Post subject: What's the relationship between Ed and Stone?
Posted: Thu Mar 12, 2009 2:23 am
Force of Nature
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2005 11:18 pm Posts: 351
This is a musical question. I've found some of my favorite songs, bands, or albums to be a result of some creative friction. PJ definitely has it, but not necessarily has depended on it. Ten was a great example of Ed following Stone's template of classic rock and adding his punk energy and vocal strength to it. There's something there about Ed the new guy being forced to go against some of his natural tendencies when he is faced with some very un-punk classic rock riffs. It takes the band to a cool place - not quite classic rock, but not punk either that makes for a good example of successful creative friction. The band's mistakes are sometimes the result of them avoiding each other or being too nice or non-confrontational too. I can think of some examples (Binaural tracklisting, subpar songs like God's Dice).
Now, some of my favorite stuff from PJ took different approaches (Vitalogy was pure uncompromising Ed at his best and most passionate, or Yield and s/t where the band successfully took the better inclincations of different members of the band). But what has been missing for some time is the creative friction between Ed and Stone. Where has it gone and is it ever going to come back? A band is often a result of their off-stage relationships, some of the most cohesive "band" bands are best friends/relatives or people that go back to childhood and the chemistry reflects in the music (80's U2, Ramones, Kings of Leon, Strokes) or they are creative personalities of very different people who absolutely hated each other (Jane's Addiction, RATM, Stone Roses, Ramones again). Or they are bands formed later in life that make it work really well because they have an ultra- frontman and really good band backing them (My Morning Jakcet and Pearl Jam).
Judging from watching the PJ on stage over many years and reading numerous interviews, I sense a distance between them that I relate the distance in their creative work. From stage body language and comments, what I've picked up is: -Ed and Mike have developed a really cool bond because of their intense devotion to the live shows - it goes all the way back to the early days where they feed off of each other live. Also, they appear to hang out together off stage and look to be genuine friends even though they come from different musical universes. -Ed and Jeff aren't quite as close but are on the same page with each other because of their old-punk preferences. The choices of opening band seem to be theirs and I would guess they do not hang out alot off stage but do so only when convenient. -Everyone seems to like Matt equally and defer and respect him b/c of his past. I see every member of the band hanging out w/ him. -Stone goes back forever w/ Jeff, has a guitar-buddy in Mike, and another old friend in Matt. I can see him hanging out with all of them.
But Ed? I can hardly see them in the same room with each other. I do not see much interactio b/t them on stage. How often does Ed go over or even look right at Stone? I sense great respect from Stone towards Ed on a musical level, but not much else. And Stone seems the only one who could, or used to, put Ed in his place and shut him down when needed. But has this happened anytime recently? Ed first picking up the guitar must have been a big ego hit for the primary riff-master in the band. This is all a discussion on the music, cause these things matter alot when it comes to music and creating something together.
Does any of this ring true? Do any of you see example of how the band members' relationship effects the songs and albums? Can they make it work like that again? Am I totally off track?
Post subject: Re: What's the relationship between Ed and Stone?
Posted: Thu Mar 12, 2009 9:05 am
Master of Meh
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 11:00 pm Posts: 13226 Location: Adelaide, AUS
I don't think you're imagining the tension between Ed and Stone, it's readily apparent. There's certainly a respect there but I can't imagine them having any kind of personal relationship whatsoever, they come across as wildly different people with very different outlooks on music (not to mention life outside of music).
Ed basically rode into town and took over Stone's band, even supplanting his position as rhythm guitarist in the band; that must have been a huge blow to Stone's ego.
I think Stone will leave the band one day and that will be the end, to be honest I'm surprised it hasn't already happened. I can't blame him, to be honest.
Post subject: Re: What's the relationship between Ed and Stone?
Posted: Thu Mar 12, 2009 9:43 am
Force of Nature
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 10:19 am Posts: 746 Location: the Netherlands
Interesting discussion! I think it has a lot to do with Stone. The Stone we see now is a different Stone than some years ago. He wrote most of the riffs in Green River, formed his dreamband with Mother Love Bone. Scored a major label contract with that band, he was a man on a mission writing most of the music. With TEN he was still on a mission, when you look at early club shows it is Stone who's in charge. Taking the lead in improvisations, looking condident. But then PJ went to greater highs then he ever had hoped for. Mission accomplished! And seeing Ed grow as a band leader and songwriter he found a new mission. Being a good songwriter for this band. I think this man is very talented and is indeed the riffmeister, STBC, Hailhail, DTE, Life Wasted are all simple stoney riffs. I think he has a buttom to push and great riffs will randomly come out. But where he used to be the one that picked riffs, now it's probably the band (or Ed). His classic rock roots evolved into more punk style songs (or Who like). He's following a wave, trying to catch the same wave as eddie. Maybe this all is a bit vague, but let me illustrate it with this:
If I'm correct the second track is an instrumental written by Stone, amazing melodies and harmonies. Rooted in classic rock but with his own distinctive sound over it. Those riffs never made it into a real song. So I agree with you, more friction between Stone and Ed could have made this into a real song. And who knows I could have been an amazing track.
I have a strong feeling that some of this friction could come back in the next record. This is probably based on two qoutes I've read in recent articles
Quote:
After laying down some instrumental beds last summer, additional demos were put to tape in December, and the band's non-singing members formulated another batch of material during a recent trip to Montana
An approach they haven't done since Ten. And this one
Quote:
Ament: "We're gonna get together in October and have a handful of sessions. We have about five or six solid instrumental arrangements, and Stone Gossard has come up with some great riffs.
. Like I said, interesting....
_________________ ''ik hou van je, godverdomme'' Ed - tivoli 1992
Post subject: Re: What's the relationship between Ed and Stone?
Posted: Thu Mar 12, 2009 10:20 am
Yeah Yeah Yeah
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 6:14 pm Posts: 3213 Location: chicken shaped country in europe Gender: Male
Quote:
Q: Has Pearl Jam always been a democracy? Jeff: I dont know if its ever been a dictatorship. we started the band with the idea that it was gonna be a democracy but theres been times in the last 15 years where Ed has had to take the reins because we were about to go off a cliff. At those times where we werent sure WHAT we were doing, hes been great at being able to steer the ship right. He has no problem telling any of us that he needs help. Now were pretty good at calling one another and saying things like how do you feel about this? Id really love to take the reins on this project and work it through. It makes everyone feel a genuine part of the band. Pearl Jam is a real band. Stone: Im the luckiest guy in the world cos I get to be in a band and write songs in a band with 5 songwriters. I get to learn from everybodys process of how a song structures change and how different people hear different rhythms and different melodies and different sequences. Ed can relate to all these sorts of different things, he always steps outside and keeps exploring new places. I get to play with Matt Cameron, I get to play with Eddie Vedder, come on! And I get to strum along.
_________________ IMHO J/K Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
Post subject: Re: What's the relationship between Ed and Stone?
Posted: Thu Mar 12, 2009 11:00 am
Master of Meh
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 11:00 pm Posts: 13226 Location: Adelaide, AUS
spenno wrote:
Ed basically rode into town and took over Stone's band, even supplanting his position as rhythm guitarist in the band; that must have been a huge blow to Stone's ego.
Some quotes to illustrate my point:
Quote:
Having founded the band and written most of the first album by yourself, why was it necessary to share songwriting? "Even Flow," "Alive" and "Black" were pretty incredible compositions.
GOSSARD: If it had remained always my band, my natural tendency would have been to get more complex and arrange things more and more. That wouldn't necessarily be good for Eddie, or anyone else in the band. Of course, I enjoy being self-indulgent. And I look forward to the time when I can become more indulgent with my songwriting. But this band is a family, and it's a process that we have to grow with together.
Q: The demo tape was passed along to Eddie Vedder who had an epiphany on his surfboard. He quickly recorded three vocals over the backing tracks and posted it back to Seattle. What was your reaction to Eddies songs?
Stone: For Jeff it was instantaneous he loved it and a lot of people realised how good he was. For me it was a longer process. I was probably slow. He was clearly a good singer. I didnt necessarily get it. You can hear a song in your head but when somebody actually brings you back a finished vocal you can be like wow thats a different approach.
There's another quote I can't find where Stone talks about it being a really tough adjustment when Ed started writing more songs and playing more guitar, roughly saying he felt uncomfortable about losing what he thought was his position in the pecking order of the band.
If Stone quit, I can't see myself following anything else the band does (if they decide to stick together); likewise, I can't see myself following anything Ed does too closely if the band splits.
To be honest, I don't even expect anything in terms of new material from the band anymore as it is, I think that elusive magic that fueled the first few albums is gone for good - and that magic had a lot to do with the push-pull of the Stone/Ed relationship.
Post subject: Re: What's the relationship between Ed and Stone?
Posted: Thu Mar 12, 2009 1:45 pm
Yeah Yeah Yeah
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:57 pm Posts: 3332 Location: Chicago-ish
Interesting topic. I think the creative friction between them is important so that the collaboration gets the best sound.I think they were at their best in the first 3-4 albums. I don't know if the same synergy isn't there or if they're past their prime or what else is going on but the quality of music isn't at the same level - to be fair it's almost impossible to expect a band to continue to produce that quality though.
Maybe it is good that Eddie started doing more of the song writing (riffs/structures). Those 2 in that video were quite boring. I lover their more complicated structured songs, though, a la stone. I've been a music fan of that.
Is there a compiled and easily accessible list of who has written what songs? It'd be interesting to see who's done what, who's evolved and how.
Post subject: Re: What's the relationship between Ed and Stone?
Posted: Thu Mar 12, 2009 2:20 pm
Former PJ Drummer
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 11:00 am Posts: 16093 Location: dublin Gender: Male
I think that friction, moreso tension, is what gives Pj a lot of their magic, but live i just wish Stoney looked a little more interested? 'cos he doesn't most of the time at all..That being said, Pj is like a kind of family they re-visit each other every few years. If they got along a little better i'd imagine we'd see and hear a lot more from them but they have families&kids now so it won't happen like that.
Do wish Stone would come to the front a little more in the writing...though on the Binaural tour, Ed often put Thin Air on the setlist&said it was his favourite song on the record so you'd never know really.
Stone will never leave Pj..he's the member most likely to leave for sure but he never will.
_________________ At the end of the day, it's night.
Post subject: Re: What's the relationship between Ed and Stone?
Posted: Thu Mar 12, 2009 4:18 pm
Father Bitch
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 12:20 am Posts: 5198 Location: Connecticut Gender: Male
This band has been together so long. I really don't see Stone ever "quitting". I think they're so far into their career now, that when any one member decides he's had enough, they'll talk it over with the band, and Pearl Jam will retire.
Having said that, I think Pearl Jam will be around in some way or another for quite some time. You never know with them, they could release another 5 or 6 albums, but realistically they've probably got one or two more, maybe 3 if we're lucky. Especially considering the amount of time between albums now. I think their tours will probably get shorter and less frequent. Right now they do their own thing between Pearl Jam albums/tours. I think the future will have them concentrating on their individual projects, and PJ will be the "in between".
I've sometimes wondered about Ed's relationships with Jeff and Stone. Obviously there's a ton of respect in all directions, but it seems pretty obvious Jeff & Stone don't always get along with Eddie. But I think Pearl Jam as a whole realizes they've become something special and won't allow personal differences to get in the way of what could/will be quite a legacy. I really think that although this band doesn't want to be the biggest band in the world, they certainly do want to be remembered as one of the great bands of their time.
Post subject: Re: What's the relationship between Ed and Stone?
Posted: Thu Mar 12, 2009 4:32 pm
Yeah Yeah Yeah
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 6:14 pm Posts: 3213 Location: chicken shaped country in europe Gender: Male
Sandler wrote:
This band has been together so long. I really don't see Stone ever "quitting". I think they're so far into their career now, that when any one member decides he's had enough, they'll talk it over with the band, and Pearl Jam will retire.
Having said that, I think Pearl Jam will be around in some way or another for quite some time. You never know with them, they could release another 5 or 6 albums, but realistically they've probably got one or two more, maybe 3 if we're lucky. Especially considering the amount of time between albums now. I think their tours will probably get shorter and less frequent. Right now they do their own thing between Pearl Jam albums/tours. I think the future will have them concentrating on their individual projects, and PJ will be the "in between".
I've sometimes wondered about Ed's relationships with Jeff and Stone. Obviously there's a ton of respect in all directions, but it seems pretty obvious Jeff & Stone don't always get along with Eddie. But I think Pearl Jam as a whole realizes they've become something special and won't allow personal differences to get in the way of what could/will be quite a legacy. I really think that although this band doesn't want to be the biggest band in the world, they certainly do want to be remembered as one of the great bands of their time.
...and the money is nice too
_________________ IMHO J/K Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
Post subject: Re: What's the relationship between Ed and Stone?
Posted: Thu Mar 12, 2009 7:14 pm
Force of Nature
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 7:20 am Posts: 762
homersheineken wrote:
Interesting topic. I think the creative friction between them is important so that the collaboration gets the best sound.I think they were at their best in the first 3-4 albums. I don't know if the same synergy isn't there or if they're past their prime or what else is going on but the quality of music isn't at the same level - to be fair it's almost impossible to expect a band to continue to produce that quality though.
Maybe it is good that Eddie started doing more of the song writing (riffs/structures). Those 2 in that video were quite boring. I lover their more complicated structured songs, though, a la stone. I've been a music fan of that.
Is there a compiled and easily accessible list of who has written what songs? It'd be interesting to see who's done what, who's evolved and how.
Alright, I did this kind of quickly. I took the information from the official credits in the album liner notes, credits from the U.S. copyright office website, information from various articles, and a little speculation. The Vs. and Vitalogy eras were tricky, since the band members were getting equal credit at that time. This is just for Ed and Stone, but I can do the others if you wish.
Ed
Ten era Porch Oceans (co-written with Stone and Jeff) Release (co-written with the rest of the band)
Vs. era Rearviewmirror Small Town
Vitalogy era Not for You Whipping Corduroy Bugs Better Man Immortality Stupid Mop I Got Shit Long Road
No Code era Sometimes In My Tree (co-written with Stone and Jack) Off He Goes Habit Lukin I'm Open (co-written with Jack) Around the Bend Black, Red, Yellow Dead Man
Yield era Wishlist MFC Leatherman U
Binaural era Breakerfall Light Years (co-written with Mike and Stone) Insignificance Grievance Soon Forget Parting Ways Sad Education Hitchhiker Drifting Thunderclap
Riot Act era Can't Keep Love Boat Captain (co-written with Boom) I Am Mine Thumbing My Way Green Disease Arc Undone 4/20/02 Man of the Hour
Pearl Jam era World Wide Suicide Severed Hand Gone Come Back (co-written with Mike) Inside Job (co-written with Mike) Santa God
Stone
Ten era Once Even Flow Alive Black Oceans (co-written with Ed and Jeff) Garden (co-written with Jeff) Deep (co-written with Jeff) Release (co-written with the rest of the band) Wash Alone Footsteps Hold On Brother Breath Dirty Frank (co-written with the rest of the band)
Vs. era Animal Daughter Glorified G (co-written with Mike) Dissident W.M.A. (co-written with the rest of the band) Rats (co-written with the rest of the band) Leash (co-written with the rest of the band) Indifference (co-written with the rest of the band) Hard to Imagine
Vitalogy era Last Exit Spin the Black Circle Tremor Christ (co-written with Mike) Satan's Bed
No Code era Hail, Hail (co-written with Jeff and Mike) Who You Are (co-written with Jack) In My Tree (co-written with Ed and Jack) Red Mosquito (co-written with the rest of the band) Mankind All Night (co-written with the rest of the band) Don't Gimme No Lip
Yield era No Way Do the Evolution In Hiding All Those Yesterdays
Binaural era Light Years (co-written with Mike and Ed) Thin Air Of the Girl Rival Fatal Strangest Tribe Harmony
Riot Act era Save You (co-written with the rest of the band) Bu$hleaguer All or None Down (co-written with Mike)
Pearl Jam era Life Wasted Comatose (co-written with Mike) Parachutes Wasted Reprise
_________________ I want for to lay down. Nothing for to say.
Last edited by StoneIrons on Thu Mar 12, 2009 7:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Post subject: Re: What's the relationship between Ed and Stone?
Posted: Thu Mar 12, 2009 7:35 pm
Yeah Yeah Yeah
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 7:36 pm Posts: 3271 Location: Chicago
At first, I think it took some time for Stone to adjust to not being "the guy", but after looking at it logically, Ed was his ticket to being sucessful and he accepted that. He later embraced it because at the end of the day, he didn't want to be the guy to make all the decisions, he had been doing that forever.
Quote:
GOSSARD: If it had remained always my band, my natural tendency would have been to get more complex and arrange things more and more. That wouldn't necessarily be good for Eddie, or anyone else in the band. Of course, I enjoy being self-indulgent. And I look forward to the time when I can become more indulgent with my songwriting. But this band is a family, and it's a process that we have to grow with together.
The above really makes me sad/upset. The whole point of a band is to evolve into something new. With the mentality of just accompaning others, their sound will never change. If Ed had been accompaning like Stone appararently has, we wouldn't of had a No Code. This is one of the main reasons I don't think PJ will release anything interesting. They're too old, lazy, and too set in their ways to care about making something special. I guess when you have that much money, things like that change. And i'm sure having different motives now (children and family) have something to do with that also.
_________________ strobe lights and blown speakers.
Post subject: Re: What's the relationship between Ed and Stone?
Posted: Thu Mar 12, 2009 8:41 pm
Father Bitch
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 12:20 am Posts: 5198 Location: Connecticut Gender: Male
pnjguy wrote:
The whole point of a band is to evolve into something new. With the mentality of just accompaning others, their sound will never change. If Ed had been accompaning like Stone appararently has, we wouldn't of had a No Code. This is one of the main reasons I don't think PJ will release anything interesting. They're too old, lazy, and too set in their ways to care about making something special. I guess when you have that much money, things like that change. And i'm sure having different motives now (children and family) have something to do with that also.
I didn't take the quote that way. I think he just meant that the band has to grow (or evolve) together, rather than just follow his lead.
And yeah, they probably are too old at this point (tho not too lazy) to really re-invent themselves or their sound, but that doesn't mean they can't do something a little different.
Post subject: Re: What's the relationship between Ed and Stone?
Posted: Thu Mar 12, 2009 8:42 pm
Yeah Yeah Yeah
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 6:14 pm Posts: 3213 Location: chicken shaped country in europe Gender: Male
pnjguy wrote:
At first, I think it took some time for Stone to adjust to not being "the guy", but after looking at it logically, Ed was his ticket to being sucessful and he accepted that. He later embraced it because at the end of the day, he didn't want to be the guy to make all the decisions, he had been doing that forever.
Quote:
GOSSARD: If it had remained always my band, my natural tendency would have been to get more complex and arrange things more and more. That wouldn't necessarily be good for Eddie, or anyone else in the band. Of course, I enjoy being self-indulgent. And I look forward to the time when I can become more indulgent with my songwriting. But this band is a family, and it's a process that we have to grow with together.
The above really makes me sad/upset. The whole point of a band is to evolve into something new. With the mentality of just accompaning others, their sound will never change. If Ed had been accompaning like Stone appararently has, we wouldn't of had a No Code. This is one of the main reasons I don't think PJ will release anything interesting. They're too old, lazy, and too set in their ways to care about making something special. I guess when you have that much money, things like that change. And i'm sure having different motives now (children and family) have something to do with that also.
This post is interesting. I 1st thought i didn't get it completely. I'm of the opinion that Stone is overrated by PJ fans but this is only because he tends to be rated by what he could have done instead of what he actually did. Stone uses this exact excuse here. He never did anything that could be called complex nor he has ever shown signs of relevant complex arrangements. He's average and doesn't have a recognizable style (outside PJ). Plus he had side projects and could have done whatever he wanted from an artistic point of view but it was all largely overlooked. In all honesty he had way better chances of showing his musical vision and talent than 99% of people who write music. I just don't like this whiny "if only i could" attitude. I think you're right they'll never do an interesting album again, very good yes, but interesting no. They'd have to have their songwriting dynamics set in place for that.
_________________ IMHO J/K Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
Post subject: Re: What's the relationship between Ed and Stone?
Posted: Thu Mar 12, 2009 9:57 pm
Global Moderator
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 4:02 am Posts: 44183 Location: New York Gender: Male
Mine wrote:
pnjguy wrote:
At first, I think it took some time for Stone to adjust to not being "the guy", but after looking at it logically, Ed was his ticket to being sucessful and he accepted that. He later embraced it because at the end of the day, he didn't want to be the guy to make all the decisions, he had been doing that forever.
Quote:
GOSSARD: If it had remained always my band, my natural tendency would have been to get more complex and arrange things more and more. That wouldn't necessarily be good for Eddie, or anyone else in the band. Of course, I enjoy being self-indulgent. And I look forward to the time when I can become more indulgent with my songwriting. But this band is a family, and it's a process that we have to grow with together.
The above really makes me sad/upset. The whole point of a band is to evolve into something new. With the mentality of just accompaning others, their sound will never change. If Ed had been accompaning like Stone appararently has, we wouldn't of had a No Code. This is one of the main reasons I don't think PJ will release anything interesting. They're too old, lazy, and too set in their ways to care about making something special. I guess when you have that much money, things like that change. And i'm sure having different motives now (children and family) have something to do with that also.
This post is interesting. I 1st thought i didn't get it completely. I'm of the opinion that Stone is overrated by PJ fans but this is only because he tends to be rated by what he could have done instead of what he actually did. Stone uses this exact excuse here. He never did anything that could be called complex nor he has ever shown signs of relevant complex arrangements. He's average and doesn't have a recognizable style (outside PJ). Plus he had side projects and could have done whatever he wanted from an artistic point of view but it was all largely overlooked. In all honesty he had way better chances of showing his musical vision and talent than 99% of people who write music. I just don't like this whiny "if only i could" attitude. I think you're right they'll never do an interesting album again, very good yes, but interesting no. They'd have to have their songwriting dynamics set in place for that.
I'll agree with most of what's written here (except maybe the last paragraph--I suppose that depends how you define interesting. With some exceptions PJ's best material has rarely been the most 'interesting' and as I've said before good is far more important to me than different)
_________________ "Better the occasional faults of a Government that lives in a spirit of charity than the consistent omissions of a Government frozen in the ice of its own indifference."--FDR
Post subject: Re: What's the relationship between Ed and Stone?
Posted: Thu Mar 12, 2009 10:02 pm
Global Moderator
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 4:02 am Posts: 44183 Location: New York Gender: Male
this is not really related to this thread but it will be very interesting to see how the songwriting changes/evolves on this new record for a few different reasons. there will likely be some changes to Eddie given his experience with his solo record (which the band has alluded too) but they've also started a new moment in their career in terms of inspiration. the first few records were written from dark, angry places. No code and yield (and vitalogy as a transition if you like, but I tend to find it much closer to Ten and Vs than what followed) are pretty personal albums in terms of the band responding to and making peace with their fame and themselves. Riot Act and S/T especially are musical reactions to Bush, which was really hard for Eddie to write about since he doesn't have the eye for nuance and subtlety and nuance that he does with people (I'm not quite sure where binaural fits in with this rough typology).
The band is in a different place now--they're comfortable with who they are, and looking at a collapsing world with hope rather than fear. This is a new dynamic for them, and it'll be interesting to see how it affects their song writing (if at all)
_________________ "Better the occasional faults of a Government that lives in a spirit of charity than the consistent omissions of a Government frozen in the ice of its own indifference."--FDR
Post subject: Re: What's the relationship between Ed and Stone?
Posted: Thu Mar 12, 2009 10:08 pm
Yeah Yeah Yeah
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:57 pm Posts: 3332 Location: Chicago-ish
pnjguy wrote:
At first, I think it took some time for Stone to adjust to not being "the guy", but after looking at it logically, Ed was his ticket to being sucessful and he accepted that. He later embraced it because at the end of the day, he didn't want to be the guy to make all the decisions, he had been doing that forever.
Quote:
GOSSARD: If it had remained always my band, my natural tendency would have been to get more complex and arrange things more and more. That wouldn't necessarily be good for Eddie, or anyone else in the band. Of course, I enjoy being self-indulgent. And I look forward to the time when I can become more indulgent with my songwriting. But this band is a family, and it's a process that we have to grow with together.
The above really makes me sad/upset. The whole point of a band is to evolve into something new. With the mentality of just accompaning others, their sound will never change. If Ed had been accompaning like Stone appararently has, we wouldn't of had a No Code. This is one of the main reasons I don't think PJ will release anything interesting. They're too old, lazy, and too set in their ways to care about making something special. I guess when you have that much money, things like that change. And i'm sure having different motives now (children and family) have something to do with that also.
Stone was successful before Ed since MLB was a pretty successful band. Maybe he saw Ed as a ticket to superstardom, but I"m not sure if he even wanted it.
I definitely agree though about PJ not releasing an 'interesting" album again. I'd love to get another NO Code or even Vitology, but I think they'll be much more reserved and avocado. Which is a shame since I'd like to see them take the extra time between albums to make it really great than rush one out since it's been 2-3 years and the fans are whining. The arrangements on Alive and Evenflow are great. But I love songs with complicated arrangements (and my band hates me for it)
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum