Pasadena Album Synopsis

Scott Peltz · May 30, 2007, 10:16:07 PM

yeah, I mean, I don't think we need to go into who said what to whom, or who got to keep the cd's that they bought together or whatever it is, I just like understanding the motives behind the songs. So knowing that the forlorn songs that Daniel wrote may have some foundation on real life events interests me. I mean, I guess I'm interested in whether Star got married or not, but I don't think it has effected ozma as much as Daniel's relationship has.

I guess what I'm saying is, any beatles fan has an opinion on how much yoko changed the music. As long as the talk of ozma's relationships is pertinent to the music, I don't see any harm in a little minor digging into their personal lives.

Scott Peltz · May 30, 2007, 10:17:15 PM

anyways, back to the album...can someone tell me where the trombone comes in? I listened for it, and could not hear it anywhere. Same thing with the guest vocals on Lunchbreak.

heysarahsarah · May 31, 2007, 02:54:42 PM

I think the point I mean is not to spread rumors, or, more importantly, it would be very rude for anyone to discuss personal matters that they may have heard privately.

I don't want GOD to be a rumor mill sewing circle is all.

CT-700 · May 31, 2007, 03:42:38 PM

Quote from: Scott Peltz on May 30, 2007, 10:17:15 PM
anyways, back to the album...can someone tell me where the trombone comes in? I listened for it, and could not hear it anywhere. Same thing with the guest vocals on Lunchbreak.

I've been trying to find it for a week. Still haven't.

Seb · June 01, 2007, 02:02:25 PM

Quote from: Scott Peltz on May 25, 2007, 12:19:32 PM
Quote from: Seb on May 22, 2007, 02:52:39 PM
And if you don't like Straight Flush, you need your ears testing.

I love it when people say stuff like this. It always reminds me that my opinions are in fact inferior to others', and that my tastes are wrong.

Oh wait, I forgot that music snobs' elitism doesn't count if there are grammatical errors. So I guess I'll go get my "ears testing" and see if that makes a difference.

Don't put my words in quotation marks in a pathetic attempt to pick holes in my grammar where there are none. Yes, it's grammatically incorrect to say you'll "get your ears testing", but that's not what I said - you took me out of context. Now, look up "gerund" in a fucking dictionary and then come back at me.

And it was quite clear that my comment was meant in a light-hearted way. Not in a snobby "You're an idiot if you don't like the song" way, but in an "I can't believe anyone would dislike the song!" way.

funwithsponges · June 02, 2007, 12:04:17 PM

I love Straight Flush more and more everytime I listen to it. Goddamn, this is a ridiculously good song.

Scott Peltz · June 02, 2007, 08:23:21 PM

Quote from: Seb on June 01, 2007, 02:02:25 PM
Quote from: Scott Peltz on May 25, 2007, 12:19:32 PM
Quote from: Seb on May 22, 2007, 02:52:39 PM
And if you don't like Straight Flush, you need your ears testing.

I love it when people say stuff like this. It always reminds me that my opinions are in fact inferior to others', and that my tastes are wrong.

Oh wait, I forgot that music snobs' elitism doesn't count if there are grammatical errors. So I guess I'll go get my "ears testing" and see if that makes a difference.

Don't put my words in quotation marks in a pathetic attempt to pick holes in my grammar where there are none. Yes, it's grammatically incorrect to say you'll "get your ears testing", but that's not what I said - you took me out of context. Now, look up "gerund" in a fucking dictionary and then come back at me.

And it was quite clear that my comment was meant in a light-hearted way. Not in a snobby "You're an idiot if you don't like the song" way, but in an "I can't believe anyone would dislike the song!" way.

Okay, not that I care that much, but there is no grammtical difference between "get my ears testing" and "you need your ears testing". Both of them should equally be "tested" instead. So I wouldn't really say that it was taken out of context. There's no need to get snippy.

But more importantly, maybe it would help me if one of the many of you on here that love this song so much could explain to me why. I'd ask someone I know in person, but honestly no one I know likes the song at all. So if my friends don't like it, but all of you do, perhaps other than ozma we have widely varying tastes? What exactly makes this song so "ridiculously good"? I just can't ever get a handle on whether it's supposed to be a slow song or a rocking song. The opening vocal melody does nothing for me. I can't get into the lyrics at all. I mean, you know how some people think that "Bad Dogs" is dumb, because it's all about dogs? Well, that's how I feel about "Straight Flush". Except "Bad Dogs" is actually a pretty cool metaphor. And I assume that "Straight Flush" is also supposed to be a metaphor, but I don't get it.

So, maybe if you guys tell me why you like it so much, I'll realize what I'm missing?

Martha Gail · June 02, 2007, 11:21:27 PM

You know, I can't put my finger on why I like this song, but the more times I listen to it, the better I like it. It might just be the part when Dan yells, "If you want the odds..." Honestly, I really didn't like that song at first.

Fantastic Max · June 02, 2007, 11:41:55 PM

Reminds me of more of a hard-rockin' "Come Home Andrea" in some parts like "Leave it up to me...babe" and "Well, if I was the king, babe, I'd buy you anything" Kinda country-ish sounding. Love it.

Then other parts there's more of a metal sound where there's the guitars are harmonizing and everything..and although it's not my favorite song, Dan's vocals are flawless from the middle to the end.

And the harmonizing of Ryen's guitar with Star's keys throughout the song as well.

EDIT: Motorology's easily probably my favorite.

Seb · June 03, 2007, 01:15:21 AM

Quote from: Scott Peltz on June 02, 2007, 08:23:21 PM
Okay, not that I care that much, but there is no grammtical difference between "get my ears testing" and "you need your ears testing". Both of them should equally be "tested" instead. So I wouldn't really say that it was taken out of context. There's no need to get snippy.

There is, though. If you use the word "get", you have to follow it with the past participle "tested". If you don't use it, then yes, you CAN use the past participle, with the implied words "to have your" or "to get your" missed out (eg "You need to have your ears tested"). However, you can also use the GERUND, which is "testing". A gerund is a verb acting as a noun. Like I said, look it up. In that instance, "testing" becomes an OBJECT that you're being told you need. If you re-arrange it : "You need the testing of your ears". Sounds silly when arranged that way, but is still grammatically correct. "You need your ears testing" is just a better-sounding rearrangement of that.

Now, I can't say that all that was running through my head when I said it, but it's still a fairly commonly-used phrase, and certainly it's the one that came to my mind first. Try googling "need your ears testing" and "need your ears tested" - they come out with almost the same number of results (the former actually brings this thread up as second result!). As you say, it's hardly the most important thing in the world, except for the fact that I don't like people being smug and superior about my grammar when it's actually perfectly legitimate. What you've done is a thing that a lot of people on the internet do - you've seen a piece of grammar that you don't understand, or don't like, and you've assumed it must be wrong.

funwithsponges · June 03, 2007, 08:00:16 AM

The way Dan's voice sounds, the harmonizing of guitar and keys in between verses, plus I think that when I listen to the album version I can remember how they played it live, and I thought it was really good live.

I don't usually listen to the lyrics until I've listened to a song a couple of times, and even when I do listen for lyrics, I don't really try to break them down. So I don't care what the metaphor is. So I don't have that bugging me the same way it bugs you.

Scott Peltz · June 03, 2007, 12:38:45 PM

Quote from: Seb on June 03, 2007, 01:15:21 AM
Quote from: Scott Peltz on June 02, 2007, 08:23:21 PM
Okay, not that I care that much, but there is no grammtical difference between "get my ears testing" and "you need your ears testing". Both of them should equally be "tested" instead. So I wouldn't really say that it was taken out of context. There's no need to get snippy.

There is, though. If you use the word "get", you have to follow it with the past participle "tested". If you don't use it, then yes, you CAN use the past participle, with the implied words "to have your" or "to get your" missed out (eg "You need to have your ears tested"). However, you can also use the GERUND, which is "testing". A gerund is a verb acting as a noun. Like I said, look it up. In that instance, "testing" becomes an OBJECT that you're being told you need. If you re-arrange it : "You need the testing of your ears". Sounds silly when arranged that way, but is still grammatically correct. "You need your ears testing" is just a better-sounding rearrangement of that.

Now, I can't say that all that was running through my head when I said it, but it's still a fairly commonly-used phrase, and certainly it's the one that came to my mind first. Try googling "need your ears testing" and "need your ears tested" - they come out with almost the same number of results (the former actually brings this thread up as second result!). As you say, it's hardly the most important thing in the world, except for the fact that I don't like people being smug and superior about my grammar when it's actually perfectly legitimate. What you've done is a thing that a lot of people on the internet do - you've seen a piece of grammar that you don't understand, or don't like, and you've assumed it must be wrong.

No, I understand perfectly what a gerund is. I did not make fun of it because I didn't know what it was; you were a jerk and I wanted to make you look like an idiot. So you may not be an idiot, but you're still a jerk.

It may be a correct sentence theoretically, but it doesn't seem right for what you were saying. It reminds me of the scene in Love Actually where Colin Firth's character is speaking portuguese, and his new fiance is speaking english, and their verbage is all screwy. I can't remember how much of it was wrong, but there were phrases like "yes, is being my answer". It grammatically all makes sense, but that doesn't mean it's the right way to say it.

It also sounds to me like a prearranged event. As in, "Man, my ears testing appointment is tuesday. I don't want to go." said Larry.
His wife responded "I really think you should. Your hearing gets worse every day. You need your ears testing"

Actually, no, even then it still sounds like english is their second language.

And 'testing' would not be an object. It is a noun, yes, but it would perhaps be a thing, or more accurately an event.

And you still haven't said why you like it so much.

heysarahsarah · June 03, 2007, 01:53:41 PM

Personally, I just love Dan's vocals in the song. The "Nooooooo rush, straaaaaaaaight flush" sounds really..I dunno...maybe sexy is the right word. I think it's some of the best vocals on the album apart from HvH.

VanSlegr Fan · June 03, 2007, 02:52:51 PM

agreed Sarah, great vocals.

this isnt much of a synopsis, but my favorites from most to least are,
1. Incarnation Blues
2. Underneath My Tree
3. Heartache v. Heartbreak
4. Motorology 339
5. I Wonder
6. Straight Flush
7. Barriers
8. Fight the Darkness
9. Lunchbreak
10. Eponine
11. NONTK

FireAarro · June 03, 2007, 11:14:50 PM

Quote from: heysarahsarah on June 03, 2007, 01:53:41 PM
Personally, I just love Dan's vocals in the song. The "Nooooooo rush, straaaaaaaaight flush" sounds really..I dunno...maybe sexy is the right word. I think it's some of the best vocals on the album apart from HvH.

I love the vocals too. What I love about Straight Flush overall is the dynamics. It gets absolutely bone-crushingly heavy by the end, and is balanced by some really tender bits. It feels really emotional, to me, anyway. Also I love the harmony in it. But yeah, it's really intense and beautiful.

Seb · June 04, 2007, 12:21:57 AM

Quote from: Scott Peltz on June 03, 2007, 12:38:45 PM
It may be a correct sentence theoretically, but it doesn't seem right for what you were saying.

It doesn't seem right... TO YOU. That doesn't make it wrong. You spell "colour" and "neighbour" wrong. You're probably one of those people who say "could care less", or "you've got another thing coming". They don't sound right to me, but people still use them.

And I can't be bothered to go into why I like the song (aside from the fact that it's a matter of personal taste) because I don't see why I should do you the courtesy when you're persisting with the idea that I speak crap English when I've got a degree in it that included extensive and intensive study of the history, use and theory of the language.

JOD · June 05, 2007, 11:05:19 AM

Boys, boys, you've run this thread into the gerund.

I.. I like Straight Flush too.

Seb · June 05, 2007, 02:00:02 PM

Jeremy O'D for the win.

LMRS · June 06, 2007, 02:31:49 AM

Quote from: Scott Peltz on May 30, 2007, 10:17:15 PM
anyways, back to the album...can someone tell me where the trombone comes in? I listened for it, and could not hear it anywhere. Same thing with the guest vocals on Lunchbreak.

Trombones are heard at the end of the song. They start as Ryen sings the last word of the song, "Go". It's a very mellow instrument so it's a bit hard to pick out especially since there is only one attack at the beginning of the first note. The rest are legato.

Guest vocals... "one day we'll go... room 117, oh I'll be there" Left channel, very loud and clearly heard with Ryen at center. They also appear throughout the rest of the song.

CT-700 · June 06, 2007, 05:46:37 AM

Thank you.