Red Mosquito

I think the idea that there are no objective standards to one's enjoyment of music is equally silly.

I'm completely objective.

I think you can say a lot of objective things about individual musicians' physical skill, and can make large scale objective comments about different styles of music (i.e. jazz is objectively different from punk rock), but overall I'm not sure what you're getting at.

Kevin Davis wrote:I think you can say a lot of objective things about individual musicians' physical skill, and can make large scale objective comments about different styles of music (i.e. jazz is objectively different from punk rock), but overall I'm not sure what you're getting at.

Matt Cameron objectively sucks is what he's getting at

Its all about context, my friends.

And, carrying around the artwork to show others (should you need to) that the album title is OK.

Heathen wrote:

Kevin Davis wrote:I think you can say a lot of objective things about individual musicians' physical skill, and can make large scale objective comments about different styles of music (i.e. jazz is objectively different from punk rock), but overall I'm not sure what you're getting at.

Matt Cameron objectively sucks is what he's getting at

Not sucks. But he's not the Rock God some call him. That's objective. And that leads me towards an enjoyment of Pearl Jam which is slightly tempered compared with my enjoyment of Pearl Jam ft. Dave A. or even Jack Irons (who I wasn't a huge fan of either). So, my enjoyment of Matt is subjective, but it's based on an objective fact. IMHO.

harmless wrote:

Heathen wrote:

Kevin Davis wrote:I think you can say a lot of objective things about individual musicians' physical skill, and can make large scale objective comments about different styles of music (i.e. jazz is objectively different from punk rock), but overall I'm not sure what you're getting at.

Matt Cameron objectively sucks is what he's getting at

Not sucks. But he's not the Rock God some call him. That's objective. And that leads me towards an enjoyment of Pearl Jam which is slightly tempered compared with my enjoyment of Pearl Jam ft. Dave A. or even Jack Irons (who I wasn't a huge fan of either). So, my enjoyment of Matt is subjective, but it's based on an objective fact. IMHO.

But what if he is indeed the Rock God?

harmless wrote:

Heathen wrote:

Kevin Davis wrote:I think you can say a lot of objective things about individual musicians' physical skill, and can make large scale objective comments about different styles of music (i.e. jazz is objectively different from punk rock), but overall I'm not sure what you're getting at.

Matt Cameron objectively sucks is what he's getting at

Not sucks. But he's not the Rock God some call him. That's objective. And that leads me towards an enjoyment of Pearl Jam which is slightly tempered compared with my enjoyment of Pearl Jam ft. Dave A. or even Jack Irons (who I wasn't a huge fan of either). So, my enjoyment of Matt is subjective, but it's based on an objective fact. IMHO.

Thejambi wrote:

harmless wrote:

Heathen wrote:

Kevin Davis wrote:I think you can say a lot of objective things about individual musicians' physical skill, and can make large scale objective comments about different styles of music (i.e. jazz is objectively different from punk rock), but overall I'm not sure what you're getting at.

Matt Cameron objectively sucks is what he's getting at

Not sucks. But he's not the Rock God some call him. That's objective. And that leads me towards an enjoyment of Pearl Jam which is slightly tempered compared with my enjoyment of Pearl Jam ft. Dave A. or even Jack Irons (who I wasn't a huge fan of either). So, my enjoyment of Matt is subjective, but it's based on an objective fact. IMHO.

dimejinky99 wrote:Well this explains a lot

So PJ went from fighting corporations, to using them for exclusive album distribution, to naming their albums after them.

darthvedder81 wrote:

dimejinky99 wrote:Well this explains a lot

So PJ went from fighting corporations, to using them for exclusive album distribution, to naming their albums after them.

Logical extensions.

darthvedder81 wrote:

dimejinky99 wrote:Well this explains a lot

So PJ went from fighting corporations, to using them for exclusive album distribution, to naming their albums after them.

It's looking that way.

stupidmop wrote:

darthvedder81 wrote:

dimejinky99 wrote:Well this explains a lot

So PJ went from fighting corporations, to using them for exclusive album distribution, to naming their albums after them.

It's looking that way.

I kind of wish you hadn't made that connection, it's made me a bit down.

darthvedder81 wrote:

dimejinky99 wrote:Well this explains a lot

So PJ went from fighting corporations, to using them for exclusive album distribution, to naming their albums after them.

So what's the next move, RM? Are the band members going to rename themselves after brands?

I've basically got an unfortunate feeling.

Eddie Fender
NIKE McCready,
Jif Ament

Any more?

Heathen wrote:

darthvedder81 wrote:

dimejinky99 wrote:Well this explains a lot

So PJ went from fighting corporations, to using them for exclusive album distribution, to naming their albums after them.

So what's the next move, RM? Are the band members going to rename themselves after brands?

Stone "Kotex" Gossard

Stone has been wearing Gossard bras and lingerie for years

You guys didn't know?

I'm sure there's something else to it.

Quick! we need a rambling barely informative interview with ed.