PEARL JAM

[pogal]

That's a rather reductive view of the arts.

Edited July 3, 2006 by pogal

[Olivavu]

Pearl Jam have got a lot to live up to!! They better blow me away live or I will not be best pleased.............

[Cultseeker]

Not really. I could make a political statement through music, but if it's shit music, who would want to listen to it?

I don't listen to bands to be informed on political topics. If they're political it doesn't mean I won't listen to them (RATM), but I'm really not bothered either way - and it's certainly not a reason to praise them. It make absolutely no difference to my opinion of a band.

[pogal]

Fair enough.

But similarly, if a band's music is driven by the political world around them then surely they should be free to express this quite naturally in that music?

[Olivavu]

The sentiment and lyrical content of a song is important to me. Of course how it sounds is crucial, but I like good lyrics and content. Simple lyrics about shallow subjects aren't really my thing.

Everyone likes fun music, and I am no exception. I like The Presidents of the USA amongst others for this, but my mainstay is serious music.

[pogal]

The sentiment and lyrical content of a song is important to me. Of course how it sounds is crucial, but I like good lyrics and content. Simple lyrics about shallow subjects aren't really my thing.

Everyone likes fun music, and I am no exception. I like The Presidents of the USA amongst others for this, but my mainstay is serious music.

[Cultseeker]

I think 'serious' music can still be about trivial subjects. Look at 'Lola', 'Don't Stand So Close To Me' etc. They're classics but not about what many would call 'serious' subjects...

[pogal]

A good example of trite music done well, which I have no problem with.

The Cure are masters of this; a band I have alot of time for. Funny how it's serious musicians who can do trite well, don't you think?

[Olivavu]

Absolutely, The Cure are a fine example, music doesn't have to be 'serious' to be taken seriously in my opinion. Wasn't it Hendrix who said "it's harder to write a three-minute happy pop song than a four-minute ballad", or something along those lines?

[Cultseeker]

Absolutely, The Cure are a fine example, music doesn't have to be 'serious' to be taken seriously in my opinion. Wasn't it Hendrix who said "it's harder to write a three-minute happy pop song than a four-minute ballad", or something along those lines?

[pogal]

I do believe it was...but I consider him wrong!

Writing 'My Friend's Over You' (New Found Glory) must've taken about 10 minutes...whereas to write something like 'Lilac Wine' (Nina Simone) or 'Hallelujah' (Leonhard Cohen) must've taken a hell of a lot longer.

[Cultseeker]

Let's face it, we could all whittle on about when we were dumped by a girl/got drunk and depressed/fell over/out of love etc etc etc, but it's not so easy to capture a feeling of happiness. In my opinion and experience.

I have to say though, much as I love The Cult, Astbury did have his moments of bad, actually terrible, poetry! Still a classic band though.

[Olivavu]

I don't agree. When you're down, really down, the emotion is there. It's easy to get at, easy to reach. Sling in a load of minor chords and a few strings and you're there, whereas when you're just bobbing along, life is good, it's not easy to get that down on a piece of paper.

Let's face it, we could all whittle on about when we were dumped by a girl/got drunk and depressed/fell over/out of love etc etc etc, but it's not so easy to capture a feeling of happiness. In my opinion and experience.

[pogal]

I think it's infinitely more difficult to write a truly moving song as opposed to an upbeat poppy number.

[Cultseeker]

I think it's infinitely more difficult to write a truly moving song as opposed to an upbeat poppy number.

Edited July 3, 2006 by Cultseeker

[Olivavu]

Writing a song with significance is harder than writing a song without, certainly.

For example, I have today, been writing a song about my former good friend and vocalist who committed suicide. The avoidance of cliche and sickening sentiment is one of the most difficult literal tasks that I have undergone. Contrastingly, I wrote a grungy post-punk style tune about an ex (or something) in about ten minutes. It's not about happy vs sad, or poppy vs sophisticated, its about genuine vs lazy.

[pogal]

Writing a song with significance is harder than writing a song without, certainly.

For example, I have today, been writing a song about my former good friend and vocalist who committed suicide. The avoidance of cliche and sickening sentiment is one of the most difficult literal tasks that I have undergone. Contrastingly, I wrote a grungy post-punk style tune about an ex (or something) in about ten minutes. It's not about happy vs sad, or poppy vs sophisticated, its about genuine vs lazy.

Edited July 3, 2006 by pogal

[Cultseeker]

Exactly right, but it's harder (in my opinion and experience) to write a genuinely inspiring, happy song, with that significance. I don't know why, but I've always found that to be the case. Yes, moving songs may be easier to relate to as 'classic' because of the emotional content, but that is no more difficult than doing exactly the same, only for a happy mood.

Sorry to hear about your friend Cultseeker.

[Cardboard Box City]

So... Who are these Pearl Jam people? I've personally never heard of them so am assuming they're shit

[Cultseeker]

So... Who are these Pearl Jam people? I've personally never heard of them so am assuming they're shit

[PaulJam]

the lyrics aren't why I like Pearl Jam. It's the way its presented, through the music. I love that feeling of ascendency when listening to songs such as Porch, In My Tree and Given to Fly.

And I love Stevie Wonder. He is an absolute musical GOD to which very few can compare (admitedly after 76 he wasn't the same). Popularly and critical acclaimed, right across the board. The song 'I Was Made to Love Her' could probably bring me back to life, but he's never been hailed as a lyricist. Most of his words are very cheesy and cliche but you'd have to be seriously f*cked up for that alone to put you off the music.

Edited July 3, 2006 by PaulJam

[Cultseeker]

the lyrics aren't why I like Pearl Jam. It's the way its presented, through the music. I love that feeling of ascendency when listening to songs such as Porch, In My Tree and Given to Fly.

And I love Stevie Wonder. He is an absolute musical GOD to which very few can compare (admitedly after 76 he wasn't the same). Popularly and critical acclaimed, right across the board. The song 'I Was Made to Love Her' could probably bring me back to life, but he's never been hailed as a lyricist. Most of his words are very cheesy and cliche and you'd have to be dead for that to put you off the music.

Edited July 3, 2006 by Cultseeker

[wheres the mudfight]

I agree with just about everything that's been said in one way or another. my original point was really about comparing lyrical styles and trying to understand a bit about why I (or anybody) likes a given artist.

It could be I wasn't thinking about the Vedder songs, I thought he was the only lyricist in the band.

oh, too much other stuff to go into seeing as I missed all the debate but I think it is worthwile debating what songs mean and why people like them.

I guess it does boil down to taste, just trying to understand what the difference is I guess.

all in all a fairly interesting read, shame I missed it.

[Cultseeker]

I agree with just about everything that's been said in one way or another. my original point was really about comparing lyrical styles and trying to understand a bit about why I (or anybody) likes a given artist.

[wheres the mudfight]

Did you check out 'Hands All Over' Mudfight?