I'm not offended by it Harmless. It's just after what is starting to feel like years of reading the same thing over and over again this is all tiresome to me. That's probably Pearl Jam's fault, or my own, more than RM's, since what else is there right now. You were a late addition to this party, for sure, although there seems to have been a pretty dramatic shift since King Animal (maybe that's just when I noticed). But like I said, I'm responding to what I see as a broad trend and I just happen to be doing it via your posts.

Perhaps. Maybe I'm wrong about my whole read on this.

Sorry if you feel I've been needlessly confrontational. But you're right; although I had a lot of doubts about 'new Pearl Jam' before (not as an album, but as an entity, a 'business'), the (very recent) combination of silence and apathy from the band, and increasing frustration from Jeff, has quickly made me quite annoyed about what they're doing. Everything else before it has just aided my frustration; it's only 'come out' like this since King Animal because 1) that's the time frame in which we had several spikey-sounding comments from Jeff about the state of the band, and 2) Soundgarden, on the whole, have just seemed to be doing everything right, both musically and as far as PR and marketing goes; of course, it's very early days, but Soundgarden are proving that you can be a great rock band in 2012. So basically, I don't know what PJ's problem is. I'm not really speculating on what it is objectively, I only know my reactions to what I'm seeing. But I wish Pearl Jam could give Soundgarden a run for their money, for as long as they both exist in the same musical space. But I'm not sure they will, and yeah, I am slightly sad about that. But thrilled for Soundgarden at the same time. I mean, I never kissed their ass like I did PJ, but it's not too late to start. On the other hand, all of the venom I've been spitting about PJ will be yesterday's news if PJ's next album is good.

well in order for PJ to compete with Soundgarden they need to have a new record. Soundgarden took 17 years. Give PJ a few more months, and wait until you have new music before you throw in the towel. One band's non existent new music is going to have trouble competing with another band's new album.

And don't apologize for your tone. My whole point is kinda obnoxious to begin with. I apologize if I caused offense.

That's the thing: I'm not sure it would. In order for no album to compete with good album, I would simply need to trust PJ as a group of motivated musicians who are out doing other things and, preferably, too busy doing other *musically-related* things to make a new album. The most interesting things I've seen them do recently were an Obama rally, and Mike speaking out about healthcare. Those things I could get behind. But while Soundgarden have been promoting a new album, PJ have just displayed a gigantic lack of desire or focus. Except for Jeff, who has to all intents and purposes gone off and created a new band.

well eddie has had a solo tour that had to be rescheduled coinciding with soundgarden's album and promotion.

Also there is the issue of PJ's drummer being somewhat indisposed at this time for some reason

For what it's worth, I doubt the frustration and restlessness you refer to run very deep--meaning, I doubt many people are spending hours of their free time brooding in the dark over how Pearl Jam have let them down. For me anyway (and I suspect others), a lot of this stuff is just spurred on by conversation on the board. To my mind, filling in the gaps between what music is and how you think it could be better is a big chunk of what writing about music constitutes, professionally or unprofessionally, and I think at base that's really all that's going on here. The interview comments from the band just illuminate the tangible evidence, which is always a byproduct of interviews.

I have no objection to the new record coming out on its own time, and I have no desire to dictate how the band "should be" spending their time. But I do believe that, generally, excessive "breaks" disrupt a band's or artist's creative momentum, and I think the last two records bear that out to a degree--not necessarily by virtue of them being weaker records (many bands have highs and lows within the spectrum of a single, cohesive creative arc), but for the fact that they feel like standalone records, semi-random collections of songs existing outside of the general creative thread of the rest of the band's career. I personally relate much more closely to "S/T" and "Backspacer" than I do to "Ten" and "Vs.," and in most cases find the songcraft more interesting, but those earlier records are just given such a boost by how naturally they fit into the story of what the band was and did. Those first seven records and "Lost Dogs," to me, feel like eight individuals situated around a round table in perfect symmetry, locked into a natural, cooperative communicative mode with each other; "S/T" and "Backspacer," for all their individual merits, feel like late-to-the-party stragglers trying cram seats in where they don't fit, demanding a place at the table: "ME WANT SOME TOO!" A lot of records feel that way at the beginning, but to me these have actually felt more like that over time, which is a bummer. And while I would certainly wait just as long before dismissing any new record as such, I do think its potential for signifying the longest between-records gap in the band's history points unfavorably to a repeat occurrence.

I agree that the general tone of the board on PJ-related matters has grown tiresome. But I don't think the last few pages of this thread have contributed to it. True, we could all just say "we want new music" or "I didn't like the last 3 records" and leave it there, but that's consistently what you're saying you don't want this board to be--a series of flippant opinions without any elaboration.



You're right, which is what I meant when I specified "what their limitations permit." My larger point (which goes back to the studio band/live band thing) was that none of the songs were simply so dependent on studio enhancements that they couldn't be duplicated live--they're ultimately basic rock songs that should survive a studio-to-stage transformation relatively easily. Hell, just imagine "Gonna See My Friend" or "Johnny Guitar" being played on the 2006 Aussie tour--they would probably be pretty awesome.

I think simple lack of conditioning is responsible for more of Pearl Jam's shortcomings as a live band than any of us realize.

It's funny. I think you're right: they've simply never written a song that would be difficult for a band of their calliber to replicate on stage. Not one. And yet they treat it like it's this big deal. So that when they talk about stuff which 'works on stage', it's hard not to translate that in my head as 'stuff which only takes a couple of days to rehearse before a tour'. It's not about replicating it on stage as much as it's about replicating something very easily on stage. I mean, while bands like Meshuggah are finding a way to replicate songs like 'Bleed' on stage, I just think that a 20 year-old band still struggling with this just smacks of laziness. Sorry if that's harsh.

that last Jeff quote did not communicate that... but it could be the frustration talking.

No argument there



Fair point. I guess I'm just shit out of luck until we have something concrete to talk about.

Which bit? What was your interpretation?

Not to get off topic, but why does anybody have a problem with them downtuning? I've never thought it made that big of a difference and I even thought Comatose sounded alot better down a half step. I guess it seems kinda silly to record an album then a few months later transpose those tunes down a notch or two, but not because they sound like crap or anything.

The Zeppelin reunion show was all tuned down a half or full step and it made Robert Plant sound closer to his 70s heyday more than any of the other Page/Plant stuff and it's much better than him struggling to sing the songs in the original tunings.

I don't necessarily have a problem with them downtuning (although I agree it's kind of strange to have to tune down a few months after you wrote the song in the first place). However, I think if it sounds worse it's the wrong approach. For whatever reason, a lot of the times they tune down sound kind of off to me; it's not a huge deal, but it's there. Why that is I can't explain; I'd probably need to be much more technically astute in music than I actually am.

You answered your own question. Why not just write them in a key you can sing?

This really isn't anything that's been said before, but it feels completely natural that one's opinions on their recent music will have an impact on how we're viewing the present goings-on with the band. If someone really liked Backspacer, I think it's easier to view the past few years with more optimism, and those who think they lost the plot a bit with their recent work may see the lack of activity as a lack of interest. The latter group of people have their most recent work as evidence of that.

i consider them on hiatus.

most definitely. that's why for me all this speculation often feels like a different way to have the 'did you like backspacer' conversation.

Not really, as I liked Backspacer. Do I think it was everything that it could have been? Not in the slightest. But in amongst all the other things I'm unhappy about, it's a factor. Where Backspacer is weaker, it's because various parts sound half-baked for the purpose of finishing sooner. I say that as someone who wishes it was stronger because it has plenty of good ideas dotted around.

Everything they've said lately has made me think that maybe Backspacer sounds like it does because this kind of 'new wave' pop rock was a way of making a quick and "efficient" album. That seems to be Ed's mindset, anyway. Which is actually weird, because 'new wave' or 'pop rock' needn't preclude a lot of hard work and originality. The Cure proved that a pop band could also be incredibly clever.

I don’t know…I mean, that could just as easily be turned around into someone liking Backspacer is turning a blind eye to some substantive issues with the PJ camp these days. I think it’s less that it’s just another rehash of the same issue and more that people’s opinions on the recent music, whether positive or negative, will inevitably color how they view the band now in some way. But that doesn’t necessarily mean there’s nothing to talk about, or no fair critiques to make, beyond that, that could be explained away as merely not enjoying (or enjoying, for that matter) the band's newest work.