If Only

[dreamingant1132]

i like this song, but i can't help but ask myself if i would like it if it was actually a john mayer song

[Quendi]

Originally Posted by dreamingant1132

i like this song, but i can't help but ask myself if i would like it if it was actually a john mayer song

No doubt I felt the same vibe when I first listened, but if I may be general in saying that perhaps this is just a bi-product of similar taste w/ our listening habits..? No offense to John, but he wasn't the first to think of a walk down chord progression, or the vibe the band puts off w/ this song.. Just my 2 cents!

[nabigeyedfishte]

Originally Posted by lafleurjp

enough of this. just, enough. have you heard the cliche "beauty is in the eye of the beholder?" who says this isn't the best they're capable of? YOU?!? CPPJames? And why? because it doesn't sound the same as UTTAD?; because the lyrical content and dave's perspective on the world/life in general has changed over the last quarter century and isn't as compelling to you as it was in 1995?; because when you listen to the new songs you can't recreate the feeling you had when you first listened to DMB when you were probably a teenager?

i'm not commenting on your right to state an opinion. if you don't like the music because it doesn't speak to you then fine.. I am sorry for you, but fine. flame away on the new music, i have nothing to say. If you don't like their new direction, fine. But, if you don't like the music because you're idly clinging to some pie in the sky unattainable standard that this band (or any band) could ever meet, than give it a rest. To presume that you know what this band is "capable" of when your sole criteria for making such an uninformed statement in the first place is the fact that you really really like their music from 20 years ago is lame.

everything changes. it has been said 4000 times here... if DMB tried to make UTTAD/Crash/BTCS part II they would have broken up. they need to evolve. they need to change. it is human nature. proclaiming that the band is mailing it in and not trying because YOU don't appreciate it is not very intellectually honest.

It's not as if its just an opinion here. There is measurable evidence that the new stuff isn't as interesting musically as it used to be. Lyrics: fine, its an opinion (albeit a generally held one) that they used to be better. Message: honestly I don't think this is the biggest issue. A lot of the big 3 stuff had no message and bad lyrics, yet we all love it. Why? its because of the MUSIC.

Dave quoting Ring Around the Rosy with his choral melodies, or releasing songs lacking a melody during the verse like Spaceman is simply not living up to his musical potential. That's not an opinion, its a fact.
Unless his potential has fallen dramatically. But that argument fails because he still writes gems like LITHOG and the verse of Gaucho.

In conclusion, we're disappointed because the band is almost there. They're releasing songs that are half-great. If someone in the studio would tell Dave to rewrite some of the choruses he comes up with and not stop until he comes up with something more melodically interesting than Ring Around the Rosy, the Band could make something better.

[hmich176]

Originally Posted by nabigeyedfishte

It's not as if its just an opinion here. There is measurable evidence that the new stuff isn't as interesting musically as it used to be. Lyrics: fine, its an opinion (albeit a generally held one) that they used to be better. Message: honestly I don't think this is the biggest issue. A lot of the big 3 stuff had no message and bad lyrics, yet we all love it. Why? its because of the MUSIC.

Dave quoting Ring Around the Rosy with his choral melodies, or releasing songs lacking a melody during the verse like Spaceman is simply not living up to his musical potential. That's not an opinion, its a fact.
Unless his potential has fallen dramatically. But that argument fails because he still writes gems like LITHOG and the verse of Gaucho.

In conclusion, we're disappointed because the band is almost there. They're releasing songs that are half-great. If someone in the studio would tell Dave to rewrite some of the choruses he comes up with and not stop until he comes up with something more melodically interesting than Ring Around the Rosy, the Band could make something better.

But this is all opinion. You're saying Dave isn't living up to his musical potential while another person can say that If Only so entrancing that it's awesome. And I say this again, but I think If Only is based on the King of the Castle lines in the outro of Crash. Personally, I like Spaceman a lot.

There are also plenty of people who do not like LITHOG.

Since when did good = bad? Because that's what most of this criticism sounds like. It's good, but it's not great, therefore it's bad.

[nabigeyedfishte]

Now that you say that, I do see the similarity to the King of the Castle lines. But lets be honest, Crash was never one of the band's top songs, in my opinion.

I concede that it is my opinion, but my point is that there is good reason for that opinion. If I transcribed the melodies of all the most recent songs and counted the number that had uni-note or di-note melodies, the recent songs would dwarf the old ones.

Obviously more notes does not equal better necessarily, but nobody here listens to DMB for one note melodies.

I think the band is not living up to it's potential with If Only because of a few reasons:
The parts aren't as developed as they could be, i.e. the dearth of horn parts, that's not an opinion. I think we can all agree that there's SOMETHING the horns could do that would improve the song. Listen to Carter on If Only and I think you'll see what I mean.
The beginning of the chorus is uninteresting (read, un-unique, which is true whether Dave took it from RRTR or Crash). The bridge is uninteresting melodically with its grand total of 5 notes, and rhythmically its even worse with just the half notes on two and four with zero variation until he holds the top note out longer. The verse is fine. Nothing special, but not bad either.

Maybe saying the band isn't living up to potential is an opinion. But you can't say that there isn't reason to suspect that the band is mailing some things in just a little.

[nabigeyedfishte]

Also, I don't mean to say that the new stuff is bad.
I just am defending the position of being disappointed that the new stuff isn't better.

[Panther41]

Originally Posted by hmich176

Since when did good = bad? Because that's what most of this criticism sounds like. It's good, but it's not great, therefore it's bad.

Glad someone recognizes this fallacy.

[SpotlightEyes]

I love this song.

[tedies]

Originally Posted by SpotlightEyes

I love this song.

me too

[Elliott Evans]

My favourite of the new songs. In fact, I'll rank them:

If Only
Sweet
Mercy
Gaucho

[Dramageek]

Originally Posted by Elliott Evans

My favourite of the new songs. In fact, I'll rank them:

If Only
Sweet
Mercy
Gaucho

One thing that is interesting about the new songs is the variety of opinions about them. My new song rankings would probably be the exact opposite of this (though I like them all more or less).

[Bluewater21]

Originally Posted by Dramageek

One thing that is interesting about the new songs is the variety of opinions about them. My new song rankings would probably be the exact opposite of this (though I like them all more or less).

Not really though it was the same way with big whiskey prior to its release.

[BustedStuff5]

I am just curious of the people who are offended with the Ring Around the Rosy chords, what do they think of Dave basically quoting Twinkle Twinkle Little Star in Satellite?

[Weezerblather]

all the kings horses and all the kings men - kill the king
ring around the rosey- gravedigger
like a diamond in the sky- satellite
down the hill came jack and jill- what would you say

he's always liked his nursery rhyme lyrics

[SpecialAgent007]

Originally Posted by BotheEgonfan

Better yet, if we accept the fact that the 90's weren't all that amazing lyrically we can treat this newer music far more fairly.

The 90's music featured lyrics that weren't on the level many view them to be compared to truly great songwriters like Bob Dylan or Paul Simon or Leonard Cohen, but they were at the very least incredibly unique. His words weren't always poetic, but it was incredibly expressive in a way that wonderfully fit his unique music, primarily the guitar parts.

The lyrics nowadays are more cliche, obvious, boring, weak? I'm trying to be nice; I started with subjective and moved to the more objective...anyways...there's just a huge, huge, huge difference between citing repeated simple phrases ilke "So Much To Say" in the old stuff and then pretty much anything new that's being written.

I'll be honest, If Only isn't doing much for me. It's not terrible at all, but like many other new tunes, it just feels forced. I don't feel like these songs are born from great ideas. They sound like songs written by someone who sat down and decided they needed to write a song.

What does "If Only" bring to the table that hasn't been said a thousand times over, and far better at that? Even musically, is there anything going on in it that is unique or memorable? I really don't hear it. So if you don't have great music or great lyrics or a really great idea, what's the point of this song's existence again?

Maybe it works better on the album (if it's in the right spot), but taken alone, I feel like it just drags along and exists. It's not bad enough to hate nor good enough to like. It merely exists; it starts, it finishes. It's like driving home on a route you know so well that sometimes you forgot how you got home; you just arrive at the conclusion of the trip and hope you were more aware of your surroundings in the moment. The song reminds me a lot of Seven if you dial Seven down from 8-9 to maybe 2, and strip it of it's spine and gall.

"Help me get my way back to you"?

Seriously?

I can't hear these lyrics and these guitar parts and think anything other than Dave decided he needed to write a song, so he wrote the most obvious stuff he could because he lacked an actual inspired idea. It's just too bland and uninspired-sounding to stick with you for long.

Let's compare this to Let You Down, one of Dave's more obvious early songs that is somewhat similar thematically, and also consider how it could work on the album. Let You Down is not the most unique song on the planet in any way. It's a simple, basic little "take me back, I'm sorry, I wish you knew how much I love you" sort of love song. It's worth noting that it hasn't been played live much either. Why? Context. It works well on a record because Drive In, Drive Out is a heavy hitting force of a song, and on an album, you need something simple and breezy like Let You Down to prepare you for a song like Lie In Our Graves. LIOG wouldn't work nearly as well if it came right after DIDO; you get your chance to breathe as a listener with Let You Down. It's almost an extended segue in many ways.

But even though Let You Down is pretty simple and obvious in every way, he still turns a few phrases in a somewhat unique, clever manner. There's imagery that's amusing to suit the light-hearted nature of the song. The lid upon his head and climbing up on top of her head to see the world as she sees it, tangled in her hair. And that line plays off the obvious phrase "I let you down" so well by making it a physical thing, I let you "down," so "let me climb up you to the top so I can see the view." If he wanted to be totally obvious, he could just say "I want to see the world through your eyes" or something equally as tired sounding. He didn't have to drop the lid lines in there to say that she's always on his mind, but it makes it infinitely more memorable to have that image in your mind. Even the most cliche "puppy for your love" line works as a sort of payoff in a little song crafted as well as Let You Down.

What brilliant imagery do we get from "If Only"?

We get Dave smiling from someone blowing him kisses through a window.

Deep. Clever. Wait, what?

"I want you. Take me back, please."

"I know you and you know me."

"Help me get my way back to you."

"Sometimes I forget how much I want you back."

"You win some and you lose some."

"When you find a good one, don't let her get away."

"If only I could love you just the way I want to."

Seriously?

"I let you down. Let me climb up you to the top so I can see the view from up there, tangled in your hair."

"I have no lid upon my head, but if I did, you could look inside and see what's on my mind. Oh, it's you."

"I let you down. Oh, forgive me, you give me love. Let me walk with you, maybe I could say...maybe talk with you. Open up and let me through, don't walk away, don't walk away."

That last verse is much weaker than the first verse but still works better than anything in If Only. There's little comparison in quality between these two songs. I'm fine with saying the 90's lyrics don't stand with the great songwriters of all time alone. They simply don't at all. However, they're infinitely better than the obvious, uninspired ramblings Dave's been churning out over the last decade. It's a shame he gave up on working hard, especially working hard at being inspired. And yes, that does take work too. Lillywhite will make this album sound gorgeous no doubt, but he can't make Dave write better material if Dave doesn't want to put in the work. That's the unfortunate bottom line.

[Bluewater21]

Originally Posted by SpecialAgent007

The 90's music featured lyrics that weren't on the level many view them to be compared to truly great songwriters like Bob Dylan or Paul Simon or Leonard Cohen, but they were at the very least incredibly unique. His words weren't always poetic, but it was incredibly expressive in a way that wonderfully fit his unique music, primarily the guitar parts.

The lyrics nowadays are more cliche, obvious, boring, weak? I'm trying to be nice; I started with subjective and moved to the more objective...anyways...there's just a huge, huge, huge difference between citing repeated simple phrases ilke "So Much To Say" in the old stuff and then pretty much anything new that's being written.

I'll be honest, If Only isn't doing much for me. It's not terrible at all, but like many other new tunes, it just feels forced. I don't feel like these songs are born from great ideas. They sound like songs written by someone who sat down and decided they needed to write a song.

What does "If Only" bring to the table that hasn't been said a thousand times over, and far better at that? Even musically, is there anything going on in it that is unique or memorable? I really don't hear it. So if you don't have great music or great lyrics or a really great idea, what's the point of this song's existence again?

Maybe it works better on the album (if it's in the right spot), but taken alone, I feel like it just drags along and exists. It's not bad enough to hate nor good enough to like. It merely exists; it starts, it finishes. It's like driving home on a route you know so well that sometimes you forgot how you got home; you just arrive at the conclusion of the trip and hope you were more aware of your surroundings in the moment. The song reminds me a lot of Seven if you dial Seven down from 8-9 to maybe 2, and strip it of it's spine and gall.

"Help me get my way back to you"?

Seriously?

I can't hear these lyrics and these guitar parts and think anything other than Dave decided he needed to write a song, so he wrote the most obvious stuff he could because he lacked an actual inspired idea. It's just too bland and uninspired-sounding to stick with you for long.

Let's compare this to Let You Down, one of Dave's more obvious early songs that is somewhat similar thematically, and also consider how it could work on the album. Let You Down is not the most unique song on the planet in any way. It's a simple, basic little "take me back, I'm sorry, I wish you knew how much I love you" sort of love song. It's worth noting that it hasn't been played live much either. Why? Context. It works well on a record because Drive In, Drive Out is a heavy hitting force of a song, and on an album, you need something simple and breezy like Let You Down to prepare you for a song like Lie In Our Graves. LIOG wouldn't work nearly as well if it came right after DIDO; you get your chance to breathe as a listener with Let You Down. It's almost an extended segue in many ways.

But even though Let You Down is pretty simple and obvious in every way, he still turns a few phrases in a somewhat unique, clever manner. There's imagery that's amusing to suit the light-hearted nature of the song. The lid upon his head and climbing up on top of her head to see the world as she sees it, tangled in her hair. And that line plays off the obvious phrase "I let you down" so well by making it a physical thing, I let you "down," so "let me climb up you to the top so I can see the view." If he wanted to be totally obvious, he could just say "I want to see the world through your eyes" or something equally as tired sounding. He didn't have to drop the lid lines in there to say that she's always on his mind, but it makes it infinitely more memorable to have that image in your mind. Even the most cliche "puppy for your love" line works as a sort of payoff in a little song crafted as well as Let You Down.

What brilliant imagery do we get from "If Only"?

We get Dave smiling from someone blowing him kisses through a window.

Deep. Clever. Wait, what?

"I want you. Take me back, please."

"I know you and you know me."

"Help me get my way back to you."

"Sometimes I forget how much I want you back."

"You win some and you lose some."

"When you find a good one, don't let her get away."

"If only I could love you just the way I want to."

Seriously?

"I let you down. Let me climb up you to the top so I can see the view from up there, tangled in your hair."

"I have no lid upon my head, but if I did, you could look inside and see what's on my mind. Oh, it's you."

"I let you down. Oh, forgive me, you give me love. Let me walk with you, maybe I could say...maybe talk with you. Open up and let me through, don't walk away, don't walk away."

That last verse is much weaker than the first verse but still works better than anything in If Only. There's little comparison in quality between these two songs. I'm fine with saying the 90's lyrics don't stand with the great songwriters of all time alone. They simply don't at all. However, they're infinitely better than the obvious, uninspired ramblings Dave's been churning out over the last decade. It's a shame he gave up on working hard, especially working hard at being inspired. And yes, that does take work too. Lillywhite will make this album sound gorgeous no doubt, but he can't make Dave write better material if Dave doesn't want to put in the work. That's the unfortunate bottom line.

There is no reason to have a post this long, and if anyone actually takes the time to read this then they are just as goofy as you are for writing it. haha it's just a song!!! If you don't like it just say so.

[planstoquit]

Originally Posted by SpecialAgent007

The lyrics nowadays are more cliche, obvious, boring, weak? I'm trying to be nice; I started with subjective and moved to the more objective...anyways...there's just a huge, huge, huge difference between citing repeated simple phrases ilke "So Much To Say" in the old stuff and then pretty much anything new that's being written.

I'll be honest, If Only isn't doing much for me. It's not terrible at all, but like many other new tunes, it just feels forced. I don't feel like these songs are born from great ideas. They sound like songs written by someone who sat down and decided they needed to write a song.

I shortened your post, but I agree with all of it. Highlighted bit is spot on. I guess I'm goofy for being interested in your displeasure with the song along with your intriguing take on why that displeasure exists.

[SpecialAgent007]

Originally Posted by Bluewater21

There is no reason to have a post this long, and if anyone actually takes the time to read this then they are just as goofy as you are for writing it. haha it's just a song!!! If you don't like it just say so.

There are plenty of reasons to have a post that long should one desire to actually discuss a topic with some semblance of depth. There is, however, no reason you can't simply ignore it if you believe it is too long.

Sometimes if you want to actually support a perspective, you have to, you know, support it. Subjective opinions are a dime a dozen and thus carry little weight on their own. Objective analysis can help bring understanding as to why people formulate their subjective opinions.

But yes, it actually requires more than a three sentence post. I am sorry for that. But thank you anyways for your valuable contribution to the discussion!

[alec]

Originally Posted by SpecialAgent007

Maybe it works better on the album (if it's in the right spot), but taken alone, I feel like it just drags along and exists. It's not bad enough to hate nor good enough to like. It merely exists; it starts, it finishes. It's like driving home on a route you know so well that sometimes you forgot how you got home; you just arrive at the conclusion of the trip and hope you were more aware of your surroundings in the moment....

I think this is the main problem. Everything has been said and done to such an extent musically, that people are immune to it. And, we have impossibly high standards that we compare anything new to. In reality, you could drive home the exact same route every single day, and if you cultivated enough awareness, it could be a brand new experience every time. There are always subtle differences because everything is constantly changing, but we often times don't take the time to notice. The same thing can be said for music.

There is a Zen quote that I love, that sums up what I am trying to say...
"If you become bored while staring at a wall, don't blame the wall".

Is "If Only" a good song? A bad song? I don't know. All that I know is that I enjoy it.

[dreamingtree041]

Originally Posted by Elliott Evans

My favourite of the new songs. In fact, I'll rank them:

If Only
Sweet
Mercy
Gaucho

I toadally agree with you.

[BJisBA41]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VB1iuDDuBM4

Great video I found earlier, hope this song is on the CD

[kyledmb]

Originally Posted by SpecialAgent007

There are plenty of reasons to have a post that long should one desire to actually discuss a topic with some semblance of depth. There is, however, no reason you can't simply ignore it if you believe it is too long.

Sometimes if you want to actually support a perspective, you have to, you know, support it. Subjective opinions are a dime a dozen and thus carry little weight on their own. Objective analysis can help bring understanding as to why people formulate their subjective opinions.

But yes, it actually requires more than a three sentence post. I am sorry for that. But thank you anyways for your valuable contribution to the discussion!

I totally agree with what SpecialAgent is saying. Yeah, it was long, but the whole point about creative imagery is spot on. Some of these songs sound so forced lyrically. Let You Down seemed so effortless and perfectly executed. If Only has tons of words that don't say anything. It seems like a song that was made up on the spot.

[jaymas9]

I am now moving in the opposite direction on this song the more I listen to it. It's just not doing it for me. Carter specifically, as I've said before. This could be a much better tune.

[Quendi]

Originally Posted by SpecialAgent007

Lillywhite will make this album sound gorgeous no doubt, but he can't make Dave write better material if Dave doesn't want to put in the work. That's the unfortunate bottom line.

Love your analysis on Dave's writing, both past & present. It's obvious you're a clear thinker who can accurately transcribe his thoughts, and may I guess have a musical background? Or at least creative writing ;p

Tell me if you agree with the fact, though, that Dave still may be working his ass off, and this is just what's coming out of him, as the man he is today? UTTAD was 18 years ago; are you the same person you were then?

I've always thought that Dave's early music (ala the Big 3 ) were created at a time in his life where there was no jadedness when it came to his songwriting. Now he has producers and VP's that he talks to on a normal basis, & even having that around will change a man's perspective, let alone if they consider to indulge in it. I don't think this is what Dave does though. In fact, I believe he's tried to rid himself (as much as he can as an international artist) of the business side of things (like releasing Busted Stuff after the label told him no on the Lillywhite Sessions, giving fans what they want in the setlists, forming and maintaining the Warehouse, etc.). But even that fact alone will change his music, even if his intentions are good.

Dave has said several times that Big Whiskey was the most work he's ever put into an album. He could probably say the same about this one, & I would believe him. If the lyrics don't flow as well as the Big 3, well, all I can say to that is he has something different to say now. Look at "Digging a Ditch" and "Mercy". What a journey someone has to go through to change in viewpoints like that.

I agree with everything you said in your "long" post which is probably the most intelligent post I've ever read on these forums. But to say that Dave isn't working hard at his music is, well, perspective in the end, but to my end doesn't mean he's not working hard. Big Whiskey did not flow to me the way the Big 3 or the Lillywhite Sessions did; just my opinion. But Big Whiskey is still just as big an inspiration, just in a different way, just like I anticipate this album will be.

[trippinchad]

Originally Posted by planstoquit

I shortened your post, but I agree with all of it. Highlighted bit is spot on. I guess I'm goofy for being interested in your displeasure with the song along with your intriguing take on why that displeasure exists.

Yeah that statement nails pretty much how I feel about all the new material. It's been forced for a while.

[jaymas9]

I do think Mercy is the best new song for the exact reason being discussed. It feels really genuine and natural.

[trippinchad]

Originally Posted by jaymas9

I do think Mercy is the best new song for the exact reason being discussed. It feels really genuine and natural.

exatly..which is why its my favorite new one as well.

[dontburnthe_pig]

yeah, mercy (especially from 5/18) is right on the money.

[kyledmb]

Mercy is a decent song musically. It just lacks any lyrical interest. All the new stuff lacks in that regard. Big 3 material was much different. Go into a room full of Dave fans and ask them to interpret The Stone. You’d probably open an hour long discussion/debate!

I don’t think anyone would have anything to talk about with these new songs…

[trippinchad]

Originally Posted by kyledmb

Mercy is a decent song musically. It just lacks any lyrical interest. All the new stuff lacks in that regard. Big 3 material was much different. Go into a room full of Dave fans and ask them to interpret The Stone. You’d probably open an hour long discussion/debate!

I don’t think anyone would have anything to talk about with these new songs…

To me, that's whats disappointing.