The Flood and The Mercy - reviews Options

[Bremang]

I'll put it more simply then:

If you think that the intro to PLOTR (one song) is equivalent to all of the la da da da and other non-verbals in his newer music, or that the presence of such no verbals one one song on one album justifies them to be used in virtually every song on recent material then you're being sheepish for no reason at all.

2nd, I never made the "ego" argument. I find you equating the intro to PLOTR to the intro on the river to be quite laughable, especially since the man himself has given a purposeful explanation of the former.

That being said it's not exactly a reach to see some elements of ego, to think you can ohhh, agh, and la da da da on everything. It suggests that lyrics are somewhat irrelevant so long as the singer is making sounds. There is such thing as doing it too much and my opinion is that modern Ed does it too much and not only that, but when does do it, it's not as meaningful as the intro to PLOTR or the whistling in Waitress. Hell, by your logic, Ed whistled in one song 20 years ago, if he whistled every bridge in TFATM it'd be totally legit.

Ed's fans enjoy the way the non-verbal vocals sound. So humble and generous of him to put so many non verbal meaningless vocals on the record for his fans to enjoy! Such meaningless non verbal vocals have been done a million times on Live's earlier albums, by the beatles, led zeppelin, rolling stones, and the majority of bands and singers on the planet. You won't hear about such non verbal vocals being egotistical until you get to fansoflive. The whole ego idea is just an incestuous trolling concept invented by a small group of Ed haters on the net. You won't find absurd ideas like that being followed anywhere else.

This post has been edited by Bremang: Oct 3 2013, 3:12 am

[PurdueSteve]

Ed's fans enjoy the way the non-verbal vocals sound. So humble and generous of him to put so many non verbal meaningless vocals on the record for his fans to enjoy! Such meaningless non verbal vocals have been done a million times on Live's earlier albums, by the beatles, led zeppelin, rolling stones, and the majority of bands and singers on the planet. You won't hear about such non verbal vocals being egotistical until you get to fansoflive. The whole ego idea is just an incestuous trolling concept invented by a small group of Ed haters on the net. You won't find absurd ideas like that being followed anywhere else.

You're confusing the argument, and it's obvious it's not on the merit of discussion but because you feel that I'm an "Ed Hater", so you must dilute the argument based upon that.

This issue is not dichotomous, no one is arguing the mere existence of non-verbals versus them not existing at all. What we are discussing is the frequency of their issue. Ed doing it on 1 song on 1 album is very different than doing it on 8 songs on 1 album. Why you cannot see this as the point is beyond me.

There's nothing wrong with non-verbals so referring to other bands or singers that do them is irrelevant. What is relevant is their frequency, if over-used, and/or the effectiveness of it. Can you honestly say that the la da da da's in "The River", the falsetto Ahhhh in "Seven" or the Ohhhhh in "Love Shines" is the same as the chant in "Pain Lies on the Riverside" or the whistling in "Waitress"?

Ego is an element, there is a direct correlation between Ed's control of the band (and solo work), the quality of the albums, and the frequency non-verbals are used. This is not opinion, it is fact. Put simply, in the earlier days non-verbals were not used with near the same frequency. Ed has demonstrated in multiple interviews and videos that his song writing process begins with the guitar and that the vocals are jibberish. He develops the vocal melody with the guitar first and then pencils in the lyrics later. Many of the non-verbals that you here in Ed's modern work are clearly the result of just leaving in the sounds of the vocal melody without lyrics. The TDTH outtakes has a demo or earlier version of Face&Ghost wherein the entire chorus is "la la la la" in accordance with the final vocal melody. Are you going to argue that the unfinished song is the same as the finished song based on the argument that "PLOTR begins with Ahhhhh, or that Led Zepplin used a non-verbal"

[dancing queen]

on Facebook, in the comments after a video in Holland, Ed said "I may be a Christian but I'm not a doormat." and there samore and then the cheek thing.

I am not trying to argue with anyone. I have met Ed many many times. He usually remembers me and we chat. He is always good to meet. This album, and his more recent work, seems to use more non-verbal vocals... and in less meaningful ways. It seems like he just wants to hear his voice. This is my opinion. Maybe I'm wrong but parts of the songs where I would just like to hear instruments I hear him ooohh ing and aaaahhhh ing.

[SJN1279]

Album
Ed Kowalczyk
The Flood And The Mercy
4 October, 2013

Ed Kowalczyk’s second solo effort is difficult to separate from his work as the hugely popular frontman of Live, and a cover shot recalling The Dolphin’s Cry video clip imagery does him no favours. The Flood And The Mercy is solid enough – rock-heavy, melodic, musically dynamic, intensely lyrical and even epic in the alternately banging and gentle twists of album highlight Take Me Back and the guitar work of R.E.M.’s Peter Buck throughout – though there’s not a great deal of new ground broken. If it ain’t broke…

Tyler McLoughlan

http://themusic.com.au/reviews/album/2013/...ler-mcloughlan/

[Bremang]

You're confusing the argument, and it's obvious it's not on the merit of discussion but because you feel that I'm an "Ed Hater", so you must dilute the argument based upon that.

This issue is not dichotomous, no one is arguing the mere existence of non-verbals versus them not existing at all. What we are discussing is the frequency of their issue. Ed doing it on 1 song on 1 album is very different than doing it on 8 songs on 1 album. Why you cannot see this as the point is beyond me.

There's nothing wrong with non-verbals so referring to other bands or singers that do them is irrelevant. What is relevant is their frequency, if over-used, and/or the effectiveness of it. Can you honestly say that the la da da da's in "The River", the falsetto Ahhhh in "Seven" or the Ohhhhh in "Love Shines" is the same as the chant in "Pain Lies on the Riverside" or the whistling in "Waitress"?

Ego is an element, there is a direct correlation between Ed's control of the band (and solo work), the quality of the albums, and the frequency non-verbals are used. This is not opinion, it is fact. Put simply, in the earlier days non-verbals were not used with near the same frequency. Ed has demonstrated in multiple interviews and videos that his song writing process begins with the guitar and that the vocals are jibberish. He develops the vocal melody with the guitar first and then pencils in the lyrics later. Many of the non-verbals that you here in Ed's modern work are clearly the result of just leaving in the sounds of the vocal melody without lyrics. The TDTH outtakes has a demo or earlier version of Face&Ghost wherein the entire chorus is "la la la la" in accordance with the final vocal melody. Are you going to argue that the unfinished song is the same as the finished song based on the argument that "PLOTR begins with Ahhhhh, or that Led Zepplin used a non-verbal"

You confused the argument. DQ was talking about the "overuse," of Ed's non verbal vocals, to which she described was Ed singing "over" the music. That could mean frequency, or it could mean she thinks Ed is putting the vocals too loud in the mix, or both. My response covered both.

When you first chimed in, you made no mention of frequency, as you now claim is the main point. All you said was that some of Ed's non verbal vocals had more meaning than others. You also claim now that the frequency has gone up. You also claim that it's not opinion, but rather a fact that certain Live music is better than other music.

So again, my response covered all of that. And I think your response is generally wrong. I don't think it's so much a fact, but rather your opinion, that certain Live music would be thought of as better by you or anyone. I also think it's your opinion that certain non verbal vocals have more or less meaning than others, cause a song can mean anything to the listener. And as I said before, Ed has been doing the non verbal vocals from day one. MJ, TC, SS, TDTH has non verbal vocals in almost every song.

Also, I don't think you have a handle on Ed's songwriting. Just cause you hear evidence of one track doesn't mean that's how all his songs come to be. Also, your comparison of Ed's control of Live's music to the quality of the music, is again your opinion, and the correlation is shrouded by so many factors. Ed wrote the fan favorites as well, and his voice was fresher was he was young. For instance, it could be more that Ed was young and inspired, opposed to having let CCP have control, which made the music more likable to you.

This post has been edited by Bremang: Oct 5 2013, 6:55 am

[PurdueSteve]

You confused the argument. DQ was talking about the "overuse," of Ed's non verbal vocals, to which she described was Ed singing "over" the music. That could mean frequency, or it could mean she thinks Ed is putting the vocals too loud in the mix, or both. My response covered both.

Seems clear to me which she was referring to.

When you first chimed in, you made no mention of frequency, as you now claim is the main point. All you said was that some of Ed's non verbal vocals had more meaning than others. You also claim now that the frequency has gone up. You also claim that it's not opinion, but rather a fact that certain Live music is better than other music.

If Ed's own comments aren't good enough for the discussion, then nothing is. Some of Ed's non-verbals do indeed mean more than others. The frequency has gone up. Speaking in general terms, Live's earlier music is better than Live's later music and Ed's solo stuff. While sure, from the perspective of any one person, one could prefer SFBM to SS or Alive to TC, but when considering the fanbase as a whole, it's really not an opinion that TC is considered better than SFBM.

So again, my response covered all of that. And I think your response is generally wrong. I don't think it's so much a fact, but rather your opinion, that certain Live music would be thought of as better by you or anyone. I also think it's your opinion that certain non verbal vocals have more or less meaning than others, cause a song can mean anything to the listener. And as I said before, Ed has been doing the non verbal vocals from day one. MJ, TC, SS, TDTH has non verbal vocals in almost every song.

Again the presence of non-verbals does not quantify frequency. You are saying that because there are some on say MJ, that it would make it OK for them to be used in every song on a later album. That just doesn't make sense.

As for the meanings of non-verbals, no one was discussing listener interpretations. The argument was around Ed's usage of non-verbals and how it's perceived by some as an element of his ego. That has everything to do with Ed's intention or meaning behind a non-verbal and nothing to do with how one listener might interpret them. Like I said, Ed himself stated that the PLOTR intro was inspired by something specifically and that the whole track was going for that kind of sound. It does not matter if that's your interpretation of it or not, at least relative to a discussion of Ed's ego and non-verbals being an indicator of it. Having a specific meaning or setting you're trying to get at with a non-verbal versus just singing la-da-da-da-da in a false-setto just because aren't the same thing, no matter how you try to spin it.

Also, I don't think you have a handle on Ed's songwriting. Just cause you hear evidence of one track doesn't mean that's how all his songs come to be. Also, your comparison of Ed's control of Live's music to the quality of the music, is again your opinion, and the correlation is shrouded by so many factors. Ed wrote the fan favorites as well, and his voice was fresher was he was young. For instance, it could be more that Ed was young and inspired, opposed to having let CCP have control, which made the music more likable to you.

Again, I don't just make shit up for the sake of debate. Ed's songwriting process has been detailed by him in countless interviews. I hear evidence of it on tracks 20 years ago and today. His general process has not changed. He says as much, still to this day. Why do you insist arguing against what the man himself says? I used Face&Ghost as it was a very clear example of it, but it's quite clear in "All That I Wanted" from TFATM.

As for opinion, again read above. In general, the majority would say that Live's earlier work is better than their later work and Ed's solo stuff and that it directly correlates with Ed's control over the band and lack of collaboration. Hell, even by Nicks success metric of sales and concert attendance early Live wins out over later Live and Ed Solo.

This post has been edited by PurdueSteve: Oct 7 2013, 7:48 am

[Hoodstock]

Bottom line with this album - Ed has done better. Ed can do better.

Guess it is what it is. Take what you can enjoy from it and add it to a playlist.

Hopefully the next album will top this one.

[Bremang]

Some of Ed's non-verbals do indeed mean more than others. The frequency has gone up.

As for the meanings of non-verbals, no one was discussing listener interpretations.

Nobody was talking about Ed's non verbal vocals having meaning until you tried to relate that to Ed's ego. If you don't understand how listener interpretations negate your argument, then you aren't listening to what Ed says repeatedly about his songwriting. He prefers to lend the song meaning to whatever the listener wants to think, which makes it impossible to figure out which non verbal vocals have more meaning than others. Plus, the frequency of non verbal vocals is about the same as it always was.

You are saying that because there are some on say MJ, that it would make it OK for them to be used in every song on a later album. That just doesn't make sense.

Of course that doesn't make sense...you made that up. I wasn't talking about whether it's "OK" to use non verbal vocals in any sense, i'm just saying I don't think there's a correlation to Ed's non verbal vocals on TFATM and Ed being arrogant.

In general, the majority would say that Live's earlier work is better than their later work and Ed's solo stuff and that it directly correlates with Ed's control over the band and lack of collaboration.

Well, the majority seem to be short sighted on the weening popularity of Live's music. They tend to be very emotional and tend to not even think about the many other factors that seem very likely reasons for the music to become less popular....such as Ed's voice being thoroughly damaged after a career of screaming, shifts in inspiration, changes in the music industry, changes in consumer demands, being 40 years old, etc. Almost nobody keeps it going hot from 16yrs old to 40yrs old in the singer/songwriter department or in the music industry. There's almost no chance Ed can pull off the same level he was at in the 90's but I commend Ed's effort for putting out an album that's listenable. That's called having realistic expectations.

Look at Live's secret samadhi shows. Ed was attention seeking there if he ever was. Watch his super aloof interview style during throwing copper, speaking coyly, acting like a super wise 22 year old. Today, touring is just his day job. He has 4 kids to feed. His music is aimed for the middle ground of contemporary adult rock, nothing fancy at all. No more frolicking. I see Ed being way less arrogant now than he was in the 90's.

This post has been edited by Bremang: Oct 8 2013, 6:53 pm

[PurdueSteve]

It seems like you're responding for the sake of it.

I see Ed being way less arrogant now than he was in the 90's.

Arrogance and Ego are not synonymous terms. You're not going to disprove one by trying to disprove the other. One can have an element of ego and not be arrogant. One cannot be arrogant without ego.

Nobody was talking about Ed's non verbal vocals having meaning until you tried to relate that to Ed's ego. If you don't understand how listener interpretations negate your argument, then you aren't listening to what Ed says repeatedly about his songwriting. He prefers to lend the song meaning to whatever the listener wants to think, which makes it impossible to figure out which non verbal vocals have more meaning than others. Plus, the frequency of non verbal vocals is about the same as it always was.

I understand listener interpretations. I'm just saying that regarding Ed's ego and his intentions (egotistical or not) have no relevance to a listener's interpretations. If Ed jumps out in front of his guitar player while the guy is playing a solo and starts falsetto-ing over the guy that is ego and the listener's interpretation of that is irrelevant. Not irrelevant in general, just irrelevant to the discussion.

As for the frequency, there are at least 6 tracks on TFATM that have them. Haven't counted and have only loosely paid attention to it. Are there that many on TC, SS, MJ? Moreso, live performances they get used more. Bridge in Lightning Crashes does not have non-verbals on the studio track, performed today it does.

Of course that doesn't make sense...you made that up. I wasn't talking about whether it's "OK" to use non verbal vocals in any sense, i'm just saying I don't think there's a correlation to Ed's non verbal vocals on TFATM and Ed being arrogant.

That's fine if that's what you "think". I "think" there is a lot of evidence to the contrary. Is it absolute? No, it's not math we can't conclude this one way or the other but I've made my arguments and I've cited very specific examples using specific tracks. The only specific example you cited was PLOTR, to which I pointed out that Ed has gone in interview and talked directly about that opening. Unless you have evidence (an interview perhaps) where Ed breaks down a falsetto "ooooooooo" that starts out "Love Shines" as to something more than just making sounds for the fuck of it, I'll be all ears, tell then it's quite reasonable given the evidence from the man himself that some can have a bigger meaning or intent than others.

[Bremang]

When she said "ego," she meant being arrogant, and so do you. Yea, more than 6 times on MJ, TC, or SS. Doesn't matter, we're talking about non verbal vocals, there's not a connection to arrogance really.

[dangum]

6 reviews on Amazon.co.uk. All are 5 stars.
link

[Soxwsc]

Seven used to be one of my favorite tracks on the album, but that was before that high-pitched beeping sound effect got to me, before it was even really noticeable to me. I guess I've always noticed it but it didn't bother me much at first. Now after 100 listens it's like nails on a chalkboard or the most obnoxious sounding alarm clock. I swear I was taking a shower and all the sudden I heard something in the bedroom and quickly realized it was that damn beeping in my head. Then I was enjoying a nice Italian dinner that same night and at one point I looked over at my girl and say 'did you hear that.. oh god.. never mind'.

Does this drive anyone else crazy? WTF was the point in adding this sound effect throughout the track? It doesn't even sound good. Anyone with any insight into song writing can shed some light into why a decision was made to add this sound effect?

[Live4Life]

Seven used to be one of my favorite tracks on the album, but that was before that high-pitched beeping sound effect got to me, before it was even really noticeable to me. I guess I've always noticed it but it didn't bother me much at first. Now after 100 listens it's like nails on a chalkboard or the most obnoxious sounding alarm clock. I swear I was taking a shower and all the sudden I heard something in the bedroom and quickly realized it was that damn beeping in my head. Then I was enjoying a nice Italian dinner that same night and at one point I looked over at my girl and say 'did you hear that.. oh god.. never mind'.

Does this drive anyone else crazy? WTF was the point in adding this sound effect throughout the track? It doesn't even sound good. Anyone with any insight into song writing can shed some light into why a decision was made to add this sound effect?

Wut? ocd much? LOL. Um how does something like that bother you? Wierd. I mean, it's a song. lol it's not a sound effect it's keyboards.

This post has been edited by Live4Life: Oct 26 2013, 9:11 pm

[dangum]

Anyone with any insight into song writing can shed some light into why a decision was made to add this sound effect?

I read/heard an interview with Ed saying that the effect was added by producer Jamie Candiloro. Watch the 2013 FaceCulture videos - I think he elaborates on the idea behind it there.

[Live4Life]

I read/heard an interview with Ed saying that the effect was added by producer Jamie Candiloro. Watch the 2013 FaceCulture videos - I think he elaborates on the idea behind it there.

I read on his fb it was a keyboard sound effect? Effect but keyboards? so it's not?