Squaw
Star Scout
You're the only one that you are screwin' when you put down what you don't understand~ Kristofferson
Posts: 544
|
Post by Squaw on Mar 14, 2012 5:20:18 GMT -5
Does anyone think they're spoiled by listening to Paul's music? Do you think he's raised the bar as a songwriter? I don’t think he raised the bar - Dylan has it so high it may never go higher. But to use another metaphor, Paul's not always the first out of the gate but he will always win, place, or show when compared to anyone else. He is a master of the "latent hook". If I’m not terribly excited the first time I hear one of his songs, I usually change my mind by the third or fourth listen.
|
|
|
Post by FreeRider on Mar 14, 2012 9:12:44 GMT -5
I'm going to say, I really really value Paul's basement recordings. .... I can't remember where I saw/heard it... but in one interview with Paul- I remember he said something like "I make music to entertain myself" ..... and I LOVE that. Thats how I've always made music. For me. I make the music I want to hear (or thats what I shoot for atleast) or music I have in my head... Yep, I think that holds true for most songwriters who aspire to something more than just commercialism. I think if these artists try and write to create a hit single or something, or to please the label, etc, it comes across as fake or manipulative (not to pick on these two, but they come to mind pretty quickly: Jewel and Liz Phair). you may be right about that....I've also wondered if these were just song ideas or were there entire songs behind it that Paul could never quite finish so he gave us the best snippet of those songs? But sure, getting a chance to go thru his demos and stuff would be pretty fascinating! Well, we'll find out, I guess.
|
|
|
Post by FreeRider on Mar 14, 2012 9:21:38 GMT -5
Does anyone think they're spoiled by listening to Paul's music? Do you think he's raised the bar as a songwriter? I don’t think he raised the bar - Dylan has it so high it may never go higher. But to use another metaphor, Paul's not always the first out of the gate but he will always win, place, or show when compared to anyone else. He is a master of the "latent hook". If I’m not terribly excited the first time I hear one of his songs, I usually change my mind by the third or fourth listen. Oh yeah, I don't mean he's the only one to raise the bar. Hell, you'd have to include Lennon-McCartney in there as well. I was just suggesting in the general sense of listening to his stuff (and others) have spoiled one's senses so that listening to what is considered popular on mainstream rock oriented radio, everything else seems kind of bland. Our standards (or maybe mine) are very high in terms of expectations. When someone hands me a CD and says "You'll like this kind of power pop-rock stuff" and it doesn't grab me, it's because I'm expecting to hear the same kind of melodicism of, say, Big Star, or Paul, or the Beatles, etc... I'm giving Matthew Sweet's cd an honest listen, I'm not totally rejecting it out right. I'm going to see if it starts to click with me after a few listens, but it certainly didn't jump right out at me upon first listening.
|
|
|
Post by FreeRider on Mar 14, 2012 9:25:25 GMT -5
Does anyone think they're spoiled by listening to Paul's music? Do you think he's raised the bar as a songwriter? Yes, I find myself with that problem. Whether I want to or not, I do compare Paul's music to new music and usually find the new stuff too bland and generic. Either that or it's me becoming a cranky old man that thinks music today is crap and those damn kids need to stay off of my lawn. yeah, don't you hate it when they run through your backyard all the time? But yeah, I agree...I don't listen to rock radio (except the classic rock oldies station once in awhile) because it all sounds so bland and generic like you said.
|
|
|
Post by wecantgetanybetter on Mar 14, 2012 15:19:02 GMT -5
On the spoiled question, for me it's lyrics (and maybe vocals) even more than music.
I pretty much gave myself over to Deer Tick and John McCauley's other projects. I've found that stuff to be as good a Mats substitute as has come along. His voice has got it. The music is mostly there. Lyrically, it's above par for sure but that's where I can no longer fool myself I'm in the master's hands.
|
|
ih8music
Star Scout
couldn't be happier.
Posts: 943
|
Post by ih8music on Mar 14, 2012 15:45:27 GMT -5
My past enjoyment of PW's work does not prevent me from appreciating new music, no. Wilco, Lucero, Drive By Truckers, Delta Spirit, Dawes, Deer Tick, etc. have all put out some at times extraordinary music in recent months.
Does the songwriting from these bands always hold up to PW's? Not always - but then again, PW doesn't always hold up to his standards, either ($100 Groom, hello!).
There are only so many times I can listen to the same old stuff over and over again. I appreciate artists who still have the desire to record & release new music.
|
|
bside
Star Scout
Posts: 356
|
Post by bside on Mar 14, 2012 15:55:29 GMT -5
For me it's that Paul's music just seems to get better with age. I'll have spun a disk 100 times and something new will strike me, usually in mining a new lyric, the subtle genius of a turn of phrase finally smacking me, or my life situation becoming more applicable. I am in my mid 20's, I can only imagine how relevant his later work will be when I'm chasing middle age and pacing in my cage, even as it resonates with me now. I've kind of surprised I've never tried to break up any nuptials given Paul's knack for the subject.
Just this past week I kept humming the phrase "on the brink today of writing something memorable." I kept turning it over in my mind, then went to seek it out, for some reason thinking it was on Folker because I couldn't place it beyond PW's basement output. I ended up on 49:00 and falling hard for that song ("It'll Never Die", or "49:00" depending on your lenience). It now ranks above my favorites, years after I first heard it. I keep returning to it (and 49:00 in general, the consequential beauty of it being a single long track) and am in full discovery mode each time. How can you not be?
|
|
|
Post by GtrPlyr on Mar 14, 2012 17:16:17 GMT -5
I've been enjoying this thread. Guess it's time to enter the fray. Does anyone think they're spoiled by listening to Paul's music? Do you think he's raised the bar as a songwriter? Yes, I find myself with that problem. Whether I want to or not, I do compare Paul's music to new music and usually find the new stuff too bland and generic. I can definitely relate to this sentiment. Though I still believe there are a handful of really great songwriters out there doing their thing in an umcomprimsing way, some arguably writing better songs than Paul is these days. As for Paul raising the songwriting bar, I'm not sure he has, but he definitely belongs to a small and elite group of peers. He's definitely a songwriter with a knack for clever and inspired couplets, melodies and chords, but more than songwriting, I feel his strongest forte is his ability to convey raw emotion and passion through his playing and singing. That to me is what he brings to the table that so few others do. No doubt he's written some classic songs, but he's also written a lot of tossed-off songs that are fairly mundane musically and lyrically. The Westerberg delivery is what saves a lot of these average songs I feel. In someone elses hands a lot of those songs would be quite forgettable. I think Paul's songwriting batting average would probably improve if he spent a bit more time on his craft. There's nothing like a great song that happens in 15 minutes, but the reality is the best stuff often comes from refining what you have. It's like writers say: writing is all about rewriting. To me that applies to songwriting too. I think good songwriting often happens through a series of stages: 1) You capture a raw unedited stream of ideas and feelings to tape or paper, then 2) You refine the raw clay of these ideas and shape them into something more interesting and unique. Of course the Initial creative spark is where the emotion and heart of the song often resides, but without refinement you may not being doing justice to these ideas and feelings, and you end up with something uninspired and cliched sounding. My way of thinking is, if you have a good song that means something to you, it will inspire you to make it better, and you'll still be able to do it justice on take 3, 4, 10, or whatever. Now the so-so songs on the other hand are the ones that need to be captured quickly as they don't have the lasting power to fuel the creative spirit long-term. If an artist has a song they don't want to work on for more than one or two takes, well maybe the song isn't all that good or meaningful to them in the first place. I get the impression that Paul has a hard time focusing on his songs for any real length of time these days so everything ends up sounding tossed off and undercooked. Now I love the whole did-this-on-the-fly recording/songwriting style, but I also realize its limitations. As someone who dabbles in songwriting, I find that this method is great for getting the meat of a song down. But for me, I often come up with better or improved ways of saying or playing something over a period of time. I may start a song on guitar and realize later that the song actually needs a piano, or banjo, or pedal steel or whatever to take it to an even better place. It's these sort of experiments with a song that can vastly improve them. But if you never take the time to work on lyrics, arrangements and production everything can end up same-y same-y and generic. Some artists thrive and have the discipline and ear to do good work by themselves and know what to keep and what to shelve. But those people are in the vast minority. And even then, almost all benefit from an outside source at some point along the creative process. I think Paul's ADHD or whatever you want to call it definitely puts him in the category that would probably benefit from some outside help on ocassion, whether that be a band, producer or both. You know, someone to push, challenge and inspire. Even if it's just having someone come in after the initial tracking to overdub some other instruments or re-record a drum part or whatever. Of course, if the muse isn't there no amount of help will matter. Hopefully that isn't the case in Paul's case.
|
|
|
Post by FreeRider on Mar 15, 2012 15:24:20 GMT -5
Hey Gtrplyr, good to see you getting drawn back into posting! I should probably amend my previous statement about raising the bar. That's actually not quite the right word choice to use. You're right, it isn't so much raising the bar in songwriting---afterall, he's not inventing any new form or genre with his songs. I guess what I meant was raising the bar in terms of expectations. Like the example I used with my friend telling me that I'd like Matthew Sweet's power-pop rock style. My frame of reference for that is Paul, Big Star, Beatles, etc...I'm expecting to have something jump right out and grab my attention with a strong melody or catchy chorus or some riff/ hook. I do agree that Paul has this ability to convey emotion or a feeling, either thru his lyrics or just his vocal stylings. But I don't write this to slag on Sweet. Having cycled thru "Girlfriend" for 4 times now, I'm starting to get some of the songs a little more, some of them are growing on me. Yet, I still tend to feel it's the stylistic trappings of the songs (the 60's pop vocal harmonies, for example) more than the actual melody or chorus and hooks that draw me in. Again, I realize it's unfair to constantly compare another artist to Paul's work. You make good points about the process. I can't see Paul always being sworn to doing just one take. After all, we have the demo/rehearsal versions of songs that weren't fully formed, "Can't Hardly Wait", "Outta My System". And doesn't that reflect a little polishing? Or a little more thought into shaping and forming the song? Perhaps you're right in that he's gotten lax about paying more attention to his latest offerings, where he could tweak some stuff. And very true---since he's isolated himself, there's no one to bounce ideas off of anymore. It's just him in his basement. ih8music, You're right; it's not as if Paul hasn't written a clunker. Not every tune can be a home run with the fans, some songs are going to be much stronger and more appealing than others. And I don't or try not to be frozen in time, I will seek out new things as well if it seems like it's something I would enjoy. Yet, we will have to see if Paul wants to generate any music for his fans. Could be that he's just interested in writing and recording songs for himself now and really has no desire to share his creative meanderings.
|
|
|
Post by ClamsCasino on Mar 16, 2012 13:09:12 GMT -5
I have kind of the opposite reaction when listening to current stuff that's similar to what Paul has done in the past. I think he has raised the bar in my mind, but then I listen to Ryan Adams or Jay Farrar or whatever, and I almost get upset at myself for thinking that what they're doing is often better than anything Paul's done in the last 10-15 years. There are a lot of Ryan Adams' songs where I think, "That's the best Paul Westerberg song that Paul never wrote."
It's frustrating, because Paul should totally be able to take up the challenge and blow the doors off anything coming out today, but that's obviously not happening. He's making himself irrelevant through his inactivity, but if he was actually putting out music, then he could arguably be more relevant than he's ever been in the past. Argh.
|
|
|
Post by hudson99 on Mar 17, 2012 16:27:36 GMT -5
Hmmm, as much as I love Ryan I haven't heard anything truly memorable since 2005 or so. I wasn't a fan of the Cardinals stuff, and last year's album was so-so.
|
|
|
Post by ClamsCasino on Mar 17, 2012 17:06:06 GMT -5
I think Ashes & Fire is terrible overall, but the single, Lucky Now, is excellent.
I'm not a Cardinals fan either, but Ryan's probably put out more music since 2005 than Paul has in his entire solo career, so it's pretty easy to ignore the lackluster stuff. And I loooove Easy Tiger (2007), III/IV (2010) and half of the Follow the Lights EP (2007). Not to mention that he's released a ton of great vinyl/download only singles through his PAX AM site in the past couple years. The Tomorrowland/Disco Queen single is my favorite.
|
|
Jer
Beagle Scout
Posts: 1,182
|
Post by Jer on Mar 17, 2012 18:45:51 GMT -5
Hey GtrPlyr! Yeah - it's one thing to lay down a quick demo before you have to leave the house, and every once in a while there's something special there, but most cases it absolutely needs refinement. That sorta thing is fun on an album as the exception, maybe 1 short track, but it gets old quick against a set of realized songs. Of course there is some middle ground too. Something from Mono came across my iPod shuffle yesterday and I was thinking about this. It wasn't super tight or over-rehearsed. it was loose, the drums were a bit sloppy, but the song had an arrangement - it had a couple really cool breaks and a really cool ending. Those things don't happen the first time you make it through a song. So it wasn't the basement 1 take stuff but it wasn't Eventually either - it was some middle ground that really worked for Paul. That was such an optimistic time for PW fans... Blasphemy!!! Actually I totally agree with you Clams. Whatever someone thinks of Ryan Adams, the guy is a productive songwriter who works hard at the craft. It'd be great to see Paul put in a fraction of that effort. You're getting upset at yourself because it's almost ludicrous. It's so frustrating because we know what Paul is capabale of we haven't had a taste in many years. If Paul was productive he'd be at or near the top of that heap. I think that pressure, not only to be productive, but to be great, is a part of what keeps him away. The recent basement stuff was almost a passive aggressive "f**k you" to that whole scene and the people who want to hear what he can really do. it was half punk-rock rebellion and half terrified little brat. That might sound like somethingt that might have been said about the mats in 1984? I suppose the difference here is that it was amusing for 5 minutes (and some people still dig it), but in the end it just made me appreciate what he's done in the past and hope for a better direction in the future.
|
|
|
Post by FreeRider on Mar 19, 2012 10:12:21 GMT -5
You know, I'm also wondering what motivates Paul musically these days. ...but creating all this stuff without an audience to share it with seems kind of lonely.
Moreover, I saw the numbers on the record sales in the Color Me Obsessed documentary and they were rather paltry but indicative of a cult-like band. The question becomes, are the numbers so small now for Paul's solo efforts that his feeling now is, "is it even worth it anymore?" in regards to more solo releases? Or are we being too quick to say that he's done?
perhaps we should wait until the boxed set he's working on gets released and see what else is on there before we say the muse is gone and that he's done for. What if he held back a lot of things he could've released in the past 5 years or so to include it on the boxed set instead? Or what if he was really working on making the boxed set a little more than just the basement recordings?
|
|
|
Post by ClamsCasino on Mar 19, 2012 12:52:26 GMT -5
perhaps we should wait until the boxed set he's working on gets released and see what else is on there before we say the muse is gone and that he's done for. What if he held back a lot of things he could've released in the past 5 years or so to include it on the boxed set instead? Or what if he was really working on making the boxed set a little more than just the basement recordings? I could be wrong, but I thought that the box set news was referring to a Mats box set, not a Westerberg set?
|
|
|
Post by FreeRider on Mar 19, 2012 14:16:32 GMT -5
you know what? I'm not so sure either what was being referenced! I assumed it was his own solo career the Paul was talking about it: While a reunion may be unlikely in the near future, Westerberg has spent a lot of time recently combing through his past for a planned box set. "On a whim I got to dig through some old tapes," he says. "I found one song I never put on anything for people to hear. Then I dug deeper and found the original 'Good Day' [from his 1996 solo LP Eventually]. That pretty much stunned me. I have to close this box set pretty soon because this could take the rest of my life just going through all these things and going, 'God, why was that there.'"
Westerberg hasn't released any new material since his 2009 EP PW & The Ghost Gloves Cat Wing Joy Boys, and that's unlikely to change anytime soon. "I write stuff, but I haven't written much lately," he says. "I played a little saxophone last year, more or less just for something else to do. I wouldn't say I'm working on a record. I have enough stuff to release one tomorrow, but why bother? In this day and age, my thought is to make a song everyday and erase it as a sort of Dadaist protest." www.rollingstone.com/music/news/paul-westerberg-tommy-stinson-consider-replacements-reunion-20110822So yeah, it's not real clear if he meant the Mats material, his own, or both.
|
|
|
Post by timx1386 on Mar 19, 2012 19:23:22 GMT -5
"but why bother? In this day and age, my thought is to make a song everyday and erase it as a sort of Dadaist protest."
.... no matter how many times I read this.... it always makes me crazy inside. i'd rather watch someone throw money on a bonfire.
|
|
|
Post by anarkissed on Mar 19, 2012 19:56:20 GMT -5
I expect the "dadaist protest" remark was just classic Westerberg humor, and that actual writing and erasing doesn't really happen more now than it ever did...And I just can't believe that's he's writing and recording a lot of material on a regular basis, with no intention of ever releasing it, just for the fun of it around the house...I'm sure there's a ridiculous amount of unreleased odds and ends that he's gathered over the years (at least, those he hasn't erased), but I would think that collection only occasionally gets added to...
|
|
|
Post by FreeRider on Mar 20, 2012 10:09:20 GMT -5
"but why bother? In this day and age, my thought is to make a song everyday and erase it as a sort of Dadaist protest." ... no matter how many times I read this.... it always makes me crazy inside. i'd rather watch someone throw money on a bonfire. Yeah, that gets me wound up as well, the idea of him just erasing over material. I expect the "dadaist protest" remark was just classic Westerberg humor, and that actual writing and erasing doesn't really happen more now than it ever did..... That's what I'm hoping too, anarkissed. It's just Paul's twisted sense of humor and it's like he says stuff to the media just to get a rise out of people and have a little fun in these interviews. Although, I thought he did say that for the Stereo/Mono material, he had to give Darren the tapes finally because Paul was starting to record over the tapes with newer material. Which means maybe we need to buy the man a case or two of ADAT tapes so he never erases over stuff again!
|
|
|
Post by brianlux on Mar 20, 2012 11:12:06 GMT -5
Great discussion here, everyone!
This is only slightly related to the discussion but I'm in the middle of reading Henry Rollins SMILE, YOU'RE TRAVELING and though it's not a real current book (late 90's) he refers, as he occasionally has done elsewhere, to his dissatisfaction with where music has gone. He rants about how insipid music is today. Even if your not a Rollins fan you have to admit it goes at his music (and whatever he does) with everything he's got.
Anyway, this got me to thinking that Paul, in his own way, has shown dissatisfaction with the world of music and his approach- not just in writing but in presenting something boundary breaking like 49:00- illustrates his refusal to be just another popular fly-by-night artist.
|
|