posturing in order to keep the machine rolling. They get together every 4 years or so to force out an album and get together and sleepwalk through unrehearsed, sped up versions of their back catalog on tour (but only in easy and convenient cities)

Or maybe i'm just trolling. We'll find out in a few months.

eddie and the pearl jams

stip wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:Aging gracefully was always an option for these guys. Its why guys like Neil Young felt a bond with them in the first place. Unfortunately, that didn't pan out...

I'd love to know what people who have 'aged gracefully' like Neil young think of pj?

Neil cited Pearl Jam in his recent memoir (2012) as a modern (meaning, I assume, from a generation that succeeded his own) band who he has great respect for.

That said, I do remember Chad Kroeger of Nickelback at one point having some not so nice words for how Pearl Jam have aged, but that may have been during their "weird" phase where they were doing their most un-Nickelback-like things.

Kevin Davis wrote:

stip wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:Aging gracefully was always an option for these guys. Its why guys like Neil Young felt a bond with them in the first place. Unfortunately, that didn't pan out...

I'd love to know what people who have 'aged gracefully' like Neil young think of pj?

Neil cited Pearl Jam in his recent memoir (2012) as a modern (meaning, I assume, from a generation that succeeded his own) band who he has great respect for.

That said, I do remember Chad Kroeger of Nickelback at one point having some not so nice words for how Pearl Jam have aged, but that may have been during their "weird" phase where they were doing their most un-Nickelback-like things.

The day Chad Kroeger approves of Pearl Jam is when we know it really is the end.

VinylGuy wrote:Grievance flawed? WTF?

Yeah WTF indeed. One of the best tunes on Binaural. They played that on Letterman like a month before the album came out if I recall. I actually was slightly disappointed with how the album version turned out. The Late Show version just sounded more lively.

harmless wrote:One 'stream' of Ed's writing that he still does well, I think, is the political / social.

I thought this writing was quite awful on s/t (like everything else, mind you). Something about being too wordy and trying too hard.

Kevin Davis wrote:

stip wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:Aging gracefully was always an option for these guys. Its why guys like Neil Young felt a bond with them in the first place. Unfortunately, that didn't pan out...

I'd love to know what people who have 'aged gracefully' like Neil young think of pj?

Neil cited Pearl Jam in his recent memoir (2012) as a modern (meaning, I assume, from a generation that succeeded his own) band who he has great respect for.

That said, I do remember Chad Kroeger of Nickelback at one point having some not so nice words for how Pearl Jam have aged, but that may have been during their "weird" phase where they were doing their most un-Nickelback-like things.

Is Neil the kind of guy who would air it out to the public if he thought Pearl Jam had become lame though? I couldn't see him blasting another artist like that (the way Ed has blasted countless artists over the years).

What's odd is I can't really think of any band who's career has even remotely paralleled Pearl Jam's up to this point. They've had one of the more bizarre career trajectories of anyone, ever.

Lament wrote:Is Neil the kind of guy who would air it out to the public if he thought Pearl Jam had become lame though? I couldn't see him blasting another artist like that (the way Ed has blasted countless artists over the years).

Maybe not, but I also don't think he's the kind of guy who'd go out of his way to say it if he didn't mean it.

I don't know, they've put out a few albums that are below their standard, but overall I don't think where they are in their career right now is fundamentally really that absurd. Their best work is behind them and they're making a career out of touring on the strength of it, putting out an album more or less whenever they feel like it. It's not my favorite place to find an artist I love but they certainly don't stand out as unique for being where they are in their career. Leonard Cohen is pretty much doing the exact same thing.

Kevin Davis wrote:I don't know, they've put out a few albums that are below their standard, but overall I don't think where they are in their career right now is fundamentally really that absurd. Their best work is behind them and they're making a career out of touring on the strength of it, putting out an album more or less whenever they feel like it. It's not my favorite place to find an artist I love but they certainly don't stand out as unique for being where they are in their career. Leonard Cohen is pretty much doing the exact same thing.

I don't think the point they're at is absurd, and I would actually say it's pretty par for the course. It's just how they're got there. I mean, they peaked commercially with their first record and more or less declined in sales with each passing record into their second decade as a band, only to then experience a cultural revival on the strength of the passion displayed by those who had followed them through the odder artistic choices, at which point they then seemed to alienate said fans with artistic choices that would appear on some level to be geared towards the very fans they spent so long "weeding out." And at the end of all it, they've found themselves on the brink of being unquestioned members of rock's grand pantheon. It's all very bizarre to me.

They were alienating me somewhat with their 'artistic choices' from No Code-Riot Act. I stuck by them through these albums only because it was Pearl Jam. S/T and onwards are albums I can actually like rather than just appreciate. Goes to show their career path is different depending on how you perceive the middle period. Not everyone will see it the same way. I definitely don't see the latter period as an attempt to gain back the fans they had weeded out. I just see it as them making more direct and to me, better music. The latter albums really have little in common with what brought them their earlier successes.