Will there ever be another Biggest Band in the World?

1…457910

Comments

  • Posts: 599
    Jeremy1012 wrote:
    Be surprised then. One gets Kerrang TV rotation but would never make it on the radio. I have never heard or seen Wherever I May Roam or Sad But True in my life, besides hearing on the album.

    I find that surprising.......but this is something that I obviously cannot prove one way or another.
  • Posts: 599
    Jeremy1012 wrote:
    You come across as a rather sad person. Are you aware of this?

    I was going to type something, but I'll hold back so as not to get banned again.
  • Seattle, WA Posts: 12,223
    When I was four, I thought this bunch were the biggest band in the world:


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zwwqEm5YhQ


    :D
  • Posts: 4,423
    FinsburyParkCarrots wrote:
    When I was four, I thought this bunch were the biggest band in the world:


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zwwqEm5YhQ


    :D

    They're not?!!?! :eek:

    :p
    Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
  • Posts: 7,170
    Odin wrote:
    I was going to type something, but I'll hold back so as not to get banned again.
    Good call. I'm going to sleep. Nice chatting with you.
    "I remember one night at Muzdalifa with nothing but the sky overhead, I lay awake amid sleeping Muslim brothers and I learned that pilgrims from every land — every colour, and class, and rank; high officials and the beggar alike — all snored in the same language"
  • Posts: 167
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cbw2Wx9wqAo
    ************************************************************************
    For Those About To Rock !

    Art changes people. People change the world.
  • Posts: 599
    Rhinocerous Surprise wrote:
    :p More reliable, how? Cos it's from a journalist? Any idiot with an English degree can be a journalist. (At least I hope so... otherwise I'm wasting my college life...)

    The All Music Guide is an established publication and far more credible than some kid with too much time on his hands.
    And the second was fact, with an interjection of opinion to make it sound like Pearl Jam was bigger than Nirvana at the time, rather than just eventually outselling them.

    I interpreted the interjection as the author's way of opining that Pearl Jam was more commercially appealing than Nirvana. Subjective, perhaps.....but it doesn't make the aforementioned fact any less valid.
  • Seattle, WA Posts: 12,223
    Rhinocerous Surprise wrote:
    They're not?!!?! :eek:

    :p


    Okay, they are:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btEpF334Rtc&

    This was the true sound of 1976, I remember vividly! Who needed punk, with this lot? They were legends ... legends, matey ... :D
  • Posts: 599
    Jeremy1012 wrote:
    Yes yes, you are of course correct. With my straight A record in english throughout my school life and having handed in my first year's coursework for my university degree in english literature this very afternoon, I HAVE never come across hyperbole :rolleyes:

    Stupid? No. Maybe I'm just taking you to task for every dumbass thing you say because it gives me great amusement to watch you make a fool of yourself.

    EDIT: Now that I have learned the definition of 'ad hominem'? Are you presuming that you are teaching me here? :o Christ almighty...

    Good for you. Now look up BLOW IT OUT YOUR ASS, MOTHERFUCKER!!!!!!
  • Posts: 4,423
    Odin wrote:
    The All Music Guide is an established publication and far more credible than some kid with too much time on his hands.

    But if you saw him saying the exact same thing on AMG, his opinion suddenly becomes more credible? Every article I've read on that site is openly laced with the author's bias.
    Odin wrote:
    I interpreted the interjection as the author's way of opining that Pearl Jam was more commercially appealing than Nirvana. Subjective, perhaps.....but it doesn't make the aforementioned fact any less valid.

    No, the fact stands. But the Eagles greatest hits has sold more than any Beatles album you might mention. Does that make them bigger than the Beatles?
    Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
  • Posts: 4,423
    FinsburyParkCarrots wrote:
    Okay, they are:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btEpF334Rtc&

    This was the true sound of 1976, I remember vividly! Who needed punk, with this lot? They were legends ... legends, matey ... :D

    What's even worse is that even as I opened that link, as soon as I saw the song name, I was singing the chorus.:p Their influence is all-pervading...:D
    Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
  • Posts: 599
    Rhinocerous Surprise wrote:
    But if you saw him saying the exact same thing on AMG, his opinion suddenly becomes more credible? Every article I've read on that site is openly laced with the author's bias.

    Jeremy's ramblings wouldn't be accepted at any publication. And neither would mine......which is why I cited a professional publication rather than pull my opinion out of my own ass like Jeremy and others have on this thread.
    No, the fact stands. But the Eagles greatest hits has sold more than any Beatles album you might mention. Does that make them bigger than the Beatles?

    You're not comparing apples to apples. The Eagles' greatest hits album was released roughly a decade after The Beatles' most successful albums; the demographics had shifted (for instance, the baby boomers had higher disposable incomes in the late-1970s than they had the previous decade). Nirvana and Metallica's albums were released ONE MONTH APART!
  • Posts: 4,423
    Odin wrote:
    Jeremy's ramblings wouldn't be accepted at any publication. And neither would mine......which is why I cited a professional publication rather than pull my opinion out of my own ass like Jeremy and others have on this thread.



    You're not comparing apples to apples. The Eagles' greatest hits album was released roughly a decade after The Beatles' most successful albums; the demographics had shifted (for instance, the baby boomers had higher disposable incomes in the late-1970s than they had the previous decade). Nirvana and Metallica's albums were released ONE MONTH APART!

    I was actually using the Eagles as an example of why the "Such and such went on to sell more than such and such" argument - in this case, Pearl Jam to Nirvana - proves nothing. The Eagles record went on to outsell most of the biggest acts in the world. But they were never, at any given time, the biggest act in the world.

    And the only difference between you or Jeremy pulling an opinion out of your ass, and a journalist doing it, is the journalist gets paid for it.
    Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
  • Posts: 599
    Rhinocerous Surprise wrote:
    I was actually using the Eagles as an example of why the "Such and such went on to sell more than such and such" argument - in this case, Pearl Jam to Nirvana - proves nothing. The Eagles record went on to outsell most of the biggest acts in the world. But they were never, at any given time, the biggest act in the world.

    I wouldn't be able to say either way because I wasn't alive in the 1970s. All I know is that there are many people who liked The Eagles and others who say they liked them at one time but are reluctant to admit it.....the same way that rap music fans don't want to admit that they were ever into the most popular rapper during the early-1990s, MC Hammer.
    And the only difference between you or Jeremy pulling an opinion out of your ass, and a journalist doing it, is the journalist gets paid for it.

    So what do you suggest we use to determine the more popular band? People have tried to discredit everything I've used, be it hard facts like statistics or opinions from reputable sources. What should we do? Give Jeremy, et al a cookie for providing absolutely NOTHING?
  • Posts: 4,423
    Odin wrote:
    I wouldn't be able to say either way because I wasn't alive in the 1970s. All I know is that there are many people who liked The Eagles and others who say they liked them at one time but are reluctant to admit it.....the same way that rap music fans don't want to admit that they were ever into the most popular rapper during the early-1990s, MC Hammer.



    So what do you suggest we use to determine the more popular band? People have tried to discredit everything I've used, be it hard facts like statistics or opinions from reputable sources. What should we do? Give Jeremy, et al a cookie for providing absolutely NOTHING?

    I'm just making you work to prove your point without cussing people out.:p
    Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
  • Posts: 14,127
    well odin
    even though I may disagree
    you are tenacious.


    hope you are going to the roo to see Metallica.

    me, I will take my four PJ shows up the east coast.
    And you dont need to cuss someone out to make your point.
  • Posts: 599
    Actually, Get_Right, I'll be overseas all summer and unfortunately none of Metallica's European dates coincide with my personal itinerary.

    And if that punk-ass bitch Jeremy1012 wants to talk shit, he can do it to my 6'3, 225-lb self next month because I will be in his hometown for a few days. We'll see how insulting he is to me when faced with the threat of being knocked the fuck out and pummeled to the ground!!!!!!!!!!
  • Posts: 599
    One last comment before I sign out for the night. If and when Metallica rebounds, everyone will be back on the bandwagon like Nas fans were after he dropped Stillmatic. I guarantee it.
  • Surfing The far side of THE Sombrero Galaxy Posts: 18,236
    The original question here was something about the biggest band in the world right. As I said before it's all up to our own individual opinions to this question. That being said I can recall what Metallica's rise did for music on radio airplay.

    Metallica's rise in popularity and record sales made it a reality that Heavy Metal was ok to play on radio airwaves. This is where their power and influence became apparent to me and the major difference they made to the music industry. They made it the norm for the likes of Korn, NIN, Godsmack, Megadeth and others to be played on a regular basis on radio airways.

    Before the Metallica rise in the late 80's early 90's the few times HM was played music fans turned the radio dial. GNR may have been more popular but Metallica had a serious hard core fan base and followed the band with a passion due to the underground vibe they portrayed. In fact they were the first band I traveled to see on the Black album world Tour (Where Ever I May Roam World Tour). They quickly surpassed GNR in popularity as the the mid 90's approached.

    Since this question was coined *BB in the World* I also recall that Metallica sold out on that tour in Japan, Australia and Europe and especially the Scandinavian countries not mentioning North and South America. We must remember the world is not just the USA.

    On the other hand I don't recall Nirvana having that much of power and influence on the world stage. In America especially the west coast but I seriously don't recall them being that big of an influence on the east coast around the early 90's. Don't get me wrong I do like both bands however I feel Metallica's influence was more worldwide than Nirvana.

    In the end it still really doesn't matter in that one band is exists no more and the other is trying to reinvent themselves to a past popularity. The past is the past and we can't change a damn thing that happened back then.

    Peace,
    Everybody is right in their own minds.
    *We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti

    *MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
    .....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti

    *The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)


  • Posts: 861
    I was in 9th grade in 91-92. what great times, for music at least.

    Metallica and Nirvana were equal in popularity imo. Metallica already had a built-in contingency at my school, so Nirvana equalling them in popularity was an accomplishment. Nirvana was the band that knocked Michael Jackson's cd off the #1, so that's a testament to their popularity.

    U2 and Aerosmith were big, but were kind of more "adult oriented". GnR was popular, but they also became somewhat adult oriented, especially with "November Rain" and it's very gay video.

    after Metallica and Nirvana, PJ were #3. you can say that PJ sold more albums or whatever, but I'm telling you they weren't as popular at Metallica or Nirvana. Hootie and the Blowfish sold more than all of them, but they weren't as universally "popular". PJ just had staying power that ran through the 90s. they weren't played nearly as much on mtv as Nirvana or Metallica either. after Nirvana, Metallica, and PJ, I'd say Tool was 4th. "Undertow" had a massive grassroots type following. ***EDIT: STP was more popular than Tool. STP would've been the 4th most popular, followed by Tool.***

    with Metallica going on a musical hiatus, Nirvana took over the number 1 popularity spot between 93-94 with PJ a close 2nd. the Temple of the Dog
    album was popular too, but Soundgarden and AIC really weren't much more than a blimp on the radar.

    Nirvana purposely cut off a lot of their fanbase with "In Utero"'s much more raw production. and by that time, Cobain was pretty much a junkie, which was something that was not that out in the open at that time. so both those things led to their downfall in the popularity polls.

    summer of 94, Green Day and the Offspring were the 2 hot bands. STP's 2nd album was hugely popular that summer as well.

    summer of 95, Live was probably the most popular band on the radio.

    late 96 was Oasis and even moreso, Smashing Pumpkins double album. they pretty solidly became the most popular band. sometime in that span (I think around late 95 or early 96), Soundgarden became hugely popular with the Superunknown album. it was around this time that Metallica finally released the followup to the Black Album. though Load was a shitty album, it still brought them back to the forefront. Bush was very popular during this time as well.

    AIC also got more popular at that time. they had steadily been getting more popular following Dirt and Jar of Flies, but the eponymous album and Unplugged was probably their highest points as far as mtv and radio play. Rage also became hugely popular around 1996. though PJ were steady throughout, 1995-1996 marked the beginning of their decline in popularity.

    by 1997 some time around the release of their 2nd album, Korn became a huge band and the return to shitty rock music began.

    but yeah, around 1992....Metallica and Nirvana were equal imo.

Welcome!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.
Sign In
Register

Quick Links

Categories