|
Register | Blogging | Today's Posts | Search |
View Poll Results: Best band: 90s Seattle Era | |||
Nirvana | 47 | 31.13% | |
Alice In Chains | 40 | 26.49% | |
Soundgarden | 15 | 9.93% | |
Pearl Jam | 18 | 11.92% | |
Stone Temple Pilots | 6 | 3.97% | |
Mudhoney | 6 | 3.97% | |
Other | 17 | 11.26% | |
Tad | 2 | 1.32% | |
Voters: 151. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
02-24-2008, 11:41 AM | #21 (permalink) |
Aural melody discerner
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: in a truck down by the interstate
Posts: 347
|
Yead, BadMotorFinger was awesome
Nirvana might actually be better than Alice in Chains, but they are so overplayed on the radio, that I like them less. Come as You Are is being played right now on about 50 rock stations around the country, and that's probably their worst song. |
02-24-2008, 11:56 AM | #23 (permalink) |
The Sexual Intellectual
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Somewhere cooler than you
Posts: 18,605
|
I agree with him.
Alice In Chains were just a generic rock band from the right city at the right time.
__________________
Urb's RYM Stuff Most people sell their soul to the devil, but the devil sells his soul to Nick Cave. |
02-24-2008, 12:05 PM | #24 (permalink) |
Divination
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,655
|
I think that you have turned the tables with the word 'generic' UH. These are some of the top & best known bands of the grunge era. These are not the generic bands of the era. Only the ones that you have named yourself. I never heard of them. But that is your opinion and I can respect that, right or wrong. I take it you do not like grunge period?
|
02-24-2008, 12:10 PM | #25 (permalink) | ||
Da Hiphopopotamus
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: cloud cuckoo land
Posts: 4,034
|
Nirvana
__________________
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
02-24-2008, 12:23 PM | #26 (permalink) |
The Sexual Intellectual
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Somewhere cooler than you
Posts: 18,605
|
My personal opinion is that grunge is one of the biggest fallacies in music history.
I don't have a problem with the ideal of grunge, The thought of someone putting Black Sabbath style riffs with punk/indie ideals & attitudes appeals to me. Grunge was supposed to be the great break out of the American Underground , but that wasn't what happened. All that happened was record labels signed up any scruffy band that looked and sounded miserable , in a lot of cases ex hair metal bands (EG Alice In Chains & Pearl Jam) There were a few exceptions like Mudhoney who run out of ideas shortly after their first album came out , and Soundgarden who despite showing some signs of promise on Ultramega OK decided to be some crappy Sabbath tribute band instead. But other than that the whole grunge thing led to the whole 'alternative' thing where people actually believed that by listening to major label **** like the Smashing Pumpkins & Bush that they were under the deluded impression that they were listening to the alternative to the mainstream when in reality real alternative labels and bands struggled to compete against the growing monopoly of the big 4 labels. The whole thing was a lie , and the music was mostly rubbish and thats why I hate it.
__________________
Urb's RYM Stuff Most people sell their soul to the devil, but the devil sells his soul to Nick Cave. |
02-24-2008, 12:36 PM | #27 (permalink) | |
Divination
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,655
|
Quote:
|
|
02-24-2008, 12:45 PM | #28 (permalink) |
Aural melody discerner
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: in a truck down by the interstate
Posts: 347
|
I don't know you would say that AIC are generic rock.
They clearly have the most unique sound of any of these bands on this list. I don't understand how everyone always refers to Black Sabbath. I doubt anybody was ever trying to sound like them. Their music is dull, boring, and uninspiring. Ozzy solo was clearly better. I see what you're saying, Urban Hatemonger, that music played on the radio can be oppressive to the real artists who are fighting to get heard, but personally I liked those bands you mentioned, because they were alternative to pop radio. I haven't had the chance to hear many bands like Mudhoney, or the Meat Puppets, so it's possible I'm overlooking some real talent. But as for now, I can safely say that AIC, and Bush and the Smashing Pumpkins all attributed to better than adequate listening, which is a lot better than I can say for all the one-hit-wonders of the 90's. |
02-24-2008, 12:58 PM | #29 (permalink) |
The Sexual Intellectual
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Somewhere cooler than you
Posts: 18,605
|
To me Alice In Chains just sound like some dreary 80s stadium rock band only a little bit heavier. To me it sounded like a ball-less soul-less dirge.
I guess the acoustic stuff was a novelty but at the end of the day they just sounded like a stadium rock band trying to play acoustically , if I wanted that i'd listen to a folk band doing it properly.
__________________
Urb's RYM Stuff Most people sell their soul to the devil, but the devil sells his soul to Nick Cave. |
02-24-2008, 01:02 PM | #30 (permalink) |
Music Addict
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,221
|
Bush I'll admit had a (small) number of good songs that almost feel as if they could have been lost Cobain tracks. But the band, let's face it, were a totally shameless, despicable, almost comically derivative Nirvana rip-off. Hell. They even got Albini to produce their follow-up album.
Pearl Jam are mostly devoid of decent songs - even TEN on reflection had its share of filler. Alice In Chains provide the blueprint for bands like Staind. I refrain from comment where Soundgarden are concerned. I still have to listen to Badmotorfinger. |
|