Red Mosquito

I'm also on the not impressed so far list, even though I like each of the individual elements well enough

Coach wrote:I think a shortened version of OTE would work better in studio and a "slow lukin" live version would be interesting. But for whatever reason, I can't make it through the entire song either.

It spends way too much time meandering around (during the middle section) without ever finding a new or interesting space to go, and then it just jumps back to where it left off in the first place. That said, I generally like OTE. As it is I like it better than pretty much all of Backspacer. It just needs to be shortened by a minute or two or it needs to be reworked with some new elements. But really, who cares? It's not going to be on a new album anyways.

I appreciate the ambition of it, but I think I may like the idea of the song more than the song itself, if that makes any sense.

You know when new Pearl Jam music comes out and you're like "shit this really sucks..."? This song is another example of that.

dull is the perfect adjective for OTE. the execution isn't there, even though it has superficial aspects of a classic pearl jam song, which is why it's only briefly listenable before becoming tedious.

spike wrote:dull is the perfect adjective for OTE. the execution isn't there, even though it has superficial aspects of a classic pearl jam song, which is why it's only briefly listenable before becoming tedious.

who originally said that, spike?

E.H. Ruddock wrote:

spike wrote:dull is the perfect adjective for OTE. the execution isn't there, even though it has superficial aspects of a classic pearl jam song, which is why it's only briefly listenable before becoming tedious.

who originally said that, spike?

i'm just elaborating on/agreeing with what mcp said

spike wrote:

E.H. Ruddock wrote:

spike wrote:dull is the perfect adjective for OTE. the execution isn't there, even though it has superficial aspects of a classic pearl jam song, which is why it's only briefly listenable before becoming tedious.

who originally said that, spike?

i'm just elaborating on/agreeing with what mcp said

spike wrote:

E.H. Ruddock wrote:

spike wrote:dull is the perfect adjective for OTE. the execution isn't there, even though it has superficial aspects of a classic pearl jam song, which is why it's only briefly listenable before becoming tedious.

who originally said that, spike?

i'm just elaborating on/agreeing with what mcp said

oh. I fell like I've read that before but you are a man who is wise with your words so maybe not. Well done.

E.H. Ruddock wrote:

spike wrote:

E.H. Ruddock wrote:

spike wrote:dull is the perfect adjective for OTE. the execution isn't there, even though it has superficial aspects of a classic pearl jam song, which is why it's only briefly listenable before becoming tedious.

who originally said that, spike?

i'm just elaborating on/agreeing with what mcp said

oh. I fell like I've read that before but you are a man who is wise with your words so maybe not. Well done.

i was also attempting a kevin davis impression.

I like "Of the Earth." It's certainly a plodding song, but I think that's kind of the point, and I think it works to the song's benefit. From the few versions I've heard, it could stand to be tightened up a bit, and I'm not fond of Eddie's "ee-hee" vocal thing near the end, but the rest of it is more enjoyable than the majority of their PRAMG material. Probably a lot of my enjoyment of the song comes from the fact that I tend to like music that is on the longer side with unusual structuring and a bit of meandering can be a good thing.

You're alright, Brett.

I love meandering tunes but OTE does not do it for me. I find the drums limp and it bored me when I saw it. The middle jam is okay but I went for a beer.

Even the title sounds like a big fat dinosaur step of a reason for The Ramones to exist.

I love the outro

Strat wrote:I love the outro

If the outro is the best part of the song they are doing it wrong.

PHATJ wrote:

Coach wrote:I think a shortened version of OTE would work better in studio and a "slow lukin" live version would be interesting. But for whatever reason, I can't make it through the entire song either.

It spends way too much time meandering around (during the middle section) without ever finding a new or interesting space to go, and then it just jumps back to where it left off in the first place. That said, I generally like OTE. As it is I like it better than pretty much all of Backspacer. It just needs to be shortened by a minute or two or it needs to be reworked with some new elements. But really, who cares? It's not going to be on a new album anyways.

I agree. Tighten up the meandering middle and maybe even speed the song up a bit. And you're right, it's not on a new album so overly killing it really isn't fair to the band. It's just a tune they break out every once in awhile on tour. I actually wish they'd do more of that....doing more of that in the sense of creating new songs just to make the boots worth it.

E.H. Ruddock wrote:

Strat wrote:I love the outro

If the outro is the best part of the song they are doing it wrong.

I bet there's a lot of pearl jam songs where the best part is the outro

stip wrote:

E.H. Ruddock wrote:

Strat wrote:I love the outro

If the outro is the best part of the song they are doing it wrong.

I bet there's a lot of pearl jam songs where the best part is the outro

Why don't you start a thread about it

E.H. Ruddock wrote:

stip wrote:

E.H. Ruddock wrote:

Strat wrote:I love the outro

If the outro is the best part of the song they are doing it wrong.

I bet there's a lot of pearl jam songs where the best part is the outro

Why don't you start a thread about it