Red Mosquito

warehouse wrote:and doing drugs?

Lounge Lizard wrote:

warehouse wrote:and doing drugs?

Errr.. no.
Why

harmless wrote:

dimejinky99 wrote:

Strat wrote:

dimejinky99 wrote:

Strat wrote:Matt needs at least 3-4 songs on each PJ album.

Matts songs.. I dunno. A lot of them sort of stick out like sore thumbs on Pj records.
For good and bad reasons.

They do, but they also keep the albums much more interesting than they would be without them. In the studio, PJ is much better with those songs then they are with their standard issue 4/4 punk rock songs. or, rather, they are much better players when they are playing around matts strengths.

It has often been pointed out that Pj don't really have the chops to meet matts writing and play to his ability.
I think I'm falling into that camp.

It's a stylistic mismatch, for sure, but I don't put anyone's skillset above anyone else's necessarily. If Matt was 'too good' for PJ, he would sound fucking good when he played with PJ. Someone 'too good' doesn't make a band sound less good. I think it's more likely to be that he's less inspired by PJ's songs to make the effort. It's a subconscious thing; if you're not incredibly excited about a song, you'll merely 'do the job', not go beyond it. There's plenty of songs in the Matt era which you can tell he is / was excited about, and most of them are on Binaural or Riot Act.

Tuolumne wrote:

harmless wrote:Low Light II please. K thnx.

I'm not trying to pick a fight here, but your whole tone for anticipating the album is "I want this" and "something that sounds like this song would be great". You sound like someone operating a jukebox. They made the record they made and they wanted to make. Judge it on the artist's intent and not on what you want as if your ordering from a menu, and you may find yourself enjoying the ride more rather than getting annoyed. I'm trying to say this from a respectful standpoint. I generally take the artist side on these sorts of things and I think it makes a better listening experience if you go along for the ride (not succumbing to everything the band plays, you don't have to like everything I'm just saying you can go into this with a clean slate).

Strat wrote:

harmless wrote:

dimejinky99 wrote:

Strat wrote:

dimejinky99 wrote:

Strat wrote:Matt needs at least 3-4 songs on each PJ album.

Matts songs.. I dunno. A lot of them sort of stick out like sore thumbs on Pj records.
For good and bad reasons.

They do, but they also keep the albums much more interesting than they would be without them. In the studio, PJ is much better with those songs then they are with their standard issue 4/4 punk rock songs. or, rather, they are much better players when they are playing around matts strengths.

It has often been pointed out that Pj don't really have the chops to meet matts writing and play to his ability.
I think I'm falling into that camp.

It's a stylistic mismatch, for sure, but I don't put anyone's skillset above anyone else's necessarily. If Matt was 'too good' for PJ, he would sound fucking good when he played with PJ. Someone 'too good' doesn't make a band sound less good. I think it's more likely to be that he's less inspired by PJ's songs to make the effort. It's a subconscious thing; if you're not incredibly excited about a song, you'll merely 'do the job', not go beyond it. There's plenty of songs in the Matt era which you can tell he is / was excited about, and most of them are on Binaural or Riot Act.

You dont like matts drumming so you are projecting that matt is bored and only there to "do the job"

Lounge Lizard wrote:

Dr. Van Nostrand wrote:i want one of those passes

I want a google translated Dutch review

digster wrote:I think Matt wrote two of the best songs from the past two records; I know that no one member has really been hitting it out of the park recently, but that's something.

harmless wrote:

broken iris wrote:

harmless wrote:

broken iris wrote:

harmless wrote:

broken iris wrote:This thread has become like an ungrad sociology project where we come up with some ridiculous theory (eclectic concept album with minimalist art!) and try to mold our observations to fit it, instead of the other way around. Are we really gonna judge a record we haven't heard yet by whether or not a bunch of Germans had a gas while listening or whether they needed a shower afterwards? Maybe the room really was to noisy for them to even concentrate on it! We should not put the album on trial until we hear for it ourselves and not just blindly follow the words of others.

This post makes no sense. You're acting as if we're all being negative. We're not. You can't stop mindless speculation from happening; we're just talking about possible scenarios based on song descriptions, nothing more. I don't know what else we could be doing other than to stop talking and close the forum for the next month.

I did not see that response coming.

It probably sounded heavier than I meant it to, but yeah, I just think the conversation here might be lengthy and ridiculously detailed about something we know nothing about. But it doesn't mean anything other than that we're sad.

I just don't think a German listening party should raise a furor when nine, nine of the twelve songs could be better than Backspacer. Let's not build a wall in our brains that prevents us form fairly evaluating Lightning Bolt.

But I don't get why you're saying this. Not many of us are evaluating it negatively, and certainly not me. We are wondering what certain things that have been said mean; it could be this, it could be that. Nobody is unfairly writing this album off, or any of its songs. I'm pretty much convinced that nine of the songs could be at least more interesting than Backspacer, possibly eleven. Even if I don't end up loving them all on a long-term basis, I think this album will reward repeated attempts to appreciate it. That's my opinion, and more or less speculation doesn't make it more or less hopeful or positive.

Lounge Lizard wrote:

Blenheim Augustine wrote:

broken iris wrote:Are we really gonna judge a record we haven't heard yet by whether or not a bunch of Germans had a gas while listening or whether they needed a shower afterwards?

Germans, gas and showers in the same sentence. Was that coincidental?

real fishy

Lounge Lizard wrote:

digster wrote:I think Matt wrote two of the best songs from the past two records; I know that no one member has really been hitting it out of the park recently, but that's something.

Unemployed and ..?

digster wrote:

Lounge Lizard wrote:

digster wrote:I think Matt wrote two of the best songs from the past two records; I know that no one member has really been hitting it out of the park recently, but that's something.

Unemployed and ..?

Johnny Guitar

Strat wrote:

harmless wrote:

dimejinky99 wrote:

Strat wrote:

dimejinky99 wrote:

Strat wrote:Matt needs at least 3-4 songs on each PJ album.

Matts songs.. I dunno. A lot of them sort of stick out like sore thumbs on Pj records.
For good and bad reasons.

They do, but they also keep the albums much more interesting than they would be without them. In the studio, PJ is much better with those songs then they are with their standard issue 4/4 punk rock songs. or, rather, they are much better players when they are playing around matts strengths.

It has often been pointed out that Pj don't really have the chops to meet matts writing and play to his ability.
I think I'm falling into that camp.

It's a stylistic mismatch, for sure, but I don't put anyone's skillset above anyone else's necessarily. If Matt was 'too good' for PJ, he would sound fucking good when he played with PJ. Someone 'too good' doesn't make a band sound less good. I think it's more likely to be that he's less inspired by PJ's songs to make the effort. It's a subconscious thing; if you're not incredibly excited about a song, you'll merely 'do the job', not go beyond it. There's plenty of songs in the Matt era which you can tell he is / was excited about, and most of them are on Binaural or Riot Act.

You dont like matts drumming so you are projecting that matt is bored and only there to "do the job"

harmless wrote:Why is it that everyone is allowed to criticise everything here but when I criticise Matt it's like I've pissed in the sacred fountain?

harmless wrote:Why is it that everyone is allowed to criticise everything here but when I criticise Matt it's like I've pissed in the sacred fountain?

KurtLeon wrote:If enyone got the Listen Party leak, PM me please