Foo Fighters

sleepy jack · 04-05-2008, 03:06 PM

Grohl is probably a better guitarist (and better at whatever else he plays) than Cobain as well as a better vocalist but until he starts utilizing this I'm not going to say his music's better.

boo boo · 04-05-2008, 03:13 PM

I never said his music is better. Because I don't think it is.

I'd take Nirvana over Foo Fighters any day of the week.

sleepy jack · 04-05-2008, 03:23 PM

I know and someone had posted "and Dave Grohl continually proves who the most talented member of Nirvana was." which I was responding to but I got mixed up that was another thread. My rant in here was about the ridiculous amount of Foo Fighters hype they've gotten. I still don't think they're one of the greatest bands of their time, not even close.

Dr_Rez · 04-05-2008, 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crowquill

I should really get back to my original point. I don't think Dave Grohl keeps proving who the most talented member of Nirvana was because his songwriting leaves so much to be desired compared to Kurt's. Even RezZ a fan has admitted they don't make inventive music and while Nirvana didn't either at least they were doing something different from what was making money at the time and Kurt Cobain really didn't care so much about pleasing the masses with Nirvana as Grohl does with the Foo Fighters. I mean he could've easily made Nevermind part 2 but instead he delivered In Utero and even fought his record company (though sadly lost) for the mixing to stay the way Albini had had it which probably wouldn't have pleased all the hair metal fans gone grunge.

I also think In Utero is a far superior album to anything Grohl's written and I'm mad hungry right now so if someone wants me to expand on this too I will.

I agree with you there. We will not resolve this argument though, because it is simply i think his music is fun and catchy and you do not. I see where you are coming from i just disagree with your particular taste in the instance.

boo boo · 04-05-2008, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crowquill

I know and someone had posted "and Dave Grohl continually proves who the most talented member of Nirvana was." which I was responding to but I got mixed up that was another thread. My rant in here was about the ridiculous amount of Foo Fighters hype they've gotten. I still don't think they're one of the greatest bands of their time, not even close.

Some bands you don't like are popular, thats the way of the world.

sleepy jack · 04-05-2008, 05:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boo boo

Some bands you don't like are popular, thats the way of the world.

I don't have a problem with them being popular I have a problem with saying they're one of the best bands ever.

boo boo · 04-05-2008, 05:17 PM

That goes with being popular.

sleepy jack · 04-05-2008, 05:51 PM

That doesn't make it right or mean I can't argue it.

Rainard Jalen · 04-05-2008, 08:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boo boo

Theres more to talent than just songwriting.

Naw! It's all about the writing and the arrangements. Back-up bands usually have more instrumental talent than permanent band members. We don't praise them. When all's said and done it comes down to the quality of the music and that's rooted in the quality of the ideas.

boo boo · 04-05-2008, 08:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rainard Jalen

Naw! It's all about the writing and the arrangements. Back-up bands usually have more instrumental talent than permanent band members. We don't praise them. When all's said and done it comes down to the quality of the music and that's rooted in the quality of the ideas.

Aren't you the same guy who used to rant about how horrible Nirvana are all the damn time?

Also you're wrong. Instrumental talent is very important, at least depending on the kind of music. In Nirvanas case it wasn't a necessity. But still, denying the importantance of knowing how to play an instrument is just shallow and stupid.