Pitchfork review.. about what you'd expect
cordurology
Posts: 227
http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/13480-backspacer/
Pearl Jam
Backspacer
4.6
If you're between the ages of, say, 25 and 35, chances are you either significantly overrate or underrate Pearl Jam. Either you carry a certain nostalgist's sentiment for one of your early rock touchstones (I fall into this camp), or you view them as the root of all that was overwrought and evil about mid-to-late-90s guitar music. Sure, everyone knows PJ sold eleven trillion albums between 1991 and '94, but still I imagine it's difficult for relative young'uns to reconcile how strong an opinion so many people in a specific demographic have about a group that hasn't been commercially or critically relevant for over a decade.
Backspacer, the group's 10th studio album, seems to suggest in its tossed-off 37 minutes that Pearl Jam have no greater concern and regard for what they do than the rest of the world can muster. Virtually the whole record settles into the same formula the band's been dutifully churning out since the dawn of the millennium-- lively but almost utterly hookless riff-driven hard rock. Lather, rinse, repeat. And when I say "riff-driven" I really mean "almost entirely riff-dependent," because musically the riffs themselves are typically the only things worth your attention.
PJ's long-dormant punk and hardcore proclivities (ugh, "Lukin") have been rising to the surface with greater regularity in recent years, and I'll admit in short bursts this bulldozing approach can be somewhat satisfying. The opening four songs kick-start and then keep up a certain pleasing level of propulsiveness, with the goofily fast-and-loose "Gonna See My Friend" (hey, is that an actual bassline I hear?) and Thin Lizzy-ish double entendres of "Johnny Guitar" being particularly listenable. Sooner or later, however, you remember these guys wouldn't know a melody if it bit them in the ass. What's worse, this chugging blitzkrieg negates the power of the band's greatest weapon, Eddie Vedder's voice, which can display its craggy richness and masculine grace only when the band isn't trying to break land-speed records. (I know some folks hate Ed's singing, but it mostly seems like they're reacting to the fact that his voice launched a thousand Nickelbacks, which is like hating "The Simpsons" because of "Family Guy" or "American Dad".)
The gentle "Just Breathe" might seem like the perfect opportunity for Vedder to finally dust off those resonant pipes, but instead he sings the tune with a distractingly country-ish catch in his voice, plus the tune is numbingly syrupy and the lyrics, after a promisingly pointed start ("I'm a lucky man to count on both hands the ones I love") devolve into tedium. The same hit-or-miss sensitivity marks "The End"-- Vedder inexplicably finds it necessary to remind us he's "just a human being" on one song and "just another human being" on the other-- but at least "The End" manages to land on the right side of affecting thanks to its painfully honest depiction of romantic dissolution ("This is not me/ You see/ Believe/ I'm better than this/ Don't leave"). Still, we have to rely on "Amongst the Waves" to deliver anything remotely resembling the soaring anthemics that used to be a PJ trademark (what I wouldn't give for a "Light Years" even). The back half of the album sure isn't inclined to help, largely abandoning even the modest steamrolling enjoyment of the record's initial jolt in favor of thoroughly forgettable mid-tempo dreck, save for "Speed of Sound", which nonetheless sounds like a band trying to be the Ramones minus the fun.
It's an extremely odd thing to say about a band that for three or four years was the biggest rock megalith on the planet, but nowadays Pearl Jam are the very definition of anonymously workmanlike, seemingly plugging along with their heads down from one colorlessly unimaginative album to the next. Once upon a time this was a group that was on top of the world and yet still took all kinds of bizarre chances, recording shit like lengthy tape experiments and songs about bugs-- often ridiculously self-indulgent, sure, yet always surprising. Now, paradoxically, with the spotlights long since extinguished, Pearl Jam seem content to do things by the book.
— Joshua Love, September 22, 2009
Pearl Jam
Backspacer
4.6
If you're between the ages of, say, 25 and 35, chances are you either significantly overrate or underrate Pearl Jam. Either you carry a certain nostalgist's sentiment for one of your early rock touchstones (I fall into this camp), or you view them as the root of all that was overwrought and evil about mid-to-late-90s guitar music. Sure, everyone knows PJ sold eleven trillion albums between 1991 and '94, but still I imagine it's difficult for relative young'uns to reconcile how strong an opinion so many people in a specific demographic have about a group that hasn't been commercially or critically relevant for over a decade.
Backspacer, the group's 10th studio album, seems to suggest in its tossed-off 37 minutes that Pearl Jam have no greater concern and regard for what they do than the rest of the world can muster. Virtually the whole record settles into the same formula the band's been dutifully churning out since the dawn of the millennium-- lively but almost utterly hookless riff-driven hard rock. Lather, rinse, repeat. And when I say "riff-driven" I really mean "almost entirely riff-dependent," because musically the riffs themselves are typically the only things worth your attention.
PJ's long-dormant punk and hardcore proclivities (ugh, "Lukin") have been rising to the surface with greater regularity in recent years, and I'll admit in short bursts this bulldozing approach can be somewhat satisfying. The opening four songs kick-start and then keep up a certain pleasing level of propulsiveness, with the goofily fast-and-loose "Gonna See My Friend" (hey, is that an actual bassline I hear?) and Thin Lizzy-ish double entendres of "Johnny Guitar" being particularly listenable. Sooner or later, however, you remember these guys wouldn't know a melody if it bit them in the ass. What's worse, this chugging blitzkrieg negates the power of the band's greatest weapon, Eddie Vedder's voice, which can display its craggy richness and masculine grace only when the band isn't trying to break land-speed records. (I know some folks hate Ed's singing, but it mostly seems like they're reacting to the fact that his voice launched a thousand Nickelbacks, which is like hating "The Simpsons" because of "Family Guy" or "American Dad".)
The gentle "Just Breathe" might seem like the perfect opportunity for Vedder to finally dust off those resonant pipes, but instead he sings the tune with a distractingly country-ish catch in his voice, plus the tune is numbingly syrupy and the lyrics, after a promisingly pointed start ("I'm a lucky man to count on both hands the ones I love") devolve into tedium. The same hit-or-miss sensitivity marks "The End"-- Vedder inexplicably finds it necessary to remind us he's "just a human being" on one song and "just another human being" on the other-- but at least "The End" manages to land on the right side of affecting thanks to its painfully honest depiction of romantic dissolution ("This is not me/ You see/ Believe/ I'm better than this/ Don't leave"). Still, we have to rely on "Amongst the Waves" to deliver anything remotely resembling the soaring anthemics that used to be a PJ trademark (what I wouldn't give for a "Light Years" even). The back half of the album sure isn't inclined to help, largely abandoning even the modest steamrolling enjoyment of the record's initial jolt in favor of thoroughly forgettable mid-tempo dreck, save for "Speed of Sound", which nonetheless sounds like a band trying to be the Ramones minus the fun.
It's an extremely odd thing to say about a band that for three or four years was the biggest rock megalith on the planet, but nowadays Pearl Jam are the very definition of anonymously workmanlike, seemingly plugging along with their heads down from one colorlessly unimaginative album to the next. Once upon a time this was a group that was on top of the world and yet still took all kinds of bizarre chances, recording shit like lengthy tape experiments and songs about bugs-- often ridiculously self-indulgent, sure, yet always surprising. Now, paradoxically, with the spotlights long since extinguished, Pearl Jam seem content to do things by the book.
— Joshua Love, September 22, 2009
Lex 03, Gorge 05, Cincy 06
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
BACKSPACER RULES!
~ is your Pearl Jam cup half empty, or 1/2 Full?
Does Pitchfork have ratings out of 5 or 10? I assume it's out of 10.
Also, he said 10th Studio album....so is he counting Lost Dogs? Ten Remix? or Into The Wild to get to 10??
I can see/understand where he is coming from when he says that Pearl Jam for the last decade hasn't really been hook heavy, and more riff driven. And I gotta admit he is right in saying they are/have been more 'punk' lately rather than the 'classic rock/arena rock' of some of their earlier albums.
The one thing I do and will disagree with him about though is when he says that they were on top of the world and being experimental. I remember vividly that the lost interest in Pearl Jam didn't come from No Code, but back when Vitalogy was released. Because of the experimentation on that album people no longer cared about Pearl Jam. It probably didn't help that they followed that up with No Code, but people were jumping off the boat because of Vitalogy.
Sure it has Betterman, but anyone aside from us crazy fans couldn't name any other song off that album.
I still haven't really given Backspacer a 'proper' listen in full yet, so I can see where he is coming from with what he has been saying. But the joy I have, and I would assume most of us have is that if you 'get' Pearl Jam you realize it takes more than 1 or 2 or 10 listens to get the full impact of the song/album. It sometimes takes a while to sink in (Sleight Of Hand I'm looking at you! top 10 song for me now though) to get it, whatever 'it' may be.
i disagree with much of it, but agree with a few points. The midtempo stuff is never going to impress the Pitchfork crowd.
:geek: Easy tiger.. everything will be okay. I love the album, and will continue to abbreviate it as BS. You'll be fine.
~ is your Pearl Jam cup half empty, or 1/2 Full?
It's just that I'm the type of music fan who prefers Unthought Known, Just Breathe, and The End to Bugs and Heyfoxymophandlemama, That's Me. :roll:
3 Decibels Doubles the Volume
2006
Songs from Backspacer are going to be looked back upon as Pearl Jam's greatest. Especially Just Breathe.
~ is your Pearl Jam cup half empty, or 1/2 Full?
let's hope not
I'll be listening to it many times yet anyway, so I'll maybe change my mind.....
but greatest songs by Pearl Jam.....not by far in my opinion
For you who love it, good for you, enjoy
Peace
Except Sundays, that's Ed day.
The mind is like a parachute, it doesn't work unless it's open. FZ
I wave to all my Friends... Yeah!
I agree on this.
I'm not a gigantic fan of the new record. But don't have a problem with people enjoying it, or loving it.
yeah, we can all be friends anyway
Except Sundays, that's Ed day.
The mind is like a parachute, it doesn't work unless it's open. FZ
Oh Bitchfork, I get it
I'm sorry but saying Pitchfork rags on bands for being popular is stupid, It's kinda of like saying every Pearl Jam song sounds the same because Eddie always goes WOAHHHHHHHHHH. Pitchfork has given good reviews to bands that are more popular than Pearl Jam. The Pearl Jam albums Pitchfork have given reviews to are, Yield, which got like an 8/10, and then Riot Act, S/T, and this new one, which all got negative reviews. I don't think it would be crazy to say that in an unbiased music review you could find many faults in those three albums.
So no Pitchfork doesn't hate all popular music, If anything their main problem is giving breaks to bands that don't deserve them, like Wavves or the Vivian Girls.
Pearl Jam and Smashing Pumpkins get the same treatment by those guys all the time.
I think the review has some good insight that some of us as fans may not want to admit, but i think it goes a bit too far.
I think the album would deserve about a 7. It is not great, but far from bad too.
I tend not to let those reviews bother me. Although i do wish they had a comment section on pitchfork. It woudl be great to see the nasty comments they got left by fans of bands they always pan.
Charlotte 03
Asheville 04
Atlanta 12
Greenville 16, Columbia 16
Seattle 18
Nashville 22
Ohana Festival 24 x2
I really hate to admit that I think the reviewer has got a point (notice I've said 'I think' and not 'they are the authority on this and are absolutely not to be disagreed with'). I by no means think that this is a bad album or that the band aren't allowed to do whatever the hell they want, regardless of whether we like it or not, but this album just isn't grabbing me yet. It has some good, enjoyable songs on it and I'm giving it some time because I know it can take a while to fall in love with a Pearl Jam album. What worries me is a niggling feeling that this won't happen this time. I do hope I'm wrong.
Cleveland 5/20/2006
Pittsburgh 6/23/2006
Columbia 6/16/2008
Bristow 5/13/2010
of course not all can like Pearl Jam. The only thing that bothered me is that this Pitchfork
guy seems to praise Pearl Jam when they were a big hit and now that turned introspective
and mature, seems to dislike it. That's Rolling Stone's job isn't it?
Anyway I got used to read a lot of crap about Pearl Jam and frankly my dears . .
I don't give a damn.
It's funny. To me the first paragraph above seems completely contradictory.
About the last sentence... way to be professional in your endeavors. I completely respect your opinion now.
To the OP, thanks for copying/pasting the review here so I didn't have to direct any web traffic to that website. I genuinely mean that. I will never go there again. Not because they trashed PJ, but because none of their reviews are well written or consistent. They have absolutely no value. If anyone is interested in reading good reviews go to Antiquiet.
That's a tee shirt waiting to happen. Dare somebody to wear it to PF festival next year.
However, if you can't find a hook in Backspacer, you aren't trying very hard.
for the least they could possibly do
The thing is I find it full of hooks, but they are so obvious ....... it's like easy come, easy go...
the first listen I had yesterday I was like, yeah this rocks big time.....but a few listens later I tend to find that it's all surface and not so much beneath - in my opinion that is - with a few exceptions....
As I said earlier I will listen to it several times again, and I might change my mind, but at this point I doubt it
It's not a bad album, but in my opinion it's not a good Pearl Jam album.....
Except Sundays, that's Ed day.
The mind is like a parachute, it doesn't work unless it's open. FZ
That's fine. I disagree with you, but it's fine.
I was referring to the Pitchfork reviewer calling it "hookless." If you're going to hate it, at least hate it for the right reasons. Saying you don't like Backspacer because it is hookless is like saying you dislike Jessica Simpson because she is too smart.
for the least they could possibly do