- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Thoughts on Pearl Jam
Posted on 7/10/16 at 11:57 pm
Posted on 7/10/16 at 11:57 pm
How does the board see this band? I didn't really experience the grunge era, but I'm really getting in to it now. I like the other 3 Seattle bands, but I'm amazed with the amount of quality music that pearl Jam has put out throughout the years. This is not a thread about what nirvana or Alice in chains could have been, it's a thread about what Pearl jam is.
18
Posted on 7/10/16 at 11:58 pm to nobigdeal69
Love Pearl Jam. "Alive" was the quintessential 90's song for me.
Posted on 7/11/16 at 12:13 am to nobigdeal69
Ten is great. I stopped listening to them after Vitalogy.
Posted on 7/11/16 at 12:24 am to nobigdeal69
They kicked arse. Then they started sucking.
/thoughts
/thoughts
Posted on 7/11/16 at 12:35 am to RockAndRollDetective
Did they start sucking though? How do you possibly live up to the success of ten and VS.? Vitalogy is an incredible album, but it's different than the previous ones. Is that why so many people jumped ship? Arguably, the band's best song is on the vitalogy album.
Posted on 7/11/16 at 12:35 am to nobigdeal69
One of my favorite 90s bands ever. So many hit songs for them. Saw them at Jazz Fest a few months ago and they still sounded really good. Love Pearl Jam.
Posted on 7/11/16 at 9:23 am to nobigdeal69
Okay here's my expanded thoughts on Pearl Jam:
They started out making a kind of music that really grabbed me and I became a fan. Looking back it was a unique amalgam of approaches to rock music that incorporated driving rhythm, inventive music and soulful melodies. It straddled the then-new alt-metal contingent across to other genres easily and gracefully (metalheads liked it and alt-rock fans liked it). The live shows were unreal: guitars blazing, Abruzzese was a badass drummer, weird, charismatic frontman, energy out the arse, etc. They seemed to have it all.
Then for some reason Eddie Vedder suddenly wanted to be a part of a completely different band. They had made music that assloads of people were completely in love with and then inexplicably Vedder very openly set out to ditch all that; to not really challenge his audience (as he would like to have us believe), but more specifically retool the band as some kind of esoteric artistically coded thing to come in line with his personal aspirations of standing alongside the objects of his fanboy admiration like Sonic Youth, Fugazi, Pavement, My Bloody Valentine, etc. To a lot of people it sounded like their reach was exceeding their grasp. You can't make music that shows you have musical chops, talent and ability and then suddenly try to pretend you don't, in order to seem more edgy. That came across as really forced, fake and self-indulgent to me.
It seemed like Vedder wanted to purge his audience of two things: non-sycophants and "basic" hard rock fans. Of course the rock dude drummer got his walking papers. That was the first sign something was headed in the wrong direction. The music went from purposefully dissonant (an inorganic, fabricated dissonance) to a point where they seemed like they were trying to dip a toe back in the original sound (Yield) and just not pulling it off very well.
For me, the song "Not For You" was a fitting statement that seemed to be aimed at me particularly. Message received, guys. Have a nice life.
They started out making a kind of music that really grabbed me and I became a fan. Looking back it was a unique amalgam of approaches to rock music that incorporated driving rhythm, inventive music and soulful melodies. It straddled the then-new alt-metal contingent across to other genres easily and gracefully (metalheads liked it and alt-rock fans liked it). The live shows were unreal: guitars blazing, Abruzzese was a badass drummer, weird, charismatic frontman, energy out the arse, etc. They seemed to have it all.
Then for some reason Eddie Vedder suddenly wanted to be a part of a completely different band. They had made music that assloads of people were completely in love with and then inexplicably Vedder very openly set out to ditch all that; to not really challenge his audience (as he would like to have us believe), but more specifically retool the band as some kind of esoteric artistically coded thing to come in line with his personal aspirations of standing alongside the objects of his fanboy admiration like Sonic Youth, Fugazi, Pavement, My Bloody Valentine, etc. To a lot of people it sounded like their reach was exceeding their grasp. You can't make music that shows you have musical chops, talent and ability and then suddenly try to pretend you don't, in order to seem more edgy. That came across as really forced, fake and self-indulgent to me.
It seemed like Vedder wanted to purge his audience of two things: non-sycophants and "basic" hard rock fans. Of course the rock dude drummer got his walking papers. That was the first sign something was headed in the wrong direction. The music went from purposefully dissonant (an inorganic, fabricated dissonance) to a point where they seemed like they were trying to dip a toe back in the original sound (Yield) and just not pulling it off very well.
For me, the song "Not For You" was a fitting statement that seemed to be aimed at me particularly. Message received, guys. Have a nice life.
Posted on 7/11/16 at 9:57 am to RockAndRollDetective
quote:
Then for some reason Eddie Vedder suddenly wanted to be a part of a completely different band.
Good write-up. To me PJ was a notch above the other grunge bands. They then tried to take it to the next level and it's debatable as to how successful they were in that. However, I'd rather see a band try to evolve their sound than just cranking out the same music over and over. Sometimes that works and sometimes it doesn't. But even when it doesn't it's better than staying the same.
Posted on 7/11/16 at 10:02 am to nobigdeal69
one of my all time favorite bands, most people didn't get past Ten and Vs but they have put out good music on several albums since. Great live act because the set list changes every night.
Posted on 7/11/16 at 10:08 am to nobigdeal69
Ten is an incredible album but nothing since then ever really appealed to me.
Posted on 7/11/16 at 10:16 am to RockAndRollDetective
quote:
Okay here's my expanded thoughts on Pearl Jam:
They started out making a kind of music that really grabbed me and I became a fan. Looking back it was a unique amalgam of approaches to rock music that incorporated driving rhythm, inventive music and soulful melodies. It straddled the then-new alt-metal contingent across to other genres easily and gracefully (metalheads liked it and alt-rock fans liked it). The live shows were unreal: guitars blazing, Abruzzese was a badass drummer, weird, charismatic frontman, energy out the arse, etc. They seemed to have it all.
Then for some reason Eddie Vedder suddenly wanted to be a part of a completely different band. They had made music that assloads of people were completely in love with and then inexplicably Vedder very openly set out to ditch all that; to not really challenge his audience (as he would like to have us believe), but more specifically retool the band as some kind of esoteric artistically coded thing to come in line with his personal aspirations of standing alongside the objects of his fanboy admiration like Sonic Youth, Fugazi, Pavement, My Bloody Valentine, etc. To a lot of people it sounded like their reach was exceeding their grasp. You can't make music that shows you have musical chops, talent and ability and then suddenly try to pretend you don't, in order to seem more edgy. That came across as really forced, fake and self-indulgent to me.
It seemed like Vedder wanted to purge his audience of two things: non-sycophants and "basic" hard rock fans. Of course the rock dude drummer got his walking papers. That was the first sign something was headed in the wrong direction. The music went from purposefully dissonant (an inorganic, fabricated dissonance) to a point where they seemed like they were trying to dip a toe back in the original sound (Yield) and just not pulling it off very well.
For me, the song "Not For You" was a fitting statement that seemed to be aimed at me particularly. Message received, guys. Have a nice life.
Solid write up my man. I think you hit the nail on the head, although I don't want to believe it.
Posted on 7/11/16 at 11:04 am to nobigdeal69
I'll be back. Lol
Posted on 7/11/16 at 11:05 am to nobigdeal69
I loved them up until Yield where I started to lose some interest. I've liked a few songs on the albums since Yield, but nothing has just wowed me like their first 4 albums.
I still like them, but they're solidly in the Dad Rock genre, and I don't really listen to them all that much anymore nor really want to see them live. Saw them a handful of times in their prime, and that was enough.
I still like them, but they're solidly in the Dad Rock genre, and I don't really listen to them all that much anymore nor really want to see them live. Saw them a handful of times in their prime, and that was enough.
Posted on 7/11/16 at 11:08 am to The Spleen
I loved "Ten" and "Vs." Every track! Since then, they have been hit and miss.
Posted on 7/11/16 at 1:24 pm to nobigdeal69
I dont think that anyone is going to disagree with the idea that Ten and VS are huge albums and from start to finish are probably their best work.
Once they got past VS and into Vitalogy, they obviously changed their sound dramatically. Not to say that there aren't good, hard rocking songs throughout their discography, but overall the average song got a lot less hard-rockish, and to some degree less... catchy (for lack of a better word). If you don't like their new sound, that's fine, it's a matter of taste. But a lot of people do like it (myself included). Personally I think Vitalogy is my favorite album of theirs, and on the whole I think the earlier albums were better. One or two of their albums I really could never get into (the album Pearl Jam in particular). But I also thought Backspacer was a really solid album and that they are still producing some solid music.
In conclusion, I think they still make good music, albeit music that is not quite as good as their early stuff. I think a lot of people fell out of fandom after Vitalogy and never even listened to the later albums, and the fact that the later music isn't as catchy means that they may never give it a chance. Enjoy the ride though. It's a good band.
Once they got past VS and into Vitalogy, they obviously changed their sound dramatically. Not to say that there aren't good, hard rocking songs throughout their discography, but overall the average song got a lot less hard-rockish, and to some degree less... catchy (for lack of a better word). If you don't like their new sound, that's fine, it's a matter of taste. But a lot of people do like it (myself included). Personally I think Vitalogy is my favorite album of theirs, and on the whole I think the earlier albums were better. One or two of their albums I really could never get into (the album Pearl Jam in particular). But I also thought Backspacer was a really solid album and that they are still producing some solid music.
In conclusion, I think they still make good music, albeit music that is not quite as good as their early stuff. I think a lot of people fell out of fandom after Vitalogy and never even listened to the later albums, and the fact that the later music isn't as catchy means that they may never give it a chance. Enjoy the ride though. It's a good band.
Posted on 7/11/16 at 1:52 pm to RockAndRollDetective
quote:is a great song
the song "Not For You"
Posted on 7/11/16 at 2:35 pm to RockAndRollDetective
quote:
It seemed like Vedder wanted to purge his audience of two things: non-sycophants and "basic" hard rock fans.
Great analysis - It seems to have been a calculated risk on Vedder's part. I remember wondering how they could have lost the plot so easily. That was when they had there beef with Ticketmaster which they lost and tried to mount a couple of disaster tours on their own. Plus you had Vedder having some ridiculous resentment over the success...the band is selling out arenas but he would travel from town to town in a van like he was Black Flag circa 1980.
But it seems to have paid off for them in terms of extending their longevity. They have stayed pretty true to their visison and their recent tour is S.R.O. At least they are not a punch line like Guns n Roses.
Posted on 7/11/16 at 2:47 pm to gorillacoco
I remember how pissed people were when No Code was released. I hated it when it was first released as well, but it grew on me and it's long been my favorite album of theirs.
Posted on 7/11/16 at 2:52 pm to nobigdeal69
A truly great band. They had an iconic sound, yet managed to evolve and grow as a band and maintain relevance for over 20 years. They are in the same category as Foo Fighters as far as longevity of relevance, but they did it with far more growth over time. "Sirens" is among my favorite tracks by them despite being one of their most recent.
Posted on 7/11/16 at 3:07 pm to Brosef Stalin
quote:
Ten is great. I stopped listening to them after Vitalogy.
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News