strange how some things surface after 20 years...

dreamweaver

most specifically this Dave A. you tube thing. I mean, is this an even legit source? and isn't it strange how he would say something like "Matt, watch carefully, apparently cymals mean substance.." ??

this on top of a completely re-mixed Ten, Drummers coming out of hiding, and some other things is just a bit surreal

NewJPage

dreamweaver wrote:

most specifically this Dave A. you tube thing. I mean, is this an even legit source? and isn't it strange how he would say something like "Matt, watch carefully, apparently cymals mean substance.." ??

I took that comment to be a bit of sarcasm, as it was in response to another comment. Another one of his posts has him stating to go easy on Matt, and that pearl jam both was AND is a great band.

PJFAN_seattle

I believe you meean youyube

CJMST3K

thats not his quote. he said he accidentally erased someones post so he reposted it. theres a difference. ...and yes its surreal in a good way.

tvismyfriend

PJ_kidd121492 wrote:

I believe you meean youyube

Did you misspell youtube to be ironic?

[Edit]
My bad, just saw the original thread.

ms. goldenwords

I've been thinking the same thing. I find it interesting that the date he joined youtube was the same date of the rerelease, no? I have a hard time believing it's him as well, but then I keep thinking, who else would have these videos, you know? :?:

CJMST3K

ms. goldenwords wrote:

I've been thinking the same thing. I find it interesting that the date he joined youtube was the same date of the rerelease, no? I have a hard time believing it's him as well, but then I keep thinking, who else would have these videos, you know? :?:

He's been silent (relatively) and without a forum for what... 15 years? I'm not gonna begrudge him to post a few really cool videos. And think about it. He may have had to go to Best Buy like the rest of us and buy it... and finding they didn't even put his photo on Unplugged? ...I'd have a LOT of shitty things to say about PJ because of their behavior, but he's not. All he's doing is spreading the jam. Pretty classy if you ask me.

LineOneMightyFine

ms. goldenwords wrote:

I've been thinking the same thing. I find it interesting that the date he joined youtube was the same date of the rerelease, no?quote]

That is an interesting observation. I hope it is, more power to him. I think its cool that some of his old, rare footage is surfacing. In my opinion, he was a great drummer and he should be acknowledged for his contributions to a band that simply exploded in the early 90s.

I don't have the new remixes yet. Is it true he's not pictured on the Unplugged DVD? If so, that's really petty to not include him.

CJMST3K

ejny wrote:

ms. goldenwords wrote:

I don't have the new remixes yet. Is it true he's not pictured on the Unplugged DVD? If so, that's really petty to not include him.

That is correct. On the Unplugged DVD it has a Brady Bunch type sleeve with just four photos on it. Guess who they left off... Last I checked, five musicians played that show.

Pearl Jam is petty. This I've learned.

LineOneMightyFine

CJMST3K wrote:

ejny wrote:

ms. goldenwords wrote:

I don't have the new remixes yet. Is it true he's not pictured on the Unplugged DVD? If so, that's really petty to not include him.

That is correct. On the Unplugged DVD it has a Brady Bunch type sleeve with just four photos on it. Guess who they left off... Last I checked, five musicians played that show.

Pearl Jam is petty. This I've learned.

Honestly, that is pathetic. How can you just erase the past like that?

electronblue

CJMST3K wrote:

ejny wrote:

ms. goldenwords wrote:

I don't have the new remixes yet. Is it true he's not pictured on the Unplugged DVD? If so, that's really petty to not include him.

That is correct. On the Unplugged DVD it has a Brady Bunch type sleeve with just four photos on it. Guess who they left off... Last I checked, five musicians played that show.

Pearl Jam is petty. This I've learned.

thanks,for bringing it to my attention just took another glance and you are correct 4 photos..
lol @ the Brady Bunch type sleeve.

Spiritual_Chaos

That is correct. On the Unplugged DVD it has a Brady Bunch type sleeve with just four photos on it. Guess who they left off... Last I checked, five musicians played that show.

That is just bad. Beth and Dave has been wiped out from Eddies memory.

CJMST3K

ejny wrote:

Honestly, that is pathetic. How can you just erase the past like that?

They get away with it because 1) they are independent and 2) because we buy their products regardless of their actions.

If a number of us complained and told them that they should make sure Dave A gets significant credit on VS & Vitalogy or else we will abstain from buying the reissued VS & Vitalogy, then they may listen... when it hurts them in their wallet.

LineOneMightyFine

CJMST3K wrote:

ejny wrote:

Honestly, that is pathetic. How can you just erase the past like that?

They get away with it because 1) they are independent and 2) because we buy their products regardless of their actions.

If a number of us complained and told them that they should make sure Dave A gets significant credit on VS & Vitalogy or else we will abstain from buying the reissued VS & Vitalogy, then they may listen... when it hurts them in their wallet.

I wonder if part of the rationale was that Dave was not part of writing the music they played at the Unplugged show. That's a lame cop-out, but maybe that's what they're telling themselves...

Smarter_Than_U

There is a nice picture of Dave inside the Drop in the Park LP. I wish they would have just left Oceans off the DVD altogether. It seems really lame to go back a rerecord something like that. Very un-pEarl jam.

CJMST3K

ejny wrote:

CJMST3K wrote:

ejny wrote:

Honestly, that is pathetic. How can you just erase the past like that?

They get away with it because 1) they are independent and 2) because we buy their products regardless of their actions.

If a number of us complained and told them that they should make sure Dave A gets significant credit on VS & Vitalogy or else we will abstain from buying the reissued VS & Vitalogy, then they may listen... when it hurts them in their wallet.

I wonder if part of the rationale was that Dave was not part of writing the music they played at the Unplugged show. That's a lame cop-out, but maybe that's what they're telling themselves...

I think that's exactly what they tell themselves actually. Lame cop-out indeed.

ms. goldenwords

CJMST3K wrote:

ms. goldenwords wrote:

I've been thinking the same thing. I find it interesting that the date he joined youtube was the same date of the rerelease, no? I have a hard time believing it's him as well, but then I keep thinking, who else would have these videos, you know? :?:

He's been silent (relatively) and without a forum for what... 15 years? I'm not gonna begrudge him to post a few really cool videos. And think about it. He may have had to go to Best Buy like the rest of us and buy it... and finding they didn't even put his photo on Unplugged? ...I'd have a LOT of shitty things to say about PJ because of their behavior, but he's not. All he's doing is spreading the jam. Pretty classy if you ask me.

Yeah, don't get me wrong, I don't think (like some out there) that it's pathetic or "unclassy" of him to post the videos. Hey, it's his work/life too, and he was a kick-ass drummer, and the video's belong to him, and it's not even like he's making money from it, so I'm just happy to watch. That Lollapalooza video is just crazy!

rrivers

[ him.[/quote][/quote]

That is correct. On the Unplugged DVD it has a Brady Bunch type sleeve with just four photos on it. Guess who they left off... Last I checked, five musicians played that show.

Pearl Jam is petty. This I've learned.[/quote]

Honestly, that is pathetic. How can you just erase the past like that?[/quote]

Watch the DVD, you will see that the past is not only erased, but in the wrong order!

dreamweaver

i dont agree with those of you saying pearl jam is petty for not having dave on the unplugged artwork.

first of all, you are all assuming pj did that on purpose. and none of you are considering the fact that there are certain rules and laws in the music business. maybe they aren't allowed to have his picture on that thing.. also, there has been numerous other times when the band had been pictured or mentioned with only ed, stone, jeff and mike. ex: lost dogs cd artwork..

CJMST3K

dreamweaver wrote:

i dont agree with those of you saying pearl jam is petty for not having dave on the unplugged artwork.

first of all, you are all assuming pj did that on purpose. and none of you are considering the fact that there are certain rules and laws in the music business. maybe they aren't allowed to have his picture on that thing.. also, there has been numerous other times when the band had been pictured or mentioned with only ed, stone, jeff and mike. ex: lost dogs cd artwork..

Lost Dogs included multiple drummers.

Unplugged had 1 drummer, 2 guitarists, 1 bass player and 1 singer. I took music business for 1.5 years in college. I don't recall anything prohibiting this, especially considering they use a token Dave image on the Drop In The Park record. There is the potential that Dave requested his head not be on the cd, but frankly, I highly doubt it, especially seeing that he's proudly posting his playing with PJ recently.

dreamweaver

i meant the actual artwork on the cd's labeling... and it's very possible that by a technicality, dave wasn't put on the unplugged thing I too studied music business my friend, where did you go to school?... or there wasn't enough room, like the lost dogs cd. my point is, to say pearl jam is petty is ridiculous.. i honestly think they could give a POOP.

rrivers

Having Dave not on the artwork is not a big deal to me. Them advertising Unplugged as the whole show and then delivering a watered-down version is what I have a problem with.

Stu42

is this picture not on the deluxe edition?

Guitarhero27

It's the Diet Coke version of Unplugged.

Similiar to A Perfect Circle releasing their song Passive off of Emotive, the Diet Coke version of Vacant from the Tapeworm sessions that they played live during the Mer De Noms era...


or for you europeans...COKE LIGHT!

John Briggs 2008

He is just basking in the royalties!

John Briggs 2008

CJMST3K wrote:

dreamweaver wrote:

i dont agree with those of you saying pearl jam is petty for not having dave on the unplugged artwork.

first of all, you are all assuming pj did that on purpose. and none of you are considering the fact that there are certain rules and laws in the music business. maybe they aren't allowed to have his picture on that thing.. also, there has been numerous other times when the band had been pictured or mentioned with only ed, stone, jeff and mike. ex: lost dogs cd artwork..

Lost Dogs included multiple drummers.

Unplugged had 1 drummer, 2 guitarists, 1 bass player and 1 singer. I took music business for 1.5 years in college. I don't recall anything prohibiting this, especially considering they use a token Dave image on the Drop In The Park record. There is the potential that Dave requested his head not be on the cd, but frankly, I highly doubt it, especially seeing that he's proudly posting his playing with PJ recently.

It might just be a situation where his likeness was not approved or they would have to pay royalties far exceeding what they are now. :?: :?: :?:

rrivers

But why would his picture be on the Drop in the Park LP?

CranMalReign

dreamweaver wrote:

my point is, to say pearl jam is petty is ridiculous.. i honestly think they could give a POOP.

If they didn't give a poop, Oceans wouldn't have been edited.

Now, granted, an ex-wife and an ex-drummer are not necessarily in the same league. But there are concious decisions going on here.

I won't say one way or the other if this is a petty act.

I will say, however, that this is the most non-Pearl Jam friendly post I've read in a very long time. Not that I don't love them, but it's a breath of fresh air to get away from the Kool Aid a little.

BinFrog

Smarter_Than_U wrote:

There is a nice picture of Dave inside the Drop in the Park LP. I wish they would have just left Oceans off the DVD altogether. It seems really lame to go back a rerecord something like that. Very un-pEarl jam.

The Dave thing doesn't bother me (He didn't record on Ten, although not having his pic on the Unplugged cover is a little weird), but dubbing over "Beth" is bugging me a bit. I may skip past it every time now. Seems like such a useless and self-serving edit. I almost always give PJ the benefit of the doubt. This just seems like Ed pulling rank. I don't get it.

ms. goldenwords

BinFrog wrote:

Smarter_Than_U wrote:

There is a nice picture of Dave inside the Drop in the Park LP. I wish they would have just left Oceans off the DVD altogether. It seems really lame to go back a rerecord something like that. Very un-pEarl jam.

The Dave thing doesn't bother me (He didn't record on Ten, although not having his pic on the Unplugged cover is a little weird), but dubbing over "Beth" is bugging me a bit. I may skip past it every time now. Seems like such a useless and self-serving edit. I almost always give PJ the benefit of the doubt. This just seems like Ed pulling rank. I don't get it.

I don't get it either, and yes it bothers me, but in the end there is plenty of room for plenty of things that we just don't/can't know. I mean, maybe Beth didn't want it released with her name, who knows. Yes, I'd rather they kept it as unedited as possible, but it's their work (not to mention, his relationship/past), so it belongs to them, and I have to respect that.

rrivers

ms. goldenwords wrote:

BinFrog wrote:

Smarter_Than_U wrote:

The Dave thing doesn't bother me (He didn't record on Ten, although not having his pic on the Unplugged cover is a little weird), but dubbing over "Beth" is bugging me a bit. I may skip past it every time now. Seems like such a useless and self-serving edit. I almost always give PJ the benefit of the doubt. This just seems like Ed pulling rank. I don't get it.

I don't get it either, and yes it bothers me, but in the end there is plenty of room for plenty of things that we just don't/can't know. I mean, maybe Beth didn't want it released with her name, who knows. Yes, I'd rather they kept it as unedited as possible, but it's their work (not to mention, his relationship/past), so it belongs to them, and I have to respect that.

That is all true. All they had to do was let everyone know that it would be edited and that songs would be left out (ie RITFW). Instead they made it look like they were selling the whole show by harping on the fact that the previously unreleased "Oceans" would be on it.