Now, I'm not suggesting that it'd have been better if Pearl Jam didn't take Ticketmaster to court or stage their offensive against high ticket prices. These acts have become part of who they are. So this question is strictly in theory..

But what if they didn't even bother with that and toured as heavily in 94 as they do now? What if they were able to support No Code with a full tour as well? Would the album have done better commercially? Would the band be bigger than they are today? Or would it not have mattered?

i bet tickets would even be higher today. hard to imagine

I think if they didn't bring ticketmaster to court and have most of their fanbase slip, they wouldn't have such a big diehard fanbase. Not having a diehard fanbase would have definately hurt them, as beginning with parts of viatology and no code they really stopped creating music for the masses and more music for their artistic selves. I don't think they would have allowed themselves to sit back and ask what they want to make in music for themselves if it wasn't for the ticketmaster debacle. They would have released Vs. IV by now, and their fanbase probably would have been as turnsyle as Nickelbacks. Plus they would probably have never developed as intimate of a relationship with their fans at their shows. Just my .02

Actually, the way Pearl Jams career panned out thus far seems inverse to how all the nu-metal bands and pop-punk bands played out their careers in the past decade, from being highly acclaimed on their first few albums to becoming a 'popsicle shoved up somebodys asshole' by getting more mainstream with their sound. Pearl Jam started out acclaimed, but drifted into a more artistic sound instead of a more mainstream sound. This didn't hurt, as (most of) the hardcore fans from when they came out stayed with them, and they didnt get 'pop' and lose those diehard fans and then eventually lose the teeny bop TRL fans that they might have aquired.

But like anything, there was a lot leading up to the fiasco with Ticketmaster, and a lot that resulted from it. Any 'what if' thought is extreemly opinionated (just like this one).

I think I just said the same thing 20 different ways, so I need a beer.

It was who you are much more than ticketmaster that made all the difference. Remember that these were conscious choices. It's not like they thought Who You Are had top 5 single written all over it and they just misjudged.

Im not 100% sure about that...what other song do you think they should have picked from No Code? They tried later to fix things with Hail hail but didn't work.......

well part of the problem (in my view) is just that No Code is categorically worse than everything else they've done. Hail hail wasn't a good choice becuase it calls to mind older, better songs. If they wanted to highlight the experimental nature of No Code and sell records Present Tense or Smile would have been better. Both are more compelling songs that don't try and recall past glories. If they wanted a hard rocking opener go with Red Mosqutio. It's the best song on the album

hail hail is a great song and I do feel that Present Tense is a worst single than Who you are.

We agree that Red mosquito was kind of the obvius thing to do but they did not want to.

What I do know for sure is that if Pearl Jam continued to make music videos & choose the more obvious singles, they would still be the biggest band on earth. Even if all the music was the same. Everything is all about promotion & marketing.

I agree with stip that 'Smile' wouldve been a better choice than Who You Are or Hail, Hail... Red Mosquito also wouldve been a good choice.

Overall throughout their career, either intentionally or unintentionally.. Pearl Jam, commercially, have made some terrible choices & in 96 it bit them in the ass album-sale wise.

- Pearl Jam quit making commercial music videos
- They took Ticketmaster to court
- They refused to do nearly as much interviews around 96
- They rejected doing MTV unplugged in 98
- They've chosen bad choices as singles
- They walk a thin line between albums that are accessible & inaccessible

All of these are why PJ committed career suicide.. It's gonna take a long time for them to build up half the audience they used to have. I don't care either way

Smile probably would've been the best all-around choice for a single. It's got a very friendly title and the lyrics are accessible enough so as not to require any real esoteric knowledge. Mind you, the band probably thought along these same lines and chose not to make it a single for just these reasons. Still, food for thought.

Btw - does ANYONE know why they stopped doing MTV Unplugged? Those were so fun to watch and besides, it's not like you're making a video or advertising on MTV's channels. It's a live performance for dedicated fans. I wish they'd do it again.

It's got a friendly title? What the hell? What kind of difference does that make? lol, you're funny man

Think about it like this. We live in a time where top radio singles have names like "Dance, Dance." People have very short attention spans when it comes to music and pretty much everything else. I'm not sure how well Red Mozi would've caught on as good a song as it is.

I agree that "Who You Are" was not the best choice as a single.
I think it's a great song, just not a single.

I feel that another major reason "No Code" was not as successful was
becasue of the first song..."Sometimes".

The 3 prior albums had rockers as first songs and "Sometimes" would
never be known as a rocker. This confused a lot of fans on first listen.

I really think if "All Night" replaced "Sometimes" and "Hail, Hail" was the
first single, the album would have sold a lot more.

Still a great album.

I don't agree with Stip that No Code is worse than their other work but it's certainly less commerically accessible. I like a lot of it for what it is but there are very few songs on that record that could have been a hit single.

And I completely agree that it's because the band wanted it that way. I think they were tired of the media blitz and knew if they didn't pull back from it they were going to self destruct. So they went and did their own thing.

I'm thankful because I think if they hadn't pulled back the way they did they wouldn't be around playing for us today.

I don't think they pulled back because of the media blitz. The media could have been managed in just the way they did, basically by not doing any.
I think Pearl Jam and Eddie specifically couldn't stand the fan blitz. I think he felt he had to stand up and answer to all the pressure put on him by the fans. They were looking for answers from him when he didn't have any. Just look at his lyrics, definitely no answers to be found. Eddie didn't know how to respond to fan expectations, especially as the band got bigger. SO he felt his only choice was to completely and consciously destroy any and all expectations anyone could have of him or the band.

absolutely right. i shouldn't have specified media. at that point the fans were the bigger problem for him.

i honestly believe if they hadnt had that break in 94 that they would have broken up.

It's too bad that he couldn't have done it in a more musically accessible way. Like Pete Townsend did with Baba O'Riley's "there all wasted" line. After all the pressure to follow up on Tommy and be a rock and roll messiah and offer people answers and direction Pete looked around and in three little words destroyed any expectations he had of the fans.

What about the hit piece Rolling Stone published in the Fall of 1996. That was pretty brutal. IIRC, it painted Vedder as a fraud.

No Code=Eddie's tired of the attention.
Just my opinion. That's why they picked that single.
The other band members amy have been tired of the attention, but I think it was mostly eddie.

Great album anyway. Their 2nd best.

if it wasnt for all this stuff, they probably would have broken up.....