The board's server will undergo upgrade maintenance tonight, Nov 5, 2014, beginning approximately around 10 PM ET. Prepare for some possible down time during this process.
Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 11:15 pm Posts: 20784 Location: the bathroom
tragabigzanda wrote:
i find it weird that you guys are so hung up on getting some sort of public closure with Dave. I agree he's an integral part of their success due to his presence during "the big years," but also what the fuck. Do any of you have any desire to get in touch with someone you had a lot of conflict with in 1994?
i find it weird that you guys are so hung up on getting some sort of public closure with Dave. I agree he's an integral part of their success due to his presence during "the big years," but also what the fuck. Do any of you have any desire to get in touch with someone you had a lot of conflict with in 1994?
Ed mentions his breakdown about the ending of the recording process before he was really ready to be. Wonder what pieces he thought were unfinished or what he planned on revisiting.
Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 11:15 pm Posts: 20784 Location: the bathroom
EJ wrote:
Ed mentions his breakdown about the ending of the recording process before he was really ready to be. Wonder what pieces he thought were unfinished or what he planned on revisiting.
he seems to be a tinkerer and a bit of a perfectionist, and tough for him to say a song is finished. i only say this bc of the stories of him writing/re-writing songs and lyrics, especially during the Avocado period. for all of the shit BOB gets now, the band probably appreciates his ability for him to say, "This is good, no need to work on it further".
now, whether he's right or not is a different question.
Ed mentions his breakdown about the ending of the recording process before he was really ready to be. Wonder what pieces he thought were unfinished or what he planned on revisiting.
yeah, i was surprised to hear that. Stone was very satisfied with the album, maybe this is when those two began to fight over the band?
i find it weird that you guys are so hung up on getting some sort of public closure with Dave. I agree he's an integral part of their success due to his presence during "the big years," but also what the fuck. Do any of you have any desire to get in touch with someone you had a lot of conflict with in 1994?
I just think they ought to give the guy a lot more respect for having been an integral member of the band at a particularly important time in their history (arguably the most important time). I really can't think of any other band of their stature who've had such a strange relationship with one of their key members from their "classic" period without their being some glaringly obvious reason why. On a human level, the guy seems to still be quite affected by how it ended so suddenly, by the lack of closure from being fired when he clearly didn't expect it. Maybe there's some additional factor which has never been reported which has influenced how the band treat the guy but at this point I'm doubtful.
Anders wrote:
Dave A was with the band for three years out of 28. In 2020, he will only have been with the band for 1/10th of the time that the band has existed. Yes, the relationship could have been handled a bit more profesionally on both parts for the Hall of Fame, but mostly he's a guy from their past. Like some guy you went to school with for three years in the early 90s, and you didn't even like him that much.
These comparisons don't work at all - those three years (1991-1994) were disproportionately important to the band's history, way more so than anything which has happened in the last eighteen or so (give or take).
VinylGuy wrote:
EJ wrote:
Ed mentions his breakdown about the ending of the recording process before he was really ready to be. Wonder what pieces he thought were unfinished or what he planned on revisiting.
yeah, i was surprised to hear that. Stone was very satisfied with the album, maybe this is when those two began to fight over the band?
Yeah, this was a really interesting insight, as well as Stone's statement that the sessions kind of fizzled out and Brendan pulled it together during mixing (I also never expected to hear Stone say the phrase "we banged hard and banged early", but sometimes life surprises you).
Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 12:35 am Posts: 35489
tragabigzanda wrote:
i find it weird that you guys are so hung up on getting some sort of public closure with Dave. I agree he's an integral part of their success due to his presence during "the big years," but also what the fuck. Do any of you have any desire to get in touch with someone you had a lot of conflict with in 1994?
This.
You’d swear he was solely responsible for their success if you only read rm
i find it weird that you guys are so hung up on getting some sort of public closure with Dave. I agree he's an integral part of their success due to his presence during "the big years," but also what the fuck. Do any of you have any desire to get in touch with someone you had a lot of conflict with in 1994?
This.
You’d swear he was solely responsible for their success if you only read rm
I'd say he was about as responsible for it as Mike McCready during his time in the band.
Imagine if Mike had left/been fired around 1994-1995 when he was in rehab and off making the Mad Season record, would the response be the same?
It's not as though I think they should carry out some public apology ritual with Dave, but it's quite clear to me that he's still hurt by what happened, and it seems they (Stone excepted) repeatedly go out of their way to minimise his contributions to their success, something which they are still benefiting from. There's no way they'd be in the position they are today if not for Dave Abbruzzese.
well they had already a hit album without him...but yeah, its weird they chose to minimize his phase in the band.
And i was surprised too to hear Stone talking about the end of those sessions as something that was kinda hard too. Seems from 93 to 97 they had a lot of internal problems between Ed, Stone and Jeff.
Joined: Tue September 24, 2013 5:56 pm Posts: 47165 Location: In the oatmeal aisle wearing a Shellac shirt
Birds in Hell wrote:
tragabigzanda wrote:
i find it weird that you guys are so hung up on getting some sort of public closure with Dave. I agree he's an integral part of their success due to his presence during "the big years," but also what the fuck. Do any of you have any desire to get in touch with someone you had a lot of conflict with in 1994?
I just think they ought to give the guy a lot more respect for having been an integral member of the band at a particularly important time in their history (arguably the most important time). I really can't think of any other band of their stature who've had such a strange relationship with one of their key members from their "classic" period without their being some glaringly obvious reason why. On a human level, the guy seems to still be quite affected by how it ended so suddenly, by the lack of closure from being fired when he clearly didn't expect it. Maybe there's some additional factor which has never been reported which has influenced how the band treat the guy but at this point I'm doubtful.
Sure, and I think they really dropped the ball on a good opportunity during the PJ20 push. They could have easily cleared the air and given him his due in the book and/or doc. But the continued call for further acknowledgment is so odd to me.
Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 11:15 pm Posts: 20784 Location: the bathroom
from an interview earlier this year:
Quote:
MA: There is a lot of speculation on why you left Pearl Jam. What was the real reason?
Dave A: I left because Stone told me that they were looking for another drummer! Ha! It’s funny because it’s true. Truth be told, I still don’t know for sure why I was fired. I’d never been in that situation before. Looking back at it, as I did for years, it had me miffed. Then one day I came across footage of the band Candlebox with the drummer Dave Krusen playing with them live and a theory formed in my head. All personality questions aside, what I witnessed was just another drummer. No spark. No fire. No rock or roll. That was what they (Pearl Jam) had wanted as their drummer? Then I looked at how, in comparison to his other work, Matt Cameron’s approach with regards to his drumming is very tame and lackluster when he is playing with PJ. It made me realize that perhaps they never intended to be a hard-driven, powerful rock band. I drove that band as a rock drummer drives a rock band. Like Matt Cameron drove Soundgarden. Mind you, I am still guessing, yet this is the only excuse that I have found that makes my firing make sense.
Other excuses I have heard such as my cymbals, political views, gun ownership, or that I enjoyed the success more readily, etc. are all laughable to me. Actually, most of the facts surrounding how that powerful version of that band was destroyed is laughable to me at this point. I still think I am a little angry at the chicken-shit way it was handled twenty plus years ago. At least Stone was man enough to show me some respect and didn’t allow it to be handled by lawyers. I will always be grateful for the day we spent together when he told me I was out of the band. It was a very emotional effort that took a lot of strength on his part. He knew that it was going to destroy a part of me that he valued. It was the beginning of one of the most challenging experiences of my life, having to let go of what could have been and witness what all of that hard work was allowed to become.
MA: How did being fired from Pearl Jam affect you as a musician?
Dave A: That experience began a very challenging period of my life. Being “fired” from a band. Then to be discredited and disrespected and all but written out of the band’s history. The reason for that is a grudge that formed around my participation in an authorized book that was being written as I was fired. I participated in it and it really pissed some people off. I had no idea how far the shadow of profitability extended from the band.
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 3:35 pm Posts: 32292 Location: Buenos Aires
tragabigzanda wrote:
Birds in Hell wrote:
tragabigzanda wrote:
i find it weird that you guys are so hung up on getting some sort of public closure with Dave. I agree he's an integral part of their success due to his presence during "the big years," but also what the fuck. Do any of you have any desire to get in touch with someone you had a lot of conflict with in 1994?
I just think they ought to give the guy a lot more respect for having been an integral member of the band at a particularly important time in their history (arguably the most important time). I really can't think of any other band of their stature who've had such a strange relationship with one of their key members from their "classic" period without their being some glaringly obvious reason why. On a human level, the guy seems to still be quite affected by how it ended so suddenly, by the lack of closure from being fired when he clearly didn't expect it. Maybe there's some additional factor which has never been reported which has influenced how the band treat the guy but at this point I'm doubtful.
Sure, and I think they really dropped the ball on a good opportunity during the PJ20 push. They could have easily cleared the air and given him his due in the book and/or doc. But the continued call for further acknowledgment is so odd to me.
IMO, the biggest "fuck you" to him was the way the drummer situation was handled in the PJ20 doc.
Contrast that with the raw honesty of the Foo Fighters doc around lineup changes
I think they would have tried to bury the hatchet with Dave many years ago had he not taken such an active part in that Five Against One book. I'm sure there's still a deep-seated grudge over that.
Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 12:35 am Posts: 35489
We’ve seen this in Star Wars a lot. Pj/Vs is a tender sensitise formative years thing and the dave /pj split is like a divorce and we haven’t the tools to grasp the reasons for it and how it impacts us so we carry it on into adulthood like a child of an ugly divorce who has never had it explained to him why it happened so we’ll be forever angry about it and how dare they move on and not want to talk about it. Wan wah poor me.
He’s a drummer. He or no drummer is so crucial that the band would collapse without him. It’s 25 years ago. Move on. They have.
Joined: Tue September 24, 2013 5:56 pm Posts: 47165 Location: In the oatmeal aisle wearing a Shellac shirt
dimejinky99 wrote:
We’ve seen this in Star Wars a lot. Pj/Vs is a tender sensitise formative years thing and the dave /pj split is like a divorce and we haven’t the tools to grasp the reasons for it and how it impacts us so we carry it on into adulthood like a child of an ugly divorce who has never had it explained to him why it happened so we’ll be forever angry about it and how dare they move on and not want to talk about it. Wan wah poor me.
He’s a drummer. He or no drummer is so crucial that the band would collapse without him. It’s 25 years ago. Move on. They have.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum
