Chris Cornell Is Overrated

Pearl Jam and toast

nowayimfaithfull wrote:

I usually agree with your points but you really think cornell is light years ahead of the who and zepplin. Chris is great but thats a real tuff reach.

Light years no. Plant and Daltrey are incredible in their own rights (and STILL both are very good), but Cornell is better.

And to address something about Cornell not 'rocking' solo.. he's said roughly this:

"Yeah I was kind of burned out on riff songs. I wrote my share in soundgarden. Now I'm ready to do that again.. there are a few on "Carry On". " :cool:

BetterManningNYG

facepollution wrote:

At no point have I argued anything other than the fact that *technically* he is/was (depending on your view) an incredible singer.

yeah, there really isn't anything subjective about this part of the argument.

and look at all the grunge copycat singers out there today. eddie vedder clones, layne staley clones, kurt cobain clones, etc...

but where are all the chris cornell clones? they don't exist. and it's not because chris cornell lacked relevance. it's because no one can sing like him anymore.

...and now i have black hole sun stuck in my head.

Pearl Jam and toast

BetterManningNYG wrote:

yeah, there really isn't anything subjective about this part of the argument.

and look at all the grunge copycat singers out there today. eddie vedder clones, layne staley clones, kurt cobain clones, etc...

but where are all the chris cornell clones? they don't exist. and it's not because chris cornell lacked relevance. it's because no one can sing like him anymore.

...and now i have black hole sun stuck in my head.

Hell yes.

nowayimfaithfull

facepollution wrote:

Totally agree BetterManningNYG. It kind of irks me when people dismiss you as an obsessive fan and therefore your view must be really biased. At no point have I argued anything other than the fact that *technically* he is/was (depending on your view) an incredible singer. Anything else like showmanship etc is purely subjective. But with the notes he could reach in the early 90's, his voice was technically speaking on par with people like Aretha Franklin, and I can't imagine anyone trying to argue she can't sing.

All true.

Maybee a better word than overated would be.


overpacified.

Its like no matter what he does he gets a free pass.
Vedder gets the exact oppositte treatment.

nowayimfaithfull

Pearl Jam and toast wrote:

Light years no. Plant and Daltrey are incredible in their own rights (and STILL both are very good), but Cornell is better.

And to address something about Cornell not 'rocking' solo.. he's said roughly this:

"Yeah I was kind of burned out on riff songs. I wrote my share in soundgarden. Now I'm ready to do that again.. there are a few on "Carry On". " :cool:

Have you heard it. The solo record

To be more exact I like the structure of his non solo songs better. The timing and studio recording he did in sg, and it did show up in audislave on a high level. I am okay with the slower songs I just really got what I needed out of audioslave, which is what I missed from sg all those years away, I personnally didnt like the band 11's work, on the solo album!
it was adequette but nothing that set the music on fire.

These are my favs from audio

Show me how to live.
Revalations
shape of things to come
doesnt remind me
DROWN ME SLOWLY
What you are
Jewell of the summertime.

These songs had what I am praying we hear from chris.

Ledbetterman10

MCG wrote:

He's better than you.

I know he's better than me. What I'm saying is he's not as good as Robert Plant, Steven Tyler or Roger Daltry, as far as the high pitched frontman category goes.

I said it in an eariler post but i'll repeat it. I like Cornell. he's good. but he's not as great as some people on this site think he is. Soundgarden is good. but that's all they are: good. light years away from being bad but still far from being great. that's my opinion. I understand what the Soundgarden fans like about them, I'm just not into it.

Pearl Jam and toast

Ledbetterman10 wrote:

I know he's better than me. What I'm saying is he's not as good as Robert Plant, Steven Tyler or Roger Daltry, as far as the high pitched frontman category goes.

I said it in an eariler post but i'll repeat it. I like Cornell. he's good. but he's not as great as some people on this site think he is. Soundgarden is good. but that's all they are: good. light years away from being bad but still far from being great.

I'm sure a lot of people would really disagree with you. Ever think you might be underrating Soundgarden/Cornell?

Ledbetterman10

Pearl Jam and toast wrote:

I'm sure a lot of people would really disagree with you. Ever think you might be underrating Soundgarden/Cornell?

well here's the thing with me. this thread is more of a way of annoying the Cornell worshippers who will slag Vedder in a thread in their never ending attempts to praise Chris Cornell. I don't hate him or anything.

as far as Chris Cornell albums, I own Temple of the Dog, Badmoterfinger, Superunknown, the A-sides greatest hits album and all three Audioslave records. I like them, but in most cases, it doesn't have much to do with Cornell. I'm a Tom Morello whore so that's why I like the Audioslave albums. Temple of the Dog, for me, is just another nice pre-Ten Pearl Jam recording, not unlike Green River or Ed's Bad Radio demos. and as far as Soundgarden goes, well....first I'll say that I do love a few songs, Pretty Noose, Nothing to say, and Kyle Petty, Son of Richard being my all-time favorites. but while a lot of people on this website see them as successors to Led Zeppelin or something, I find it hard to even place them in the "big four" of grundge with Nirvana, PJ and Alice in Chains. I know why they do get this credit: they were around first, they paved the way for Nirvana at Subpop, PJ toured with them. I understand all that. I just can't listen to entire Soundgarden CD for the life of me. I've tried. that's just me.

Pearl Jam and toast

Well then you have a chemical imbalance which makes you one of those anti-cornells. It's not your fault, you just can't like him.

I'd give you Alice just because of how good they were, but saying that Nirvana was better than Soundgarden is lunacy.

nowayimfaithfull

Ledbetterman10 wrote:

well here's the thing with me. this thread is more of a way of annoying the Cornell worshippers who will slag Vedder in a thread in their never ending attempts to praise Chris Cornell. I don't hate him or anything.

as far as Chris Cornell albums, I own Temple of the Dog, Badmoterfinger, Superunknown, the A-sides greatest hits album and all three Audioslave records. I like them, but in most cases, it doesn't have much to do with Cornell. I'm a Tom Morello whore so that's why I like the Audioslave albums. Temple of the Dog, for me, is just another nice pre-Ten Pearl Jam recording, not unlike Green River or Ed's Bad Radio demos. and as far as Soundgarden goes, well....first I'll say that I do love a few songs, Pretty Noose, Nothing to say, and Kyle Petty, Son of Richard being my all-time favorites. but while a lot of people on this website see them as successors to Led Zeppelin or something, I find it hard to even place them in the "big four" of grundge with Nirvana, PJ and Alice in Chains. I know why they do get this credit: they were around first, they paved the way for Nirvana at Subpop, PJ toured with them. I understand all that. I just can't listen to entire Soundgarden CD for the life of me. I've tried. that's just me.

Wow that suprises me, I read alot of your posts and you slag me alot, its all good, but from all the music you listen too I am suprised you cant do their whole albums.

Man they are solid, and a successor to zep, not better but they did carry the torch.

nowayimfaithfull

Pearl Jam and toast wrote:

Well then you have a chemical imbalance which makes you one of those anti-cornells. It's not your fault, you just can't like him.

I'd give you Alice just because of how good they were, but saying that Nirvana was better than Soundgarden is lunacy.

You know really giving some though, once you get realed into a sg b side or their whole sound you are hooked, give this cat some time.

How many years have you given sg, honestl led 10

Pearl Jam and toast

nowayimfaithfull wrote:

Wow that suprises me, I read alot of your posts and you slag me alot, its all good, but from all the music you listen too I am suprised you cant do their whole albums.

Man they are solid, and a successor to zep, not better but they did carry the torch.

Zep. was a totally different band than Soundgarden though. I don't think they could make an album live Superunknown or Badmotorfinger,.. and I also don't think soundgarden could do songs like "The Rain Song" or any number of others. Apples and Oranges.

pjalive21

you want to talk about a voice, lets talk Layne!!!!

Cornell gets too much thread time

someone said no one can copy his voice, i must say most of the frontmen of the 80's had Cornells voice

Ledbetterman10

Pearl Jam and toast wrote:

I'd give you Alice just because of how good they were, but saying that Nirvana was better than Soundgarden is lunacy.

but there's something about Nirvana, for me, that Soundgarden just doesn't have. I don't even know what it is. and I never said that Nirvana was better then Soundgarden. I said that I liked Nirvana better than Soundgarden. and some of the Soundgarden fans around here can't grasp how that can be possible. how can someone like a song called Rape Me more than a masterpiece like Jesus Christ Pose? what kind of idiot could possibly like a song sung by a suicidal drug addict in which he just screams RAPE ME over and over and over more than the poetic brilliance of a song like Fell On Black Days? how can this be? oh it be

nowayimfaithfull

Ledbetterman10 wrote:

but there's something about Nirvana, for me, that Soundgarden just doesn't have. I don't even know what it is. and I never said that Nirvana was better then Soundgarden. I said that I liked Nirvana better than Soundgarden. and some of the Soundgarden fans around here can't grasp how that can be possible. how can someone like a song called Rape Me more than a masterpiece like Jesus Christ Pose? what kind of idiot could possibly like a song sung by a suicidal drug addict in which he just screams RAPE ME over and over and over more than the poetic brilliance of a song like Fell On Black Days? how can this be? oh it be

Nirvana wasnt bad, its all relatively the same style.
I never did the nirvana thing but if i went cover to cover with their shit I know Id be hooked.

Ledbetterman10

nowayimfaithfull wrote:

I never did the nirvana thing but if i went cover to cover with their shit I know Id be hooked.

probably the same with me and Soundgarden

nowayimfaithfull

Ledbetterman10 wrote:

probably the same with me and Soundgarden

You obviously listen to classic rock and so do I,but most of the time its pearl jam, so I dont get much free time. Soundgarden clawed its way in more when Matt joined and I listened to wellwater than sg

enharmonic

Ledbetterman10 wrote:

he probably doesn't give two shits about your opinion either

Difference is, I can qualify my opinion. Plant can't play guitar for shit...neither can Daltry. Hell...Daltry can't even write his own songs. The content of Plant's lyrics, not so spectacular.

Both in their prime could wail like no other. Both were more charismatic frontment...but neither has the chops of Chris as a songwriter. In his prime, no one could touch him.

There's a difference between being a great singer, frontman, and songwriter. I concede that Plant and Dlatry have him beat as frontmen...but as a singer and songwriter, I prefer Cornell to either, and I love all three.

As for critical acclaim, Chris is the only one of the three who has ever won a Grammy for his music. I'm not talking about a Lifetime Achievement Grammy or a Grammy for a song he didn't write.

And I'd never slag on Ed. He's a different kind of singer and songwriter. I would compare him favorably to chris because he is equally talented...just in a different way. IMO, ed is also more talented that Plant or daltry...just like Chris. Not to minimize Plant or Daltry's talent, because they have more than most people half their age.

Ledbetterman10

nowayimfaithfull wrote:

Wow that suprises me, I read alot of your posts and you slag me alot, its all good, but from all the music you listen too I am suprised you cant do their whole albums.

Man they are solid, and a successor to zep, not better but they did carry the torch.

you note that I have slagged you in the past but it's nothing personal. a day or two ago you said how I got into it with you over Pink Floyd and I apologize for that. i don't really remember it happening, but i was probably being a prick.

you say from the music i listen to that it surprises you I can't get into Soundgarden's albums. I don't know really what it is. I think it's a melody problem (or something i built up in my head as a melody problem) but there's just something about them I can't get into, even if they are very similar to Pearl Jam and Nirvana, two of my favorite bands.

just another case of "to each his own" I guess. there's no telling what someone may like. for instance, despite The Beatles and Led Zeppelin being my favorite bands, I never listen to the Rolling Stones. and I mean NEVER. that's kinda odd isn't it? to worship the Beatles and never listen to the Stones? I realize that they're a good band, and i understand why they have millions of fans, and I would never say they "suck. I'm just not into them. same with Soundgarden.

nowayimfaithfull

Ledbetterman10 wrote:

you note that I have slagged you in the past but it's nothing personal. a day or two ago you said how I got into it with you over Pink Floyd and I apologize for that. i don't really remember it happening, but i was probably being a prick.

you say from the music i listen to that it surprises you I can't get into Soundgarden's albums. I don't know really what it is. I think it's a melody problem (or something i built up in my head as a melody problem) but there's just something about them I can't get into, even if they are very similar to Pearl Jam and Nirvana, two of my favorite bands.

just another case of "to each his own" I guess. there's no telling what someone may like. for instance, despite The Beatles and Led Zeppelin being my favorite bands, I never listen to the Rolling Stones. and I mean NEVER. that's kinda odd isn't it? to worship the Beatles and never listen to the Stones? I realize that they're a good band, and i understand why they have millions of fans, and I would never say they "suck. I'm just not into them. same with Soundgarden.

im with you, to me I think its bands timing. But melody is prob more accurate

I thought it was so funny when you hit me with the floyd stuff, I made a radiohead comment in comparrison to pj and you acused me of thinking darkside was to commercial.

Floyd is great, Animals is my fav. You mentioned my grammar also
It was funny, its all good though.
I acted like a kid too I think I was like hey who cares Im going to hawaii.