Home› Other Music

Which of the Seattle

wcsmithwcsmith Posts: 165
edited January 2008 in Other Music
Sorry...it's supposed to say "Which of the Seattle Big Four is 'Aging Well'"

In the Soundgarden thread, someone raised an interesting point about AIC aging faster than the others. I would say that this is especially true of Facelift. It's interesting when you ask the "aging well" question of certain albums/bands:

AIC - as stated, perhaps not aging very well, this could be due to the fact that there were so many bands that attempted to copy their "formula" with very little success (Jar of Flies does not seem to suffer the same problem). Perhaps the reason that Facelift and Dirt are not aging well is because they were such personal recordings, just a guess...

Soundgarden - seem to be aging very well, I think that this is due to the fact that there seemed to be no imitators. I don't hear their influence in much, if any, popular rock music

PJ - aging really well, if only because they are still touring and offering different interpretations of old songs, I listened to Ten the other day, and it's not aging quite as well as Vs., I still love it, but it does stand as a document of its time

Nirvana - I'm torn here, you could make the claim that they are aging very well if only because of their influence, Unplugged definitely holds up, I'm not a big Nirvana fan, but I'm kinda feeling like they hold up the best of the Big Four

Outside of the Big 4:

STP - definitely does not hold up, Core sounds like generic "alterna-grunge", Purple holds up a little better, but not as well as the above bands

Live - IMO, holds up very well, very distinct sound with a distinct vocalist, Ed could be kind of preachy (White, Discussion for example) but they hold up almost as well as the Big 4

Just my thoughts...

why do you think bands "age well" or not? What's the criteria?
"I'll ride the wave where it takes me"
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • facepollutionfacepollution Posts: 6,834
    I think Soundgarden's music still sounds very fresh, particularly Superunknown. I think some of that is down to the production, which in my opinion is spot on, but also just the fact that the song structures were so unique.

    Pearl Jam is obviously doing pretty good, they are certainly the band who'll go down as the 'classic rock' band of our generation - I can still see them touring in 20 years time. A lot of that has to do with the fact that they've paced themselves, and taken time out when they needed it, so they never burnt out like a lot of other bands from that era.

    Nirvana were imortalised the day Kurt died. They will always sell records. On the rare occassions I listen to Nirvana I always have trouble believing that the music was made so long ago.

    AIC - difficult one. Given the fact that there are still many bands replicating their sound, I still think stuff like Dirt and Jar Of Flies stands up against any modern hard rock band. Facelift sounds a little dated, but again that is more to do with the production.

    STP is a difficult one, if you make a 'best of' up from all of their albums they are definitely one of the best bands from that era, but I don't think any of their albums were a truly defining moment. They burnt out too quick, and their chance at classic status was pretty much lost.

    Live - ah my love/hate relationship. I LOVE LOVE LOVE Throwing Copper, that album is the very definition of PERFECT for me. To echo a phrase I heard the other day, the songs all talk to each other. There's a vibe on that album that flows through each song. The problem is though, that they set the bench mark so high with that record that they'll never reach that level again. It doesn't help that Ed is a bit of a weirdo, albeit a weirdo with an amazing voice! The last three albums have ranged from passable attempts at recreating Throwing Copper's sound (Birds of Prey) to fucking horrendous (I don't even know what the last record was called, but it was severely lacking in the good tunes department). I won't give up hope though, they still have it in them to make another classic.
  • melodyman22melodyman22 Posts: 326
    Live-They hold up very well, some people dont like ed's lyrics, each to their own. I think Birds of prey was a great album.
  • Joe2TheRevengeJoe2TheRevenge Posts: 904
    Pearl Jam and AIC are holding up the best.

    i hear Betterman, Alive, Even Flow, Would, and Man in the Box more than any other "Seattle" song combined.

    Soundgarden and Nirvana aren't seeming to last as well. i hear "Smells like Teen Spirit" alot, same as "Outshined", but even "Black Hole Sun" and "Lithium" don't seem to get alot of love.

    As for the other bands, STP gets alot of play where i am from. Their first 3 albums spawned so many hits (not huge, but radio friendly enough to get a shit ton of lobe) that i hear it way often. Not so much with Live or Candlebox or the rest.

    so basically, Pearl Jam and AIC are holding up the best. The rest....not so well. Regardless of the fact that Nirvana gets their asses licked on every "best of..." list, i rarely hear them on popular radio. Whereas PJ and AIC get played constantly.
    You can't spell "dumb" without DMB
  • hailhail82hailhail82 Posts: 330
    STP holds up great, with maybe the exception of Core. I'll not talk about Shangri-La 'cause it wasn't released in the '90s, but Tiny Music and No. 4 especially still sound amazing.

    Pearl Jam of course still sound great. Vitalogy and on is just as vital as they ever were, and the first two are great documents of the time.

    The rest are great but I think because they didn't survive the '90s they'll always be just a little weaker in my mind.
    Using the word "methinks" in your message board posts doesn't make you look smart.
  • planb8888planb8888 Posts: 2
    i think pearl jam has held up the best for sure, but i think stp could have held up almost equally as well had scott had his shit together. they didnt really get to tour after the purple record and i think that had their later albums been better promoted they would have done better. its a shame that it happened that way because Tiny Music is a fantastic album, as is No. 4. shangri la dee da was very good as well, but more on an artistic level rather than one that would appease the masses.

    it really sucks people only define them by their first 2 albums
  • LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSunLikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun Posts: 6,097
    Soundgarden sounds the most dated to me. just too 80s metal influenced to me.

    same for some of AIC's albums, but jar of flies is timeless.

    Nirvana is still pure punk to me and not dated at all, though i"m so sick of Nevermind i dont care to hear it anymore.

    PJ isn't either except for Vitalogy (a little). Its their only real grunge album, the rest is classic rock (classic=timeless) or experimental.

    plus i still hear Ten songs in every bar i walk into, so i'd say its still amazingly fresh
  • facepollutionfacepollution Posts: 6,834
    MrSmith wrote:
    Soundgarden sounds the most dated to me. just too 80s metal influenced to me.

    I think Soundgarden was far more 70's classic rock influenced than 80's metal. Think Sabbath meets Zeppelin, with a punk vibe shot through some songs.
  • Pacomc79Pacomc79 Posts: 9,404
    Soundgarden to me have always seemed more 70's almost stoner rock as described above once they found their sound. There are certainly bands like that around.

    Queens of the Stone Age for one. No it's not a direct relationship, but there are plenty of bands like that who take a riff or a groove and run with it.

    Maybe Soundgarden didn't invent that but they certainly were outstanding toegther. Every song was not similar. They clearly made an effort to evolve they just had this beautiful structure to take a great riff or beat carry it to the bridge and then bring it back. They were unique Chris's voice sounds like no one elses and you could easily pick out Camerons drumming or Thayil's riffing if you knew it.

    I think honestly Ten though the song writing is brilliant and this is a phenominal album is over processed and too compressed. Too studio like so much else back then. Hell they really didn't get a different sounding overall album until Ed started playing with Vitalogy. Listen to the guitars on that album....it's fantastic raw and thick.

    Same problem with Nevermind.... could there be more drum compression? In Utero sounds so much better and a lot more raw and like it should. Everyone will own Ten and Nevermind, I'd just like to hear the original masters re done.


    As far as staying power or aging. I don't know... AIC was an outstanding band. No one sounds like Layne and obviously they had a few great songs.

    You could basically take your pick of the best from that era and play them now. Program Directors just program what they are told to play. I find it hard to believe Would is the only AIC song we can hear when Grind or Rooster or Them Bones or whatever would be just as well received.

    Hell, River of Deceit would be a great one to program from Mad Season. People would dig that now too.
    My Girlfriend said to me..."How many guitars do you need?" and I replied...."How many pairs of shoes do you need?" She got really quiet.
  • whygowhygo Posts: 55
    Blind Melon = Holding up Well
  • lalalalaaaaaaaalalalalaaaaaaaa Posts: 2,445
    Live is the only one in my mind that hasn't held up. I dunno wtf I was thinking when I bought their cd way back when.

    The rest are all pretty timeless though. I hardly ever listen to Soundgarden, but they still made some classic stuff.
Sign In or Register to comment.