Trending Topics

      Next match: Everton v LFC [Premier League] Wed 24th Apr @ 8:00 pm - Pre Match Topic
      Goodison Park

      Today is the 23rd of April and on this date LFC's match record is P25 W11 D4 L10

      Pearl Jam v Nirvana

      Read 9166 times
      0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
      Brian78
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****
      • Started Topic

      • 19,135 posts | 2772 
      • A Liverbird upon my chest
      Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Sep 07, 2012 08:19:44 pm
      Both bands had big hits in th early 90s. 1 band got/gets huge media attention.

      But which band was the better?

      I personally at the time preferred Nirvana, probably down to the media frenzy they got at the time. But have changed my mind in recent years and would have to say Pearl Jam are the better of the 2.

      Whats the general view on this one!!
      Reprobate
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 11,055 posts | 436 
      • Avatar by Kitster29@Deviantart.com
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #1: Sep 07, 2012 08:24:07 pm
      Ouch! How the hell do I answer this one?! Both are/were amazing bands and it's impossible for me to choose.

      If Nirvana had continued for as long as Pearl Jam then perhaps the decision would have been made for me one way or another. As it is, I can't answer this question.

      Brian78
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****
      • Started Topic

      • 19,135 posts | 2772 
      • A Liverbird upon my chest
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #2: Sep 07, 2012 08:26:59 pm
      Here Rep sit on this mate  ;D

      Ov3rdose
      • Forum Legend - Benitez
      • *****

      • 1,961 posts | 17 
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #3: Sep 07, 2012 08:35:04 pm
      Pearl Jam for me, mainly because they have released more material so there are more songs that I like.

      And I have a man crush on Mike McCready.
      « Last Edit: Sep 07, 2012 09:13:40 pm by Ov3rdose »
      kevinho
      • Forum Legend - Fagan
      • *****

      • 3,698 posts | 78 
      • YNWA
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #4: Sep 07, 2012 09:16:42 pm
      The only thing I am 100% sure of is that you can't understand a F***ing thing either Kurt Cobain or Eddie Vedder sing.
      Diego LFC
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 19,332 posts | 2832 
      • Sempre Liverpool
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #5: Sep 07, 2012 09:24:21 pm
      Nirvana were far more important in my life, for they were probably the first rock band I really got addicted to, that I first idolized - so if I had to, I would pick them.

      But in terms of music, and music only, I find it impossible to pick one of Nirvana or Pearl Jam. I've seen PJ live twice and twice they were unreal.
      racerx34
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 33,599 posts | 3840 
      • THE SALT IN THE SOUP
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #6: Sep 07, 2012 09:45:32 pm
      When I was a young, angry, man Nirvana fed the fire.
      Back then I listened to Faith No More and Nirvana.

      I got into the likes of Smashing Pumpkins and Pearl Jam as I got older.
      In that time I had a more layered taste in music.

      I would put both ahead of Nirvana.

      To answer the question:
      Pearl Jam, because no matter my mood
      or feeling there is always Pearl Jam music
      to suit it.

      Nirvana for me was always the soundtrack of rebellion.
      Pearl Jam got me through life and everything else.
      Roddenberry
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 16,568 posts | 1876 
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #7: Sep 07, 2012 09:49:29 pm
      I'm leaving this decision to Weird Al, he hasn't done a Pearl Jam parody, though he has done a Nirvana parody, therefore Nirvana...but he did do a song called My Baby's In Love With Eddie Vedder which does muddy the water a little.

      "Weird Al" Yankovic - Smells Like Nirvana

      Weird Al Yankovic - My Baby's In Love With Eddie Vedder

      The Nirvana parody is superb though, from the video, the performance & the lyrics.
      Scotia
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 8,968 posts | 3052 
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #8: Sep 07, 2012 09:56:18 pm
      It's Nirvana obviously - some of it still makes me almost feel that same pain

      MacEnroe v Connors - Connors achieved more but he never made it look that good
      Bostonian
      • Forum Youth Player

      • 15 posts |
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #9: Sep 08, 2012 01:28:56 am
      other than coming from the pacific north -west they shouldn't be mentioned in the same sentence. Nirvana piss on 'em.
      TheRedMosquito
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 12,201 posts | 633 
      • Elmore James got nothin' on this baby!
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #10: Sep 08, 2012 03:05:01 am
      They're not really the same type of band. It's tough to compare a trio and 5-piece band. Both are considered "grunge" but I've always felt that wasn't an accurate description for either. That really applies to every Seattle band that gets labeled "grunge." None of them are alike in my book.

      Nirvana are important for breaking the 80s funk in rock and deserve credit for that, but I've always preferred Pearl Jam. To me they're better musically and lyrically, and each member of Pearl Jam was/is a very good musician. Dave Grohl was the obvious stand-out from Nirvana. Fantastic drummer and now a frontman for one of the best bands around. That's pure talent.

      I'm a guitarist myself, so that's another reason I like Pearl Jam. The play of Stone Gossard on rhythm and Mike McCready on lead is quality. I believe Kurt Cobain once got pissy about Pearl Jam to a reporter because they had a lot of guitar solos or something.

      I'd take "Alive" over anything in the Nirvana catalog, personally, but I totally understand the love for Nirvana. 
      racerx34
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 33,599 posts | 3840 
      • THE SALT IN THE SOUP
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #11: Sep 08, 2012 10:22:32 am
      Having read the following, your username now makes sense.
      Brilliant.

      They're not really the same type of band. It's tough to compare a trio and 5-piece band. Both are considered "grunge" but I've always felt that wasn't an accurate description for either. That really applies to every Seattle band that gets labeled "grunge." None of them are alike in my book.

      Nirvana are important for breaking the 80s funk in rock and deserve credit for that, but I've always preferred Pearl Jam. To me they're better musically and lyrically, and each member of Pearl Jam was/is a very good musician. Dave Grohl was the obvious stand-out from Nirvana. Fantastic drummer and now a frontman for one of the best bands around. That's pure talent.

      I'm a guitarist myself, so that's another reason I like Pearl Jam. The play of Stone Gossard on rhythm and Mike McCready on lead is quality. I believe Kurt Cobain once got pissy about Pearl Jam to a reporter because they had a lot of guitar solos or something.

      I'd take "Alive" over anything in the Nirvana catalog, personally, but I totally understand the love for Nirvana. 
      Scotia
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 8,968 posts | 3052 
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #12: Sep 08, 2012 05:02:46 pm
      They're not really the same type of band. It's tough to compare a trio and 5-piece band. Both are considered "grunge" but I've always felt that wasn't an accurate description for either. That really applies to every Seattle band that gets labeled "grunge." None of them are alike in my book.

      Nirvana are important for breaking the 80s funk in rock and deserve credit for that, but I've always preferred Pearl Jam. To me they're better musically and lyrically, and each member of Pearl Jam was/is a very good musician. Dave Grohl was the obvious stand-out from Nirvana. Fantastic drummer and now a frontman for one of the best bands around. That's pure talent.

      I'm a guitarist myself, so that's another reason I like Pearl Jam. The play of Stone Gossard on rhythm and Mike McCready on lead is quality. I believe Kurt Cobain once got pissy about Pearl Jam to a reporter because they had a lot of guitar solos or something.

      I'd take "Alive" over anything in the Nirvana catalog, personally, but I totally understand the love for Nirvana. 

      Can't compete with the technical music knowledge but I am obsessed with listening to it always have been. One of the upsides of being 11 yrs younger than my nearest brother was that I got to knock his stuff and pass it off as mine as a kid automatically making me the coolest kid in class - for the one day a term we were allowed to bring our own stuff in to listen to!

      Your observations make sense and I always enjoy that sort of chat with my nephew who plays drums and guitar in a band and does quite a lot of session work.

      I just look for music to stir something or in some cases for the writing (lyrics) to make me think. I was late to Nirvana - just before the end but the combo of writing and the instrument that was Kurt Cobains voice still have a raw authenticity to me that Pearl Jam don't quite reach. Top band though.
      bigvYNWA
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 16,795 posts | 994 
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #13: Sep 28, 2012 11:16:39 pm
      Like Diego, Nirvana was the first band I really got addicted to in early high school. Then Pearl Jam came not long after. For raw impact, some of Nirvana's stuff is still amazing. I still have them on high rotation. But having seen Pearl Jam live as well, I have a lot of respect for them and what they do. An AMAZING show, some of the highest energy I've seen on stage - and considering at that point they'd been going for 15 years already, rare to see that enthusiasm continue. So I think Pearl may just get the nod for the fact they are still around and doing good stuff, but taking nothing away from Nirvana - an absolutely boss and iconic band, and one that deserves to live on in our music libraries for generations more.
      Arrie
      • Forum Legend - Fagan
      • *****

      • 2,763 posts | 64 
      • Being safe is risky nowadays.
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #14: Sep 29, 2012 09:36:18 am
      Nirvana's impact musically and socially was (and is) far greater than Pearl Jam's. Nirvana was sui generis and Pearl Jam, while a really good band, is, you know, just a band. They've released some good albums and done a lot of good work, they've spawned countless deep-voiced imitators over the years and have, no doubt, made an impact on the musical and cultural landscape. But they weren't as groundbreaking as Nirvana. From the outset their music was more melodic, accessible and radio-friendly. They never really risked alienating the press - and fans - that were attracted to them by espousing unpopular opinions, they never made an album that pushed their artistry outside of their comfort zone. Pearl Jam was, in some ways, an entry point into "alternative music" for mainstream audiences that found Nirvana a little too hard to listen to. That's not to disparage what Pearl Jam does, nor their talent, just to say that they are now, and have always been, very audience-friendly.

      Nirvana was the kind of band - and Kurt the kind of artist - that was going to follow his brutal muse wherever it took him, regardless of what the audience thought. Who can speculate what drives anyone to suicide (conspiracy theories aside)? But if Kurt had survived his demons rather than succumb to them I think he would have followed his creative instincts in some very interesting directions and gone on to create new sounds and offer new perspectives. I don't think Nirvana would have stayed together for 20 years, I think Kurt would have gotten restless with the constraints of the cultural moment that put his band on the map and explored new genres and territories. But who can say?
      Reprobate
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 11,055 posts | 436 
      • Avatar by Kitster29@Deviantart.com
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #15: Sep 29, 2012 10:47:15 am
      Nirvana's impact musically and socially was (and is) far greater than Pearl Jam's. Nirvana was sui generis and Pearl Jam, while a really good band, is, you know, just a band. They've released some good albums and done a lot of good work, they've spawned countless deep-voiced imitators over the years and have, no doubt, made an impact on the musical and cultural landscape. But they weren't as groundbreaking as Nirvana. From the outset their music was more melodic, accessible and radio-friendly. They never really risked alienating the press - and fans - that were attracted to them by espousing unpopular opinions, they never made an album that pushed their artistry outside of their comfort zone. Pearl Jam was, in some ways, an entry point into "alternative music" for mainstream audiences that found Nirvana a little too hard to listen to. That's not to disparage what Pearl Jam does, nor their talent, just to say that they are now, and have always been, very audience-friendly.

      Nirvana was the kind of band - and Kurt the kind of artist - that was going to follow his brutal muse wherever it took him, regardless of what the audience thought. Who can speculate what drives anyone to suicide (conspiracy theories aside)? But if Kurt had survived his demons rather than succumb to them I think he would have followed his creative instincts in some very interesting directions and gone on to create new sounds and offer new perspectives. I don't think Nirvana would have stayed together for 20 years, I think Kurt would have gotten restless with the constraints of the cultural moment that put his band on the map and explored new genres and territories. But who can say?

      Although I agree with EVERYTHING you've just said about Nirvana, I think you're being a but unfair on Pearl Jam. Nowadays their music is 'safe' and environmental activism will never exactly be cool but they were very outspoken on political matters back in the day. They have been massively influential musically and although they faced accusations of hopping on the grunge scene bandwagon, the truth is they were very much at the core of it and spawned a thousand copies, especially vocally. Not only that but they often rebelled against the music industry which we NOW appreciate is fu**ed. They refused to make music videos and when they finally bowed to the fans pleas and made the video for Jeremy, it got banned.Ty
      They may not have had the drug-fueled rebel status of bands like Nirvana but they were no safe, industry friendly hippies.

      « Last Edit: Sep 29, 2012 10:57:44 am by Reprobate »
      Diego LFC
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 19,332 posts | 2832 
      • Sempre Liverpool
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #16: Sep 29, 2012 05:11:37 pm
      Nirvana's impact musically and socially was (and is) far greater than Pearl Jam's. Nirvana was sui generis and Pearl Jam, while a really good band, is, you know, just a band. They've released some good albums and done a lot of good work, they've spawned countless deep-voiced imitators over the years and have, no doubt, made an impact on the musical and cultural landscape. But they weren't as groundbreaking as Nirvana. From the outset their music was more melodic, accessible and radio-friendly. They never really risked alienating the press - and fans - that were attracted to them by espousing unpopular opinions, they never made an album that pushed their artistry outside of their comfort zone. Pearl Jam was, in some ways, an entry point into "alternative music" for mainstream audiences that found Nirvana a little too hard to listen to. That's not to disparage what Pearl Jam does, nor their talent, just to say that they are now, and have always been, very audience-friendly.

      Nirvana was the kind of band - and Kurt the kind of artist - that was going to follow his brutal muse wherever it took him, regardless of what the audience thought. Who can speculate what drives anyone to suicide (conspiracy theories aside)? But if Kurt had survived his demons rather than succumb to them I think he would have followed his creative instincts in some very interesting directions and gone on to create new sounds and offer new perspectives. I don't think Nirvana would have stayed together for 20 years, I think Kurt would have gotten restless with the constraints of the cultural moment that put his band on the map and explored new genres and territories. But who can say?

      Great take on Nirvana there.

      That's one of the main reasons I just don't see the fuss about Foo Fighters at all.

      They're just a worse, radio-friendly version of grunge rock music. Music for teenagers. I mean, I kinda like them, and even saw them live years ago, but they're also "just" a band, as you said.
      TheRedMosquito
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 12,201 posts | 633 
      • Elmore James got nothin' on this baby!
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #17: Sep 30, 2012 03:13:49 pm
      Arrie I think you're totally wrong about Pearl Jam!

      Nirvana's impact musically and socially was (and is) far greater than Pearl Jam's. Nirvana was sui generis and Pearl Jam, while a really good band, is, you know, just a band. They've released some good albums and done a lot of good work, they've spawned countless deep-voiced imitators over the years and have, no doubt, made an impact on the musical and cultural landscape. But they weren't as groundbreaking as Nirvana. From the outset their music was more melodic, accessible and radio-friendly.

      I wouldn't say PJ's music was more "radio-friendly." "Ten" and "Vs" are very angry albums, dealing with some pretty deep stuff. If anything, it was their musical ability and genuine talent that makes them easier to play on the radio.

      They never really risked alienating the press - and fans - that were attracted to them by espousing unpopular opinions

      They took on Ticketmaster for out-pricing their fans (and eventually lost that battle and some popularity). They took on the music industry and stopped making music videos once "Jeremy" was censored (btw, that song also deals with some deep stuff if you know the back story). Making videos in the 90s was the best way to gain new fans and popularity.

      They're also very political and make no bones about which politicians in the US they support and dislike. "Riot Act" was pretty much an entirely political album.

      they never made an album that pushed their artistry outside of their comfort zone.

      You've probably never listened to their fourth album, "No Code." It is unlike anything any Seattle band had done up to that point, wasn't popular, yet IMO is arguably some of their best music. Songs like "Who You Are" and "In My Tree" are very different. Musically, it is something else and something very different than previous stuff. It was a total push outside their boundaries and as a result it's still very much panned by critics and fans. Some like it, others hate it.
      racerx34
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 33,599 posts | 3840 
      • THE SALT IN THE SOUP
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #18: Oct 01, 2012 01:28:30 pm
      Arrie I think you're totally wrong about Pearl Jam!

      I wouldn't say PJ's music was more "radio-friendly." "Ten" and "Vs" are very angry albums, dealing with some pretty deep stuff. If anything, it was their musical ability and genuine talent that makes them easier to play on the radio.

      They took on Ticketmaster for out-pricing their fans (and eventually lost that battle and some popularity). They took on the music industry and stopped making music videos once "Jeremy" was censored (btw, that song also deals with some deep stuff if you know the back story). Making videos in the 90s was the best way to gain new fans and popularity.

      They're also very political and make no bones about which politicians in the US they support and dislike. "Riot Act" was pretty much an entirely political album.

      You've probably never listened to their fourth album, "No Code." It is unlike anything any Seattle band had done up to that point, wasn't popular, yet IMO is arguably some of their best music. Songs like "Who You Are" and "In My Tree" are very different. Musically, it is something else and something very different than previous stuff. It was a total push outside their boundaries and as a result it's still very much panned by critics and fans. Some like it, others hate it.

      Saved me a hungover attempt that what would have been a poor version of that post.
      Thank you.
      racerx34
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 33,599 posts | 3840 
      • THE SALT IN THE SOUP
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #19: Oct 01, 2012 02:05:20 pm
      From the outset their music was more melodic, accessible and radio-friendly.


      Is that not the argument put forward by Cobain when challenged on Pearl Jam's popularity.
      Seems most fans bought into it.

      If you could align them a section in Grunge then

      Nirvana - Punk
      Soundgarden - Heavy Metal
      Pearl Jam - Traditional

      would be how the music media would probably line them up.
      In truth Pearl Jam also had punk influences throughout the band and
      Soundgarden played with Pearl Jam to make Temple of the Dog.

      Of course we all have our preferences but I don't buy into the Pearl Jam
      only being considered better because they were "audience friendly" or
      "being radio friendly made them popular".

      They are the best band in the world because they are F***ing good.
      They can do an angry song or an "unpopular song" as good as anyone.
      They can also put together a heartfelt melody as good as anyone and
      they can do every bit of music in between.
      racerx34
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 33,599 posts | 3840 
      • THE SALT IN THE SOUP
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #20: Oct 01, 2012 02:11:41 pm
      Pearl Jam - Do The Evolution

      Nirvana - Heart Shaped Box

      Ok I needed some videos in here.
      Both are F***ing boss.

      racerx34
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 33,599 posts | 3840 
      • THE SALT IN THE SOUP
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #21: Oct 01, 2012 02:20:35 pm
      Actually when it comes go Grunge this was my gateway song if that's what we are calling them.
      I listened to Nirvana well before I listened to Pearl Jam.

      Nirvana - In Bloom

      racerx34
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 33,599 posts | 3840 
      • THE SALT IN THE SOUP
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #22: Oct 01, 2012 02:28:32 pm
      These were the songs that got me into Pearl Jam originally:

      Pearl Jam - Rearviewmirror


      Pearl Jam - Go
      Drum and bass driven rock at its best.

      racerx34
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 33,599 posts | 3840 
      • THE SALT IN THE SOUP
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #23: Oct 01, 2012 02:43:57 pm
      Ten

      1.   "Once"     Stone Gossard   3:51
      2.   "Even Flow"     Gossard   4:53
      3.   "Alive"     Gossard   5:40
      4.   "Why Go"     Jeff Ament   3:19
      5.   "Black"     Gossard   5:44
      6.   "Jeremy"     Ament   5:18
      7.   "Oceans"     Gossard, Ament, Vedder   2:41
      8.   "Porch"     Vedder   3:30
      9.   "Garden"     Gossard, Ament   4:59
      10.   "Deep"     Gossard, Ament   4:18
      11.   "Release"     Gossard, Ament, Dave Krusen, Mike McCready, Vedder   9:05
      12.   "Alive" (live)   Gossard   4:54
      13.   "Wash"     Ament, Gossard, Krusen, McCready, Vedder   3:33
      14.   "Dirty Frank" 

      Every song on that album is brilliant.
      What are we stuck with nowadays.
      Some little punks that release one or two songs and we're supposed to believe they are superstars.
      Bollocks.

      Vs

      1.   "Go"     Dave Abbruzzese [4]   3:12
      2.   "Animal"     Stone Gossard [47]   2:49
      3.   "Daughter"     Gossard [48]   3:55
      4.   "Glorified G"     Gossard, Mike McCready [49]   3:26
      5.   "Dissident"     Gossard, McCready, Jeff Ament [50]   3:35
      6.   "W.M.A."     Abbruzzese, Ament [4]   5:59
      7.   "Blood"     Gossard, McCready [2]   2:50
      8.   "Rearviewmirror"     Vedder [6]   4:44
      9.   "Rats"     Ament [51]   4:15
      10.   "Elderly Woman Behind the Counter in a Small Town"     Vedder [51]   3:15
      11.   "Leash"     Gossard, McCready [2]   3:09
      12.   "Indifference"     Ament, Gossard [6]   5:02
      13.   "Hold On" (acoustic demo)   Vedder   Gossard   4:40
      14.   "Cready Stomp" (instrumental)       McCready   3:23
      15.   "Crazy Mary" 

      In two albums Pearl Jam made as many great songs as others could manage in their entire careers.

      You spoke about them being unit shifters or radio friendly.  ;)
      The entire point of Vitality and No-Code was against that.
      Vedder's creative revolt against what Pearl Jam had become.

      As has been said before Riot Act was a massive political album that saw them get booed onstage for
      the anti-bush masks during Bushleaguer.

      Only in their latter days have Pearl Jam become this "mainstream" act they have become accused of.
      Largely because they have mellowed out in their old age but also because they have been so often
      copied. If you set up a band and it becomes a rock and roll template some snobs might write you off.
      Others might just realise you are an often copied, never equalled, rock great.
      racerx34
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 33,599 posts | 3840 
      • THE SALT IN THE SOUP
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #24: Oct 01, 2012 03:03:08 pm
      Pearl Jam - Jeremy

      Pearl Jam - Alive

      Nirvana - Smells Like Teen Spirit

      Two F***ing fantastic bands and better then the sh*t that gets served up to the masses today.
      Glad we grew up with this and not X Factor.

      I'll leave it there.
      Reprobate
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 11,055 posts | 436 
      • Avatar by Kitster29@Deviantart.com
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #25: Oct 01, 2012 04:26:08 pm
      You spoke about them being unit shifters or radio friendly.  ;)

      Nicely done  8)

      Nirvana - Radio Friendly Unit Shifter (HQ)
      racerx34
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 33,599 posts | 3840 
      • THE SALT IN THE SOUP
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #26: Oct 01, 2012 04:35:00 pm

      I was hoping someone would post the song.
      That's some good team work.
      vulcan_red
      • Forum Legend - Fagan
      • *****

      • 2,580 posts | 212 
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #27: Jan 02, 2013 11:11:15 am
      Who do I like more? I grew out of pearl jam. During those frenzied years I was grabbing anything linked to that movement. Now, soundgarden and Alice in Chains and smashing pumpkins still get played because they just survived the test of time. Nothing contrived.

      As for Nirvana .... Seriously. They are up their with chuck berry, miles Davis, Beatles, stones, clash, joy division, pixies, public enemy, Hendrix, the doors and a few others ... They are one of the greats no doubt. F**k musicianship ... A song like dumb may sound simple ... Try and write it for the first time .... Ever. Cobain, novoselic and grohl tapped into something profound.


      racerx34
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 33,599 posts | 3840 
      • THE SALT IN THE SOUP
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #28: Jan 11, 2013 02:37:44 pm
      YANK_LFC_FAN
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 3,507 posts | 426 
      • Timid men prefer the calm of despotism!
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #29: Jan 26, 2013 03:18:29 pm
      I originally liked Mother Love Bone and I even had an old bootleg from Pearl Jam right before Ten was officially released and it had a lot of the "Ten" tracks on it.  So I always liked PJ more than Nirvana. But, I loved Nirvana too. I saw PJ play at Lollapalooza right before they really blew up and became huge and to this day it was one of the most electrifying, raw hard shows I ever saw. I even knew at that time I was watching a band people would talk about in 30 years. It was old school Grunge Pearl Jam. It was amazing.

      Compared to Nirvana I thought PJ were tighter and better musicians. Do you know how hard it is to have a debut album where every single song is good. Most great albums have at least 2-3 shitty songs but every song on "Ten" was good. Every one. 

      I was very lucky that I was in my late teens and early 20's when all those bands hit and I got to see them all...I had a chance to see Nirvana in NYC and I missed it to go to an ex girlfriends family BBQ.  UUUGGGHHH!!!!!! I am still pissed.
      FL Red
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 31,248 posts | 6364 
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #30: May 10, 2013 06:59:10 pm
      As someone else said, Nirvana was my "gateway" into "grunge" music, but Pearl Jam is the drug I'm still hooked on.

      Nirvana did some cool things but Kurt was a bit of a knuckle head and his lyrics in my mind and the musical composition are elementary compared to what Pearl Jam has done.

      I've seen Pearl Jam 5 times and their shows are unbelievable. Every one of the band members has had at least one other side band, they are all talented musicians and writers and when they play together it's almost like an all-star team.

      Me personally, there are zero bands I will listen to BEFORE Pearl Jam and that includes some of the "greats" as well.

      The amazing thing about this band as well.....my favorite album of their's used to be a toss up between Ten and Binaural but I actually think that Backspacer is the best work they've done to date. That album is so incredibly tight musically and lyrically it's almost like it was genetically engineered. They just seem to get better with age.

      Just an immense, unreal band.



      Reprobate
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 11,055 posts | 436 
      • Avatar by Kitster29@Deviantart.com
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #31: May 10, 2013 08:41:51 pm
      The amazing thing about this band as well.....my favorite album of their's used to be a toss up between Ten and Binaural but I actually think that Backspacer is the best work they've done to date. That album is so incredibly tight musically and lyrically it's almost like it was genetically engineered. They just seem to get better with age.

      I know what you mean about Backspacer. I tend to compare all Pearl Jam album releases to Ten and VS so they don't always hit me straight away. I had Backspacer ripped onto a PC at work though so listened to it several times in the absence of much else and it just grew and grew on me. I regard it as something of a masterpiece now.
      Arrie
      • Forum Legend - Fagan
      • *****

      • 2,763 posts | 64 
      • Being safe is risky nowadays.
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #32: May 10, 2013 08:50:39 pm
      This debate is up again. ;)

      Definitely Nirvana for me. Don't dislike Pearl Jam, but Nirvana did a pretty good amount in a short period of time where as I feel like Pearl Jam in that same period of time did less and over the years have left something to be desired.
      TheRedMosquito
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 12,201 posts | 633 
      • Elmore James got nothin' on this baby!
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #33: May 10, 2013 09:36:31 pm
      As someone else said, Nirvana was my "gateway" into "grunge" music, but Pearl Jam is the drug I'm still hooked on.

      Nirvana did some cool things but Kurt was a bit of a knuckle head and his lyrics in my mind and the musical composition are elementary compared to what Pearl Jam has done.

      I've seen Pearl Jam 5 times and their shows are unbelievable. Every one of the band members has had at least one other side band, they are all talented musicians and writers and when they play together it's almost like an all-star team.

      Me personally, there are zero bands I will listen to BEFORE Pearl Jam and that includes some of the "greats" as well.

      The amazing thing about this band as well.....my favorite album of their's used to be a toss up between Ten and Binaural but I actually think that Backspacer is the best work they've done to date. That album is so incredibly tight musically and lyrically it's almost like it was genetically engineered. They just seem to get better with age.

      Just an immense, unreal band.




      I know what you mean about Backspacer. I tend to compare all Pearl Jam album releases to Ten and VS so they don't always hit me straight away. I had Backspacer ripped onto a PC at work though so listened to it several times in the absence of much else and it just grew and grew on me. I regard it as something of a masterpiece now.

      That's funny. I'm not very keen on Backspace. But I really like Avocado, which apparently a lot of PJ fans don't like, so go figure.
      FL Red
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 31,248 posts | 6364 
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #34: May 10, 2013 10:15:55 pm
      I know what you mean about Backspacer. I tend to compare all Pearl Jam album releases to Ten and VS so they don't always hit me straight away. I had Backspacer ripped onto a PC at work though so listened to it several times in the absence of much else and it just grew and grew on me. I regard it as something of a masterpiece now.

      Indeed, the you don't want to listen to it on Random, need to listen start to finish and it's almost like the equivalent of reading a book musically if that makes sense. Nothing to do with the lyrics, just the music itself, the ebb and flow is perfect and the album just feels like one long performance.
      FL Red
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 31,248 posts | 6364 
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #35: May 10, 2013 10:18:53 pm
      That's funny. I'm not very keen on Backspace. But I really like Avocado, which apparently a lot of PJ fans don't like, so go figure.

      Any PJ fans that don't like Avocado need to just give up. That album is great. Riot Act probably my least favorite due to the rampant political overtones, but even saying least favorite, that album is still good and there are some great songs on there. I Am Mine being one of my favorite, especially to play on the guitar.
      racerx34
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 33,599 posts | 3840 
      • THE SALT IN THE SOUP
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #36: May 12, 2013 10:28:11 am
      Avocado?
      Brilliant.

      Was that not self titled?
      Reprobate
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 11,055 posts | 436 
      • Avatar by Kitster29@Deviantart.com
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #37: May 12, 2013 11:57:07 am
      Avocado?
      Brilliant.

      Was that not self titled?

      Was indeed. It's much like Metallica's eponymous album being known as The Black Album.
      TheRedMosquito
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 12,201 posts | 633 
      • Elmore James got nothin' on this baby!
      Re: Pearl Jam v Nirvana
      Reply #38: May 12, 2013 08:19:57 pm
      Avocado?
      Brilliant.

      Was that not self titled?
      Was indeed. It's much like Metallica's eponymous album being known as The Black Album.

      The Beatles' "White Album" is actually named "The Beatles" and so on.

      Quick Reply