I've listened to Lightning Bolt way more than Moonlander. But, yeah, I'd probably be the Moonlander is better camp. Which is not a knock on LB, just high praise for ML.
I would take "Moonlander" (or "Bayleaf," for that matter) over any of Pearl Jam's last three albums. And factoring out any of the emotional stuff I have tethered to them (first records I ever loved, etc.), over "Ten" and "Vs." too.
That's not reflexive "PJ bashing" either -- I genuinely think Stone's solo records are wonderful, and that his material supports a range of accompaniment, interpretation, etc. that no other band member's songs do, and that even as a collective they seldom manage.
Last edited by Kevin Davis on Sat January 10, 2015 8:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Kevin Davis wrote:I would take "Moonlander" (or "Bayleaf," for that matter) over any of Pearl Jam's last three albums. And factoring out any of the emotional stuff I have tethered to them (first records I ever loved, etc.), over "Ten" and "Vs." too.
That's not reflexive "PJ bashing" either -- I genuinely think Stone's solo records are wonderful, and that his material supports a range of accompaniment, interpretation, etc. that no other band member's songs do, and that even as a collective they seldom manage.
Jessica Fletcher wrote:Moon lander hasn't reached Bayleaf status for me, but it's damn good.
This.
I'd put Bayleaf above a good amount of PJ's work. Moonlander is certainly better than Backspacer and S/T. And arguably better than Lightning Bolt. I would tend toward ML but I'd entertain a good argument the other way.
Bayleaf is GLORIOUS. I'd take that over S/T, Backspacer, Lighting Bolt and Binaural (sorry, team) hands down. Probably over Vs, too.
yeah i prefer Bayleaf although Moonlander is pretty awesome.
But to put them torwards pj albums? i dont think they are similar at all. Specially Moonlander. Thats why i love them so much, even if a couple of songs could be pj songs; Stone has an identity as a solo artist too.
Bayleaf is awful. Moonlander is redeemingly good. I can't really compare Moonlander to Lightning Bolt. They're just too distinctly different to measure against each other. It's like one is a piece of fruit, and the other is a completely different kind of fruit.
Are they really that different, though? Both strike me as the same general type of stylistically eclectic pop-rock record, with occasional leanings in the direction of something more specific (some folky tracks, a "weird" track -- but all still well within the larger musical vernacular of the record). Each is stamped by its creator in a way that the other isn't, sure, but it's not like you're talking about two completely different genres of music that play by completely different rules.
The more I think about it, the harder it seems to find two records more suited to side-by-side comparison.