Tool vs Nickelback
 

Hmm, I would have liked to have made this one in a Poll format except that the option didn't appear available?

Anyway, I think this could provoke an interesting discussion. Both of these bands are the masters of their given sub-genres of mainstream commercial rock in the present day, so who do you, the people, feel is the better act?

I'll start off by giving my nod to Nickelback, who I feel have excelled in the past (if not recent times) in pushing the envelope and watching it bend. Like modern rock overlords, they've created the equivalent of the great symphonies of old - How You Remind Me is in all senses the 21st century's answer to Ludwig van Beethoven's 9th. Drawing from a wide range of influences including (but not by any means limited to) early 70s The Who, AC/DC, The Buzz****s, Sonic Youth, The Stooges and Television, they've taken a hodgepodge of ideas and merged them perfectly into a single distinct cohesive sound that has rocked bedrooms across the world.

Tool by contrast draw from fewer sources, most evidently the likes of King Crimson and Led Zep (you can hear the influences all over IV), and really have created very little (if anything) of their own device at all. Sure, they've made a few rocking songs here and there, but they fail to really conjure up that lasting, timeless appeal.

What are other people's views?

Done

Hahahahaha this is the best joke ever.
Comedy genius.:)

:rofl:

I'd actually say something more along the lines of "They took Smells Like Teen Spirit, turned down the distortion, wrote some sappy lyrics and then gave it to the record company." Television? Give me break, if you hear Television in Nickelback I'm wondering if you've ever even listened to Marquee Moon.

this thread ftw!

.

how many red bulls have you had today?

awesome thread , I love it. even before I read the thread I voted for nickelback.

/is missing Dirt

Where's the option for anal beads?

Tool whether for good or bad, have at least tried to create something different to the usual rock formula of riffs and big choruses. Unlike Nickleback who are just one in a long line of average bands that do not add anything for the genre.

Unbelieveably I have only just started to listen to Tool and I'm 35! I like what I hear (LATERALUS), but I am not hampered by any possible baggage that has hung onto the band since their inception.

I have been hearing metal since 85 and it is so frustrating to hear the genre being constantly recycled.

At least TOOL approached the genre from a different angle, which cannot be said for Nickleback.

You should have gone for TOOL VS PRIMUS. Now that would have been an interesting discussion!

Try out there newest album 10,000 days, you will like it.

Only 6 to 3?????...I'm almost embarassed for the forum

6-4 now:D

I think Tool is one of the more unique rock bands in the past 20 years. They do everything different and yet, do just as good as any other mainstream band. I think it's quite amazing.

I didn't really like that album, there was some very great songs (The Pot, 10,000 Days :love:), but I always find myself skipping through half of the album. Lateralus and Aenima are waaaay better imo.

Anyway, Anal Beads >>> Tool >>> Nickelback

Tool

Yeah, but anal beads win any fight.

its the "none of the above" option on MB

Which is the lesser of two evils? I think thats a more clear question.

Oi, where've you gone? I was about to hammer in the proverbial Nickelback nail in the coffin. Guess you was a nawty boi.

Did 4 people seriously vote Nickelback...?

What, are you trying to insinuate that Nickelback ought not to be taken seriously?

This thread makes me sad... :(

I like tool lol. And how in the world are they a sub-genre of mainstream commercial rock? Commercial? They don't even sell their music online. Was that the joke? Damn... too much tool hatin on MB.

Edit* I went back and reread the first post and i get it lol... :) not sad anymore. I missed the part about Nickelback pushing the envelope and watching it bend.

Commercialism and genre-wars aside, I can think of one 7:11 piece of Tool that alone outshines all 93 hours of Nickelback.

I voted Nickelback!:thumb:

It's true that Tool don't sell their music in MP3 format track by track, but they surely do fall under commercial. For one, they've always been with major labels. Even Opiate was released on BMG. Regardless of a band's own artistic integrity, if they have the marketing prowess of the major corporations behind them they surely have to be commercial in at least one sense, right? It's also expected that they have to answer at least in part to industry demands, if they have record contracts with the likes of Sony.

I intend this as a serious point. Not an insult.

I do also think that Tool and bands with similar directions clearly cater to a certain sub-part of modern society and culture that tend to identify strongly with the usual set of ideas and motifs. That's the whole reason they have a major label contract to begin with - their music, image and message is highly marketable, and in the present societal framework is always likely to receive a large audience. I've personally seen friends who were entirely straightforward folk, then suddenly for whatever reason started getting into conspiracy theories about aliens, government mind-control and whatnot. A few months later, and whaddayaknow...their new favourite band is Tool! The industry machine is really extraordinarily effective. I feel in many ways that far from being counter to the grain, Tool and so on really just fill another gap in the wall. If Capitalism cannot pervade all of society in one way, then it finds another way.

Yeh, having a fanbase is so commercial.

Yah, cos that's what I said isn't it ~~111!!!!

I didn't say having a fanbase is commercial. I pointed out that Tool (and bands with a similar message) are catering to a large sub-culture that empathize with those particular, generally hackneyed and cliched ideas. It is known to be a lucrative market by major labels, book publishers, film studios, and what have you. Not only that, but it's these corporations themselves that cultivate the whole conspiracy theory/mind-control (and similar ideas) market; it's a MAJOR money spinner! And Tool fit in quite nicely on the commercial agenda pertaining to that particular market. Contrary to what many fans would otherwise like to believe, they're about as much another brick in the wall as anything else.

Having a wide range of influences doesn't mean anything if your music is generic and your songs rip off each other (Nickelback). And I don't know how you've reduced Tool's influences to 2 bands anyway... I believe they're also influenced by Faith No More, Jane's Addiction, Black Sabbath, Meshuggah, the Melvins and Pink Floyd. And even then, bands often only list influences which apply to the majority of the band... Danny Carey himself has obviously been influenced by Indian percussion, jazz drummers etc.

Yes, King Crimson is a huge influence on them... And here's what Robert Fripp from Crimson had to say about Tool. "I happen to be a Tool fan. The members of Tool have been generous enough to suggest that Crimson has been an influence on them. Adam Jones asked me if I could detect it in their music, and I said I couldn’t. I can detect more Tool influence in King Crimson, than I can hear King Crimson in Tool." Pretty generous, coming from Fripp...


Now that we've made it past the influences part which isn't even particularly relevant, Tool is better IMO. I like the band a lot, I hate their fanbase. All their albums are good, and Lateralus is brilliant. Danny Carey is one of the greatest rock/metal drummers ever. Jones is a good guitarist and Justin Chancellor is a pretty decent bassist (even if he does use a pick... just joking :D ). Maynard is a great vocalist and frankly, his lyrics are brilliant.

I fail to see how Tool isn't timeless when they've already influenced a legion of musicians/bands, have a huge fanbase and quite simply, have a very original sound.

Don't even get me started on Nickelback...

I fail to see how you can claim Nickelback just make the same generic song over and over again. The hits might be suspiciously similar, but what about the rest of the songs on their albums? Nickelback are renowned for reinventing themselves time and time again - they are the Michael Boltons of Post-Grunge. Check out the albums and you'll see what I mean.

Hhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha you ****ing rule!

Yeah, Jungian psychology, transcendence, evolution...such hackneyed concepts in modern music.

God, I don't even know why I'm doing this. Would appear that you need not the slightest bit of assistance in making yourself look like a complete fucking buffoon.

TOOL
Not sure if this is a real question.

Course, I didn't say hackneyed in modern music. But rather, had obviously intended hackneyed in popular culture. But don't let the the truth stand in your way ;).

Seriously, I understand that it may be hard to accept that Tool are part of a lucrative money-making market, but don't let that fuel your anger. Temper it, like Maynard did on Lateralus ;).

Oh FFS, who cares? Popular culture, modern music, either way, Jungian psychology isn't exactly hackneyed.

Every band signed to a major label is, but that doesn't mean every band signed to a major label is commercial (unless you're using a different definition of the word than I).

Why are we focusing on the hackneyed cliched part anyway? There was no attempt to claim that EVERY topic Tool cover and all of their themes and motifs are overused (though a lot of them are indeed just that). The overriding point was that their general direction leans towards catering for the audience of a certain well-known sub-section of popular culture.

No, I wouldn't say that every band signed to a major label is necessarily commercial. I feel that Tool in particular are a good example of a commercial band, in that they sell themselves through exploiting the opportunities offered by the existence of a particular audience.

How can it be claimed that Tool are not commercial? They're among the most notorious acts for their exceedingly strong and effective marketing ploys. They practically built up their image and cult-like following single-handedly. Maynard, Carey and co. are in many ways geniuses.

Perhaps the misunderstanding lies partly in the idea that I'm using this to slate them. I'm not. I don't think being commercial is necessarily/automatically some sort of bad, evil, devilish thing. But DENYING that a band of Tool's calibre are commercial is simply ludicrous.

Is he serious? I truly CAN'T tell. Odd

This is not the pertinent question. The point is that Chad Kroeger is deadly, deadly serious, and as such must be afforded the utmost attention.

Lolz :)