Home› The Porch

What are the chances (re: new album)

bigbadbillbigbadbill Posts: 1,758
edited July 2009 in The Porch
That some of these titles might change right before the release date? Hell, Vs. was Five Against One up until the very end, when Ed changed his mind. I mean, the cassette version I bought in 1993 says Five Against One on it.
11/6/95, 11/18/97, 7/13/98, 7/14/98, 10/24/00, 10/25/00, 10/28/00, 6/2/03, 6/3/03, 6/5/03, 7/6/06, 7/7/06, 7/9/06, 7/10/06, 7/13/06, 7/15/06, 7/16/06, 7/18/06, 10/21/06, 4/10/08, 4/13/08, 9/30/09, 10/1/09, 10/6/09, 10/7/09, 10/9/09
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • kiljoythemercifulkiljoythemerciful Posts: 549
    Yeah, I'm thinking they are diversion titles used as a cover to feed the fans this magical cool aid I keep hearing about. I'm also betting that the album will be 63 minutes long and not 36. Inverting numbers sends out hypnotic vibrations that confuse and tame the herd of all accepting followers.

    If these are the actual titles and actual length, it will be the worst album every created by man.
  • Kilgore_TroutKilgore_Trout Posts: 7,334
    kiljoythemerciful wrote:
    Yeah, I'm thinking they are diversion titles used as a cover to feed the fans this magical cool aid I keep hearing about. I'm also betting that the album will be 63 minutes long and not 36. Inverting numbers sends out hypnotic vibrations that confuse and tame the herd of all accepting followers.

    If these are the actual titles and actual length, it will be the worst album every created by man.
    what he said? :|

    either theyre fake or ed let olivia name all the songs
    "Senza speme vivemo in disio"

    http://seanbriceart.com/
  • DiRtyFranK38DiRtyFranK38 Posts: 3,131
    what is wrong with the titles? i truly don't get it
    2006: Hartford
    2008: MSG 1, Hartford, Mansfield 2, Ed Solo NYC 1
    2009: London (O2), Philly 1, 2, 3, & 4
    2010: Hartford, Boston, MSG 1 & 2
    2011: Ed Solo Hartford
    2012: Philly (MIA Fest)
    2013: Worcester 2, Brooklyn 1 & 2, Hartford
  • kiljoythemercifulkiljoythemerciful Posts: 549
    Well, aparently some of the song titles are shared with bands. And some people find some of the names bad, I guess. I don't give two shits what a song is titled, and I'm not sure what people are looking for, but you see complaints about song titles every release.

    And I don't even want to get into the stupidity of the length of the lp issue.
  • DiRtyFranK38DiRtyFranK38 Posts: 3,131
    i really dig the song titles
    2006: Hartford
    2008: MSG 1, Hartford, Mansfield 2, Ed Solo NYC 1
    2009: London (O2), Philly 1, 2, 3, & 4
    2010: Hartford, Boston, MSG 1 & 2
    2011: Ed Solo Hartford
    2012: Philly (MIA Fest)
    2013: Worcester 2, Brooklyn 1 & 2, Hartford
  • Kilgore_TroutKilgore_Trout Posts: 7,334
    DiRtyFranK38 wrote:
    what is wrong with the titles? i truly don't get it
    theyre just so... un-edgy... i dont get any feel for the album the way i do when i read past tracklists... its probably a really stupid thing to base a first impression on but im underwhelmed when i see something like "johnny guitar"... i know i have a way of being hypercritical with everything but it seems alot of people are in agreement about this
    "Senza speme vivemo in disio"

    http://seanbriceart.com/
  • the wolfthe wolf Posts: 7,027
    kiljoythemerciful wrote:
    Yeah, I'm thinking they are diversion titles used as a cover to feed the fans this magical cool aid I keep hearing about. I'm also betting that the album will be 63 minutes long and not 36. Inverting numbers sends out hypnotic vibrations that confuse and tame the herd of all accepting followers.

    If these are the actual titles and actual length, it will be the worst album every created by man.

    how can people keep saying this ? :? some of the best albums EVER were under 36 minutes !!!

    wtf?

    back in the day, albums that are considered "classic" now, alot of them were around this length.

    i dont have a problem with it at all. i happen to love longer songs too, but hell, just becuase the songs are not all 5+ plus min. dont mean its not going to be a great album.

    i for one have very high hopes for this album.

    leave it to PJ fans to trash a record b4 its even released !!! all because of the length and song titles.

    p.s. Johnny guitar is lame. wonder if its about Johnny Ramone ? that would be cool.
    Peace, Love.

    "To question your government is not unpatriotic --
    to not question your government is unpatriotic."
    -- Sen. Chuck Hagel
  • kiljoythemercifulkiljoythemerciful Posts: 549
    the wolf wrote:
    kiljoythemerciful wrote:
    Yeah, I'm thinking they are diversion titles used as a cover to feed the fans this magical cool aid I keep hearing about. I'm also betting that the album will be 63 minutes long and not 36. Inverting numbers sends out hypnotic vibrations that confuse and tame the herd of all accepting followers.

    If these are the actual titles and actual length, it will be the worst album every created by man.

    how can people keep saying this ? :? some of the best albums EVER were under 36 minutes !!!

    wtf?

    back in the day, albums that are considered "classic" now, alot of them were around this length.

    i dont have a problem with it at all. i happen to love longer songs too, but hell, just becuase the songs are not all 5+ plus min. dont mean its not going to be a great album.

    i for one have very high hopes for this album.

    leave it to PJ fans to trash a record b4 its even released !!! all because of the length and song titles.

    p.s. Johnny guitar is lame. wonder if its about Johnny Ramone ? that would be cool.

    Once again, I was joking with my reply. Does it read like it's serious? I guess I need to put the ol' arrow in.
  • kiljoythemercifulkiljoythemerciful Posts: 549
    the wolf wrote:
    kiljoythemerciful wrote:
    Yeah, I'm thinking they are diversion titles used as a cover to feed the fans this magical cool aid I keep hearing about. I'm also betting that the album will be 63 minutes long and not 36. Inverting numbers sends out hypnotic vibrations that confuse and tame the herd of all accepting followers.

    If these are the actual titles and actual length, it will be the worst album every created by man.

    how can people keep saying this ? :? some of the best albums EVER were under 36 minutes !!!

    wtf?

    back in the day, albums that are considered "classic" now, alot of them were around this length.

    i dont have a problem with it at all. i happen to love longer songs too, but hell, just becuase the songs are not all 5+ plus min. dont mean its not going to be a great album.

    i for one have very high hopes for this album.

    leave it to PJ fans to trash a record b4 its even released !!! all because of the length and song titles.

    p.s. Johnny guitar is lame. wonder if its about Johnny Ramone ? that would be cool.

    Once again, I was joking with my reply. Does it read like it's serious? I guess I need to put the ol' arrow in.
  • the wolfthe wolf Posts: 7,027
    kiljoythemerciful wrote:
    the wolf wrote:
    kiljoythemerciful wrote:
    Yeah, I'm thinking they are diversion titles used as a cover to feed the fans this magical cool aid I keep hearing about. I'm also betting that the album will be 63 minutes long and not 36. Inverting numbers sends out hypnotic vibrations that confuse and tame the herd of all accepting followers.

    If these are the actual titles and actual length, it will be the worst album every created by man.

    how can people keep saying this ? :? some of the best albums EVER were under 36 minutes !!!

    wtf?

    back in the day, albums that are considered "classic" now, alot of them were around this length.

    i dont have a problem with it at all. i happen to love longer songs too, but hell, just becuase the songs are not all 5+ plus min. dont mean its not going to be a great album.

    i for one have very high hopes for this album.

    leave it to PJ fans to trash a record b4 its even released !!! all because of the length and song titles.

    p.s. Johnny guitar is lame. wonder if its about Johnny Ramone ? that would be cool.

    Once again, I was joking with my reply. Does it read like it's serious? I guess I need to put the ol' arrow in.

    sorry quoted the wrong post. lol
    anyway some ARE serious about the ablum length, and i think thats just sad.
    Peace, Love.

    "To question your government is not unpatriotic --
    to not question your government is unpatriotic."
    -- Sen. Chuck Hagel
  • Electric FeelElectric Feel Posts: 198
    bigbadbill wrote:
    That some of these titles might change right before the release date? Hell, Vs. was Five Against One up until the very end, when Ed changed his mind. I mean, the cassette version I bought in 1993 says Five Against One on it.


    Um, they better.
  • snipes824snipes824 Posts: 870
    what's wrong with the title johnny guitar?
  • tcaporaletcaporale Posts: 1,577
    Electric Feel wrote:
    bigbadbill wrote:
    That some of these titles might change right before the release date? Hell, Vs. was Five Against One up until the very end, when Ed changed his mind. I mean, the cassette version I bought in 1993 says Five Against One on it.


    Um, they better.
    Um, they probably won't, so, um, too bad.
  • the wolfthe wolf Posts: 7,027
    snipes824 wrote:
    what's wrong with the title johnny guitar?

    when it comes down to it, nothing. just dont seem like a PJ title i guess.

    watch it be the BEST song on the record ! i would love that and lmao !

    :lol::lol::lol:
    Peace, Love.

    "To question your government is not unpatriotic --
    to not question your government is unpatriotic."
    -- Sen. Chuck Hagel
  • Electric FeelElectric Feel Posts: 198
    tcaporale wrote:
    Electric Feel wrote:
    bigbadbill wrote:
    That some of these titles might change right before the release date? Hell, Vs. was Five Against One up until the very end, when Ed changed his mind. I mean, the cassette version I bought in 1993 says Five Against One on it.


    Um, they better.
    Um, they probably won't, so, um, too bad.


    um, they really should. "Supersonic" is unacceptable.
  • Kilgore_TroutKilgore_Trout Posts: 7,334
    snipes824 wrote:
    what's wrong with the title johnny guitar?
    nothing... if it were a Raffi album

    just sounds like a stupid folksy sing-a-long... but i guess its no sillier than "mr. tambourine man" and that turned out alright... so ill wait to pass any more judgment
    "Senza speme vivemo in disio"

    http://seanbriceart.com/
  • Cinnamon GirlCinnamon Girl Posts: 1,854
    sgossard3 wrote:
    snipes824 wrote:
    what's wrong with the title johnny guitar?
    nothing... if it were a Raffi album


    :lol: I disagree....but that WAS funny! (ps...I love Raffi 8-) )
    05-10-06, 08-05-07, 06-14-08 , 08-12-08(EV), 06-11-09(EV), 06-12-09(EV), 08-21-09, 05-10-10, 09-11-11, 09-12-11, 07-16-13, 07-19-13, 10-12-13, 10-21-13, 10-22-13,
  • tcaporaletcaporale Posts: 1,577
    Electric Feel wrote:
    um, they really should. "Supersonic" is unacceptable.
    :lol:

    I'm sorry, this is just funny. "Unacceptable"? It's a fucking title. You know, short, concise, to the point. They're not Tool. Maybe if they made an album full with titles like "Corona Radiata" or some pretentious garbage you'd be pleased.

    Plus, it seems like it worked for Oasis.
  • Electric FeelElectric Feel Posts: 198
    tcaporale wrote:
    Electric Feel wrote:
    um, they really should. "Supersonic" is unacceptable.
    :lol:

    I'm sorry, this is just funny. "Unacceptable"? It's a fucking title. You know, short, concise, to the point. They're not Tool. Maybe if they made an album full with titles like "Corona Radiata" or some pretentious garbage you'd be pleased.

    Plus, it seems like it worked for Oasis.


    You are not seeing the complainers' point, the fact it worked for Oasis is the problem.
  • Vedder_Girl77Vedder_Girl77 Posts: 4,335
    No one should judge the album before they have actually listened to it. Who cares what the song title is? It has nothing to do with the quality of the song and whether you'll like it or not. Also, just because the album is only 36 minutes does not mean that it is not a good quality album. I'd rather have a short album that I really like rather than a long album that I hate.
    8/29/00, 7/3/03, 5/24/06,6/28/08 & 6/30/08, 10/9/09,10/28/09, 10/30/09 & 10/31/09, 5/15/10, 5/17/10, 5/18/10, 5/20/10 & 5/21/10, 10/23/10 & 10/24/10, 9/3/11, 9/4/11, 9/11/11, 9/12/11, 9/23/11, 9/22/12, 9/30/12, 7/16/13, 7/19/13
  • bigbadbillbigbadbill Posts: 1,758
    tcaporale wrote:
    Electric Feel wrote:
    um, they really should. "Supersonic" is unacceptable.
    :lol:

    I'm sorry, this is just funny. "Unacceptable"? It's a fucking title. You know, short, concise, to the point. They're not Tool. Maybe if they made an album full with titles like "Corona Radiata" or some pretentious garbage you'd be pleased.

    Plus, it seems like it worked for Oasis.

    It also worked for J.J. Fad in 1989.
    11/6/95, 11/18/97, 7/13/98, 7/14/98, 10/24/00, 10/25/00, 10/28/00, 6/2/03, 6/3/03, 6/5/03, 7/6/06, 7/7/06, 7/9/06, 7/10/06, 7/13/06, 7/15/06, 7/16/06, 7/18/06, 10/21/06, 4/10/08, 4/13/08, 9/30/09, 10/1/09, 10/6/09, 10/7/09, 10/9/09
  • soulsingingsoulsinging Posts: 13,202
    sgossard3 wrote:
    DiRtyFranK38 wrote:
    what is wrong with the titles? i truly don't get it
    theyre just so... un-edgy... i dont get any feel for the album the way i do when i read past tracklists... its probably a really stupid thing to base a first impression on but im underwhelmed when i see something like "johnny guitar"... i know i have a way of being hypercritical with everything but it seems alot of people are in agreement about this

    Maybe, but there's not a song on this tracklist with a lamer title than Love Boat Captain ;)
  • soulsingingsoulsinging Posts: 13,202
    Electric Feel wrote:
    tcaporale wrote:
    Electric Feel wrote:
    um, they really should. "Supersonic" is unacceptable.
    :lol:

    I'm sorry, this is just funny. "Unacceptable"? It's a fucking title. You know, short, concise, to the point. They're not Tool. Maybe if they made an album full with titles like "Corona Radiata" or some pretentious garbage you'd be pleased.

    Plus, it seems like it worked for Oasis.

    You are not seeing the complainers' point, the fact it worked for Oasis is the problem.

    True, it does kinda serve to constantly remind us that PJ hasn't written a song as good as Oasis's 'Supersonic' in about 3 albums...
  • justamjustam Posts: 21,412
    Well, if they DO change the titles and tracks, we'll probably never know it!! :? :D
    &&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Sign In or Register to comment.