Nirvana Unplugged VS Pearl Jam Unplugged....again!

U R A Crazy Breed

I have seen a lot of people say that Nirvana Unplugged is better than Pearl Jam Unplugged!!...I AM NOT ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE!! while i do like Nirvana very much...Kurt can't fuck with Ed when it comes to vocals!

Now that we are getting a "true" DVD release with all the bells and whistles (and 5.1!!) instead of the many fucked up bootleg copies on the net...I think some of you may change your mind!

............besides Alice in Chains Unplugged is 2nd...then Nirvana is 3rd.

DD164485

Pearl Jam was the better band
Nirvana made the better "Unplugged"

WoodenHammer

All 3 of those sets were phenomenal and really important albums for me growing up. Hard to say, but since PJ was never released, that we can't rank them until we get that official release. I'd say out of Nirvana and AIC, I think AIC has the best replay value. I still listen to that album a lot and am floored by Layne.

GivenToJam88

what is this "true" dvd release?

pjsteelerfan

JakeG wrote:

what is this "true" dvd release?

Check ot the goods sections- March 24th. I think they are all great on their own right, all are so differnt, PJ is mostly 10 while Nirvana and AIC spans more of their whole career. I really can't wait to see it.

U R A Crazy Breed

WoodenHammer wrote:

All 3 of those sets were phenomenal and really important albums for me growing up. Hard to say, but since PJ was never released, that we can't rank them until we get that official release. I'd say out of Nirvana and AIC, I think AIC has the best replay value. I still listen to that album a lot and am floored by Layne.

I love AIC unplugged....Layne was amazing...i just remember being blown away by such a powerful voice coming from such a frail man.

SomethingCreative

Between Nirvana and Pearl Jam...Nirvana.


I'm not the biggest Nirvana fan by a mile but I just don't think that Pearl Jam was ready to do a full unplugged set. Some of the set didn't really translate very well to the acoustic setting.

Alice In Chains takes the cake though.

Given2Fly...SD

state of love and trust acoustic...enough said

pjsteelerfan

The Porch accoustic is still my favorite version of the song

Brisk.

Always would have love to have seen a Smashing Pumpkins or Soundgarden MTV unplugged.

mindi

pjsteelerfan wrote:

The Porch accoustic is still my favorite version of the song

Yep! I have never seen it done better. Best version ever!

Flagg

Alice in Chains beats them both.

Just watched it again the other night. Amazing.

TheDecline13

I BrisK I wrote:

Always would have love to have seen a Smashign Pumpkins or Soundgarden MTV unplugged.

Raplh as in puke!

Ryan_WFC

Not sure it's a fair comparison, as Nirvana had been a band for much longer at that point and had much more material to pull from.

whgarrett

As far as a Soundgarden unplugged as someone else mentioned you can just get the Chris Cornell unplugged Three Crowns; Swedish show. It is awesome!

Brisk.

whgarrett wrote:

As far as a Soundgarden unplugged as someone else mentioned you can just get the Chris Cornell unplugged Three Crowns; Swedish show. It is awesome!

Meh, he sounds very hoarsy on that. It's a great show dont get me song but it isn't Soundgarden ;p

whgarrett

hoarsey? You kinda a picky or what.... I consider that one of the best boots I have out of all the band's shows I collect.

Evolution6579

SomethingCreative wrote:

I'm not the biggest Nirvana fan by a mile but I just don't think that Pearl Jam was ready to do a full unplugged set. Some of the set didn't really translate very well to the acoustic setting.

I think that they were more than ready for a full set. But it was at a time when they were wanting to make a name for themselves as opposed to "following in Nirvana's footsteps." You still got to witness the love and passion of their live show, which still remains to this day, but in an environment that allowed them to show what great musicians they are underneath all the distortion and reverb.

youngster

My vote goes to Nirvana. Even though I like Pearl Jam more than Nirvana as an overall band, I think Nirvana's Unplugged is better. Basically it's because that Nirvana had a ton of hits at that point but instead chose to due mostly covers. It just shows their broad range in music. Maybe after I see PJ's unplugged in a true mastered form I might think differently.

Smellyman

Peter Brady sings Nirvana.

If you like what peter did with "time to change" then you probably dig Nirvana's unplugged more

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyooALwfxO8

marinovedder

Well, basically I like more nirvana's unplugged because of the setup. I think that that overall that added a lot to the concert. I always felt that PJ's unplugged was lacking in that area. For example, ironically, the thing I like the most about Alice's unplugged is the intro. How while playing Nutshell, every one of them got out when their instrument was due to play...

Regarding the songs, I'd compare Benaroya with Nirvana's. Pearl Jam would be more mature as a band and would have more songs and more of a setlist for an acoustic set.

DeLukin

I liked Nirvana's as far as production, but Pearl Jam's Unplugged was great for its raw emotion. Nirvana sounded great, but looked kind of bored. Pearl Jam made me want to find an acoustic guitar and smash it on something. To me, that made it more entertaining so my vote goes to PJ.

Random_Hero

DD164485 wrote:

Pearl Jam was the better band
Nirvana made the better "Unplugged"

could not have said it better myself.... I wasnt a huge fan of the Pearl Jam unplugged.. I tend to even like the Alice In Chains unplugged better... but for really sad reasons. The moment in the AIC unplugged when Layne takes his shades off and you see his, black circled eyes.. heart breaking

Flagg

Random_Hero wrote:

DD164485 wrote:

Pearl Jam was the better band
Nirvana made the better "Unplugged"

could not have said it better myself.... I wasnt a huge fan of the Pearl Jam unplugged.. I tend to even like the Alice In Chains unplugged better... but for really sad reasons. The moment in the AIC unplugged when Layne takes his shades off and you see his, black circled eyes.. heart breaking

Yep. Like I said in an earlier post, I just watched this the other day. My wife was like, "Oh my. God bless him. Look at him!" Very, very sad what that drug does to people.

prytocorduroy

Both awesome. But Pearl Jam's is better because they played Even Flow. Nirvana didn't play Even Flow. Fuck them.

OffHeGoes132

WoodenHammer wrote:

All 3 of those sets were phenomenal and really important albums for me growing up. Hard to say, but since PJ was never released, that we can't rank them until we get that official release. I'd say out of Nirvana and AIC, I think AIC has the best replay value. I still listen to that album a lot and am floored by Layne.

Wholeheartedly agree. AIC had to be my favorite of the three, and all three were also very important to growing up. I think Nirvana's set has PJ beat by a hair, but I also agree that PJ was/is the better band. Again, I have to emphasize that each set is close on all fronts; all three sets were masterfully performed.

I know many people aren't crazy about STP around here, but I think their unplugged set ranks up there with these three as well. Only my opinion though. I sure as hell wish they'd release that on DVD as well.

FinsburyParkCarrots

SomethingCreative wrote:

I just don't think that Pearl Jam was ready to do a full unplugged set. Some of the set didn't really translate very well to the acoustic setting.

I think this is right. Mike's Takamine sound was tinny and trebly, compared with the acoustic sound he would develop. It needed a lot more bass and mid. It was invisible at times and some of the solos came across as strangely weedy in tone. That was nothing to do with Mike's phenomenal playing in itself: it's just that the band hadn't found the right acoustic sound by trial and error, yet. Plus, Dave A's drumming didn't really suit the unplugged context: Even Flow is a bit of a strange mix of fat drums and thin guitar.

It'll be interesting, however, if on this new release, they had access to master recordings of every channel on the sound desk from that MTV session. They could re-mix the thing themselves properly, and bring each instrument out more.

Surf Rider

i choose pearl jam. :roll: and it's not even close.

Oz Jammer

FinsburyParkCarrots wrote:

SomethingCreative wrote:

I just don't think that Pearl Jam was ready to do a full unplugged set. Some of the set didn't really translate very well to the acoustic setting.

I think this is right. Mike's Takamine sound was tinny and trebly, compared with the acoustic sound he would develop. It needed a lot more bass and mid. It was invisible at times and some of the solos came across as strangely weedy in tone. That was nothing to do with Mike's phenomenal playing in itself: it's just that the band hadn't found the right acoustic sound by trial and error, yet. Plus, Dave A's drumming didn't really suit the unplugged context: Even Flow is a bit of a strange mix of fat drums and thin guitar.

It'll be interesting, however, if on this new release, they had access to master recordings of every channel on the sound desk from that MTV session. They could re-mix the thing themselves properly, and bring each instrument out more.

I'm just saddened by the fact that they left off "Rockin' In The Free World" on the new DVD. That version is sublime.
Will be interesting to see if they kept Ed's 'tribute' after they finish playing Oceans

soulsinging

Crazy Breed wrote:

I have seen a lot of people say that Nirvana Unplugged is better than Pearl Jam Unplugged!!...I AM NOT ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE!! while i do like Nirvana very much...Kurt can't fuck with Ed when it comes to vocals!

Now that we are getting a "true" DVD release with all the bells and whistles (and 5.1!!) instead of the many fucked up bootleg copies on the net...I think some of you may change your mind!

............besides Alice in Chains Unplugged is 2nd...then Nirvana is 3rd.

AiC's unplugged was better than both. But Nirvana gets the edge over PJ to me, because it showed a whole different side of the band. PJ's didn't Benaroya Hall might be better than Nirvana Unplugged though.

soulsinging

FinsburyParkCarrots wrote:

SomethingCreative wrote:

I just don't think that Pearl Jam was ready to do a full unplugged set. Some of the set didn't really translate very well to the acoustic setting.

I think this is right. Mike's Takamine sound was tinny and trebly, compared with the acoustic sound he would develop. It needed a lot more bass and mid. It was invisible at times and some of the solos came across as strangely weedy in tone. That was nothing to do with Mike's phenomenal playing in itself: it's just that the band hadn't found the right acoustic sound by trial and error, yet. Plus, Dave A's drumming didn't really suit the unplugged context: Even Flow is a bit of a strange mix of fat drums and thin guitar.

It'll be interesting, however, if on this new release, they had access to master recordings of every channel on the sound desk from that MTV session. They could re-mix the thing themselves properly, and bring each instrument out more.

Didn't they have all their instruments stolen right before that show? I thought they had said they played that unplugged with a bunch of instruments scrounged from friends at the last minute... might explain some of the technical shortcomings.