IF PEARL JAM IS BEST

Cheo Ramirez · July 2011

the mad season album was great, i dont remember the name also like doolitle pixies (im not sure if its grunge)

WELL FOR ME THE BEST ALBUM OF ALL THE ROCK MUSIC IS

VS.

Cheo Ramirez · July 2011

there is nothing left to lose is a great album

DewieCox wrote:

curmudgeoness wrote:

Foo Fighters: I think Dave Grohl is cool as hell, and I have a ton of respect for the man's talent and attitude and I enjoy his music, but the Foos to me just are not a standard-setting band. I know others on here disagree with that, and let's just agree to disagree.

I agree. I think they get a pass b/c of how cool everybody thinks Grohl is. How many truly average albums have they put out? They have some great tunes but they're music has always been as close to Nickelback or 3 Doors Down as they are to the bands most are mentioning here.

I'd put Tool in the conversation.

teeman · July 2011

butte1 wrote:

Define groundbreaking? I mean were the grundge guys really doing something just completely new, or did they just tweek something that had already existed in Zeppelin and Black Sabbath or even the Stone's in some ways. Bands like Foo don't stand the test of time if their music isn't of some substance and if it is that substantial it influences other bands and must be sort of groundbreaking from that standpoint, and let's face it, Foo has influenced some current bands but is still influencing the baqnds of tomorrow just like PJ. Alice in Chains was great but honestly how much of their stuff stands up today, not as much as PJ or Foo? Same with STP or Soundgraden. I love all three and if we are talking early 1990's and how those bands moved the new generation from heavy metal and hair bands to the grundge sound then I like the top 5 most have listed here, in the PJ, Nirvana, Soundgarden, AIC and STP being 1 through 5. If we add the element of standing the test of time then I'm not sure Foo isn't #2 right behind PJ ahead of all those bands or atleast #2 with an asterik, because it's tough to place Foo ahead of Nirvana with that asterik because Dave Grohl was in Nirvana..... :shock: :?:

I love FF, just never felt like they were up at the level of the others. I think you could look at the other 5 and instantly use them as a measuring stick: that band sounds like Nirvana, that guy sings like Eddie, and people would know what you mean. Foo Fighters? That would be tough.

Yes lots has been done before but I really think some of these bands broke new ground. There are bands now breaking new ground too.

In my opinion, AIC definitely stands the test of time as well or better than most bands.

cbrunelle783 · July 2011

teeman wrote:

Actually, Chris Cornell should get major points for the Temple of the Dog album which really captured the spirit of music at the time. That's what I think of when I think of "grunge".

Temple of the Dog was an organic grunge supergroup and if you read anything about the scene at that time that's what most of the bands were, people getting together and playing. Everyone was in everyone else's band which makes PJ and Soundgarden sharing drummers seem normal. Watch Hype to learn more about the scene,http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgTVNBpg-d8&feature=relatedand read Jessica Letkemann's article Music for Rhinos if you want to know more about Hunger Strike. http://www.twofeetthick.com/2010/10/1990-the-making-of-pearl-jam-a-tft-mini-book/
For whatever reason Temple of the Dog's Hunger Strike, Alice in Chains' Rooster and Mad Season's River of Deceit stick in my mind as three songs I identify as "grunge". They are indicative of a specific time and place in my mind. One could also argue that Pearl Jam is timeless while other bands music may not hold up as well.

Pap · July 2011

Cheo Ramirez wrote:

the mad season album was great, i dont remember the name

It's called Above. Also, I would like to state that Alice In Chains and Soundgarden have stayed true to their sound.

cbrunelle783 · July 2011

Pap wrote:

Cheo Ramirez wrote:

the mad season album was great, i dont remember the name

It's called Above. Also, I would like to state that Alice In Chains and Soundgarden have stayed true to their sound.

Would you still be listening if Pearl Jam had released 9 more duplicates of Ten?

Pap · July 2011

cbrunelle783 wrote:

Pap wrote:

Cheo Ramirez wrote:

the mad season album was great, i dont remember the name

It's called Above. Also, I would like to state that Alice In Chains and Soundgarden have stayed true to their sound.

Would you still be listening if Pearl Jam had released 9 more duplicates of Ten?

You cannot say that about Soundgarden and Alice In Chains. Duplicates?! I like experimentation and changes but I also love what these two aforementioned bands have done with their sound over the years. On the other hand, I don't like those pop and new wave elements Pearl Jam try to incorporate in their music.

butte1 · July 2011

Pap wrote:

Cheo Ramirez wrote:

the mad season album was great, i dont remember the name

It's called Above. Also, I would like to state that Alice In Chains and Soundgarden have stayed true to their sound.

Soundgarden only put out 5 albums and hasn't put out a new studio album since like 1996 or something, so it is sort of easy to stay true to a sound you haven't tried to do anything with in 15+ years. That said Chris Cornell has done some solo stuff and the Audislave stuff, does that stuff sound anything like Soundgardens sound? I don't think so, so can you really say that they've stayed true to their sound or are they just a band that hasn't done anything new in 15 years.

Alice in Chains, honestly I think the Band with Layne Staley and the band without Layne Staley sound like totally different bands and their newest album from 2009 definitely has a different vibe than the early stuff. ALso, like Alice in Chanis, like SOundgarden, has a relatively small catalog of work compared to Pearl Jam. If they'd have stayed together don't you think they might have learned to grow and expand their musical repetoire as well?

Pearl Jam has released studio albums on a consistant basis and has done so while the others were not putting any new music out. I love that PJ continualy experiments and learns and grows, it is what makes their music timeless. JMHO

Pap · July 2011

butte1 wrote:

That said Chris Cornell has done some solo stuff and the Audioslave stuff, does that stuff sound anything like Soundgarden's sound? (1)

Alice in Chains, honestly I think the Band with Layne Staley and the band without Layne Staley sound like totally different bands and their newest album from 2009 definitely has a different vibe than the early stuff. (2)

(1)That's not Soundgarden. That's just Cornell with some other musicians. I am talking about Soundgarden.

(2) Wrong in my humble opinion.

Fatal · July 2011

Jamminonthe1 wrote:

I always thought In Utero was better than Nevermind. But those are all great albums and there were plenty of others, too.

I agree.

In Utero, Siamese Dream, Purple and Jar of Flies are to this day my favorite albums of the era (in addition to the Pearl Jam records).

I like Soundgarden, but never as much as i loved Nirvana, The Pumpkins and STP back in the day.

crazygeo · July 2011

I agree.

In Utero, Siamese Dream, Purple and Jar of Flies are to this day my favorite albums of the era (in addition to the Pearl Jam records).

I like Soundgarden, but never as much as i loved Nirvana, The Pumpkins and STP back in the day.

1990-95 put out the best CDS/ALBUMS since the late 60's in my humble opinion...

FrankY59 · July 2011

DewieCox wrote:

I'd put Tool in the conversation.

+1

crazygeo · July 2011

Pearl Jam
is the best band since 1990

IF PEARL JAM IS BEST

Comments

Categories