Jump to content

90's Grunge/Hard Rock Heavyweight Poll


GeddyLeeRoth
 Share

90's Grunge/Hardrock Poll  

44 members have voted

  1. 1. Which of these 90's Grunge/Hard Rock Titans gets your vote for the best?



Recommended Posts

Nevermind isn't anywhere close to the best album in the combined discographies of these bands.

 

it's great but not anywhere close to the best

 

#rerushedbait :laughing guy:

 

Mick

 

Side 2 is too samey. Side 1 is too overplayed and overrated (seriously, they're pretty much just some catchy pop punk tunes with an edge). If you don't live under a rock, listen to Drain You and Something In The Way, then you don't really need to hear the album in full. And really you could drop Drain You.

What's wrong with catchy pop punk tunes with an edge? They've not overstuffed over produced rock songs?

 

nothing really. but Nevermind doesn't thrill everyone. i know it's shocking.

 

i myself am indifferent to it. won't play it. but i won't tyrn it off if it comes on.

 

Mick

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nevermind isn't anywhere close to the best album in the combined discographies of these bands.

 

it's great but not anywhere close to the best

 

#rerushedbait :laughing guy:

 

Mick

 

Side 2 is too samey. Side 1 is too overplayed and overrated (seriously, they're pretty much just some catchy pop punk tunes with an edge). If you don't live under a rock, listen to Drain You and Something In The Way, then you don't really need to hear the album in full. And really you could drop Drain You.

What's wrong with catchy pop punk tunes with an edge? They've not overstuffed over produced rock songs?

 

Nothing wrong, but not as special as Rolling Stone would have folks believe.

The go to Rolling Stone magazine argument is so tiresome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nevermind isn't anywhere close to the best album in the combined discographies of these bands.

 

it's great but not anywhere close to the best

 

#rerushedbait :laughing guy:

 

Mick

 

Side 2 is too samey. Side 1 is too overplayed and overrated (seriously, they're pretty much just some catchy pop punk tunes with an edge). If you don't live under a rock, listen to Drain You and Something In The Way, then you don't really need to hear the album in full. And really you could drop Drain You.

What's wrong with catchy pop punk tunes with an edge? They've not overstuffed over produced rock songs?

 

nothing really. but Nevermind doesn't thrill everyone. i know it's shocking.

 

i myself am indifferent to it. won't play it. but i won't tyrn it off if it comes on.

 

Mick

Why is it shocking? I know there isn't a creative work in the universe that everyone likes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

STP’s first three albums are freaking great.

 

That is my favorite from all those choices.

 

I also really dig AIC and Soundgarden.

 

Pearl Jam never came close to capturing the magic of that first album (Ten).

 

Nirvana? Blech.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pearl Jam.

 

Ten is the best album of the early nineties and Eddie Vedder is hands down my favourite vocalist of all these bands.

 

It is the only great album they ever made. With Vs the next. All downhill after that. And it went down hill fast for me.

 

I did love them live up till Yield........then their concerts became a chore for me.....I actually walked out on them on the Binaural tour. Standing around for 2-3 minutes between songs discussing what to play next.....like I was at a f***ing band practice.

 

Not my cup of tea at that point.

 

Ten is an amazing album to this day and is still magical. The band hated how produced it sounded......but to this day it is that slicker production that makes it so damn good. The harmonies sounded crisp, the drums were crisp and the guitars were audible. I never liked Brendon O’Brians production with them.

 

They wanted to sound like Neil Young.....it turned me off.

 

Also.....Temple Of The Dog is easily the second best album of the grunge period......hands down a work of art.

Edited by Todem
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nevermind isn't anywhere close to the best album in the combined discographies of these bands.

 

it's great but not anywhere close to the best

 

#rerushedbait :laughing guy:

 

Mick

 

Side 2 is too samey. Side 1 is too overplayed and overrated (seriously, they're pretty much just some catchy pop punk tunes with an edge). If you don't live under a rock, listen to Drain You and Something In The Way, then you don't really need to hear the album in full. And really you could drop Drain You.

What's wrong with catchy pop punk tunes with an edge? They've not overstuffed over produced rock songs?

 

Nothing wrong, but not as special as Rolling Stone would have folks believe.

The go to Rolling Stone magazine argument is so tiresome.

 

Okay, replace Rolling Stone with the general views of popular cultural critics. Just because the argument is tiresome doesn't make it wrong.

 

My personal problem with Nirvana is simple, but two fold.

 

1. Musically speaking, they aren't really special.

 

2. They are frequently and often consistently treated as though 1 is entirely false.

 

 

I realize Nirvana themselves have nothing to do with 2, but it nevertheless impacts my view towards them. I can enjoy their music when the mood strikes me. They have some great songs, and they have at least as many rather plain songs that tend to read as, albeit enthusiastic, filler to me ears. To me, in the history of pop and rock music, they are par for the course of bands which have achieved long term success, and maybe a little less than average. So when I read of the seemingly vast majority opinion than they are among the greatest bands of all time, or that Nevermind is one of the greatest albums of all time, or (especially) that Cobain was one of the greatest guitarists of all time, these ideas all run wildly contrary to my outlook on popular music. And when I go back to the music to investigate what causes so many people to think these things, I often conclude their cultural impact has outshined their musical quality in the construction of their legacy. They were a big hit that flipped pop culture on its head, to such a degree as had not been seen since Beatlemania, and that grants them greatness to many people whether or not their music was itself great. And I do hold that, had Nirvana only attained as much popularity and success as their Seattle contemporaries, say Soundgarden or Alice In Chains, they would not be so widely considered as one of the all time greats.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pearl Jam.

 

Ten is the best album of the early nineties and Eddie Vedder is hands down my favourite vocalist of all these bands.

 

It is the only great album they ever made. With Vs the next. All downhill after that. And it went down hill fast for me.

 

I did love them live up till Yield........then their concerts became a chore for me.....I actually walked out on them on the Binaural tour. Standing around for 2-3 minutes between songs discussing what to play next.....like I was at a f***ing band practice.

 

Not my cup of tea at that point.

 

Ten is an amazing album to this day and is still magical. The band hated how produced it sounded......but to this day it is that slicker production that makes it so damn good. The harmonies sounded crisp, the drums were crisp and the guitars were audible. I never liked Brendon O’Brians production with them.

 

They wanted to sound like Neil Young.....it turned me off.

 

Also.....Temple Of The Dog is easily the second best album of the grunge period......hands down a work of art.

 

I love Vitalogy. Resonant songs.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nevermind isn't anywhere close to the best album in the combined discographies of these bands.

 

it's great but not anywhere close to the best

 

#rerushedbait :laughing guy:

 

Mick

 

Side 2 is too samey. Side 1 is too overplayed and overrated (seriously, they're pretty much just some catchy pop punk tunes with an edge). If you don't live under a rock, listen to Drain You and Something In The Way, then you don't really need to hear the album in full. And really you could drop Drain You.

What's wrong with catchy pop punk tunes with an edge? They've not overstuffed over produced rock songs?

 

Nothing wrong, but not as special as Rolling Stone would have folks believe.

The go to Rolling Stone magazine argument is so tiresome.

 

Okay, replace Rolling Stone with the general views of popular cultural critics. Just because the argument is tiresome doesn't make it wrong.

 

My personal problem with Nirvana is simple, but two fold.

 

1. Musically speaking, they aren't really special.

 

2. They are frequently and often consistently treated as though 1 is entirely false.

 

 

I realize Nirvana themselves have nothing to do with 2, but it nevertheless impacts my view towards them. I can enjoy their music when the mood strikes me. They have some great songs, and they have at least as many rather plain songs that tend to read as, albeit enthusiastic, filler to me ears. To me, in the history of pop and rock music, they are par for the course of bands which have achieved long term success, and maybe a little less than average. So when I read of the seemingly vast majority opinion than they are among the greatest bands of all time, or that Nevermind is one of the greatest albums of all time, or (especially) that Cobain was one of the greatest guitarists of all time, these ideas all run wildly contrary to my outlook on popular music. And when I go back to the music to investigate what causes so many people to think these things, I often conclude their cultural impact has outshined their musical quality in the construction of their legacy. They were a big hit that flipped pop culture on its head, to such a degree as had not been seen since Beatlemania, and that grants them greatness to many people whether or not their music was itself great. And I do hold that, had Nirvana only attained as much popularity and success as their Seattle contemporaries, say Soundgarden or Alice In Chains, they would not be so widely considered as one of the all time greats.

You have no idea. You can argue with an imagined outcome all you want. What happened is what happened. Personally, I couldn't care less what a critic thinks or album sales or what a fan base thinks. All I know is when Nevermind hit it was electric. Song after song was a gut punch to what was popular at the time. Rock music was re-energized.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pearl Jam.

 

Ten is the best album of the early nineties and Eddie Vedder is hands down my favourite vocalist of all these bands.

 

It is the only great album they ever made. With Vs the next. All downhill after that. And it went down hill fast for me.

 

I did love them live up till Yield........then their concerts became a chore for me.....I actually walked out on them on the Binaural tour. Standing around for 2-3 minutes between songs discussing what to play next.....like I was at a f***ing band practice.

 

Not my cup of tea at that point.

 

Ten is an amazing album to this day and is still magical. The band hated how produced it sounded......but to this day it is that slicker production that makes it so damn good. The harmonies sounded crisp, the drums were crisp and the guitars were audible. I never liked Brendon O’Brians production with them.

 

They wanted to sound like Neil Young.....it turned me off.

 

Also.....Temple Of The Dog is easily the second best album of the grunge period......hands down a work of art.

I think Pearl Jam released several albums that are better than Ten, which sounds very bloated to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nevermind isn't anywhere close to the best album in the combined discographies of these bands.

 

it's great but not anywhere close to the best

 

#rerushedbait :laughing guy:

 

Mick

 

Side 2 is too samey. Side 1 is too overplayed and overrated (seriously, they're pretty much just some catchy pop punk tunes with an edge). If you don't live under a rock, listen to Drain You and Something In The Way, then you don't really need to hear the album in full. And really you could drop Drain You.

What's wrong with catchy pop punk tunes with an edge? They've not overstuffed over produced rock songs?

 

Nothing wrong, but not as special as Rolling Stone would have folks believe.

The go to Rolling Stone magazine argument is so tiresome.

 

Okay, replace Rolling Stone with the general views of popular cultural critics. Just because the argument is tiresome doesn't make it wrong.

 

My personal problem with Nirvana is simple, but two fold.

 

1. Musically speaking, they aren't really special.

 

2. They are frequently and often consistently treated as though 1 is entirely false.

 

 

I realize Nirvana themselves have nothing to do with 2, but it nevertheless impacts my view towards them. I can enjoy their music when the mood strikes me. They have some great songs, and they have at least as many rather plain songs that tend to read as, albeit enthusiastic, filler to me ears. To me, in the history of pop and rock music, they are par for the course of bands which have achieved long term success, and maybe a little less than average. So when I read of the seemingly vast majority opinion than they are among the greatest bands of all time, or that Nevermind is one of the greatest albums of all time, or (especially) that Cobain was one of the greatest guitarists of all time, these ideas all run wildly contrary to my outlook on popular music. And when I go back to the music to investigate what causes so many people to think these things, I often conclude their cultural impact has outshined their musical quality in the construction of their legacy. They were a big hit that flipped pop culture on its head, to such a degree as had not been seen since Beatlemania, and that grants them greatness to many people whether or not their music was itself great. And I do hold that, had Nirvana only attained as much popularity and success as their Seattle contemporaries, say Soundgarden or Alice In Chains, they would not be so widely considered as one of the all time greats.

You have no idea. You can argue with an imagined outcome all you want. What happened is what happened. Personally, I couldn't care less what a critic thinks or album sales or what a fan base thinks. All I know is when Nevermind hit it was electric. Song after song was a gut punch to what was popular at the time. Rock music was re-energized.

 

I thought The Ramones did that first in the 70s, and for some reason they aren't considered on the same level as Nirvana.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nevermind isn't anywhere close to the best album in the combined discographies of these bands.

 

it's great but not anywhere close to the best

 

#rerushedbait :laughing guy:

 

Mick

 

Side 2 is too samey. Side 1 is too overplayed and overrated (seriously, they're pretty much just some catchy pop punk tunes with an edge). If you don't live under a rock, listen to Drain You and Something In The Way, then you don't really need to hear the album in full. And really you could drop Drain You.

What's wrong with catchy pop punk tunes with an edge? They've not overstuffed over produced rock songs?

 

Nothing wrong, but not as special as Rolling Stone would have folks believe.

The go to Rolling Stone magazine argument is so tiresome.

 

Okay, replace Rolling Stone with the general views of popular cultural critics. Just because the argument is tiresome doesn't make it wrong.

 

My personal problem with Nirvana is simple, but two fold.

 

1. Musically speaking, they aren't really special.

 

2. They are frequently and often consistently treated as though 1 is entirely false.

 

 

I realize Nirvana themselves have nothing to do with 2, but it nevertheless impacts my view towards them. I can enjoy their music when the mood strikes me. They have some great songs, and they have at least as many rather plain songs that tend to read as, albeit enthusiastic, filler to me ears. To me, in the history of pop and rock music, they are par for the course of bands which have achieved long term success, and maybe a little less than average. So when I read of the seemingly vast majority opinion than they are among the greatest bands of all time, or that Nevermind is one of the greatest albums of all time, or (especially) that Cobain was one of the greatest guitarists of all time, these ideas all run wildly contrary to my outlook on popular music. And when I go back to the music to investigate what causes so many people to think these things, I often conclude their cultural impact has outshined their musical quality in the construction of their legacy. They were a big hit that flipped pop culture on its head, to such a degree as had not been seen since Beatlemania, and that grants them greatness to many people whether or not their music was itself great. And I do hold that, had Nirvana only attained as much popularity and success as their Seattle contemporaries, say Soundgarden or Alice In Chains, they would not be so widely considered as one of the all time greats.

You have no idea. You can argue with an imagined outcome all you want. What happened is what happened. Personally, I couldn't care less what a critic thinks or album sales or what a fan base thinks. All I know is when Nevermind hit it was electric. Song after song was a gut punch to what was popular at the time. Rock music was re-energized.

 

I thought The Ramones did that first in the 70s, and for some reason they aren't considered on the same level as Nirvana.

Sure they are. The Ramones are one of the greatest bands of all-time. Just ask all the people who wear their tee shirts but never heard a song other than "I Want to Be Sedated".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nevermind isn't anywhere close to the best album in the combined discographies of these bands.

 

it's great but not anywhere close to the best

 

#rerushedbait :laughing guy:

 

Mick

 

Side 2 is too samey. Side 1 is too overplayed and overrated (seriously, they're pretty much just some catchy pop punk tunes with an edge). If you don't live under a rock, listen to Drain You and Something In The Way, then you don't really need to hear the album in full. And really you could drop Drain You.

What's wrong with catchy pop punk tunes with an edge? They've not overstuffed over produced rock songs?

 

Nothing wrong, but not as special as Rolling Stone would have folks believe.

The go to Rolling Stone magazine argument is so tiresome.

 

Okay, replace Rolling Stone with the general views of popular cultural critics. Just because the argument is tiresome doesn't make it wrong.

 

My personal problem with Nirvana is simple, but two fold.

 

1. Musically speaking, they aren't really special.

 

2. They are frequently and often consistently treated as though 1 is entirely false.

 

 

I realize Nirvana themselves have nothing to do with 2, but it nevertheless impacts my view towards them. I can enjoy their music when the mood strikes me. They have some great songs, and they have at least as many rather plain songs that tend to read as, albeit enthusiastic, filler to me ears. To me, in the history of pop and rock music, they are par for the course of bands which have achieved long term success, and maybe a little less than average. So when I read of the seemingly vast majority opinion than they are among the greatest bands of all time, or that Nevermind is one of the greatest albums of all time, or (especially) that Cobain was one of the greatest guitarists of all time, these ideas all run wildly contrary to my outlook on popular music. And when I go back to the music to investigate what causes so many people to think these things, I often conclude their cultural impact has outshined their musical quality in the construction of their legacy. They were a big hit that flipped pop culture on its head, to such a degree as had not been seen since Beatlemania, and that grants them greatness to many people whether or not their music was itself great. And I do hold that, had Nirvana only attained as much popularity and success as their Seattle contemporaries, say Soundgarden or Alice In Chains, they would not be so widely considered as one of the all time greats.

You have no idea. You can argue with an imagined outcome all you want. What happened is what happened. Personally, I couldn't care less what a critic thinks or album sales or what a fan base thinks. All I know is when Nevermind hit it was electric. Song after song was a gut punch to what was popular at the time. Rock music was re-energized.

 

I thought The Ramones did that first in the 70s, and for some reason they aren't considered on the same level as Nirvana.

Sure they are. The Ramones are one of the greatest bands of all-time. Just ask all the people who wear their tee shirts but never heard a song other than "I Want to Be Sedated".

 

They are both considered two of the greatest bands of all time, however Nirvana is usually considered to be far greater than The Ramones. Thus, not the same level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pearl Jam.

 

Ten is the best album of the early nineties and Eddie Vedder is hands down my favourite vocalist of all these bands.

 

It is the only great album they ever made. With Vs the next. All downhill after that. And it went down hill fast for me.

 

I did love them live up till Yield........then their concerts became a chore for me.....I actually walked out on them on the Binaural tour. Standing around for 2-3 minutes between songs discussing what to play next.....like I was at a f***ing band practice.

 

Not my cup of tea at that point.

 

Ten is an amazing album to this day and is still magical. The band hated how produced it sounded......but to this day it is that slicker production that makes it so damn good. The harmonies sounded crisp, the drums were crisp and the guitars were audible. I never liked Brendon O’Brians production with them.

 

They wanted to sound like Neil Young.....it turned me off.

 

Also.....Temple Of The Dog is easily the second best album of the grunge period......hands down a work of art.

 

I love Vitalogy. Resonant songs.

 

And Yield is better than Vitalogy. Binaural was their first album I wouldn't rate as at least good.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Soundgarden although I'd listen to any of these on a given day.

 

Check that, Nirvana...one of the most overrated bands ever. There I said it.

 

it was bold.......and i won't TOTALLY disagree.

 

Mick

Even Cobain was quoted that they were trying to rip off The Pixies...who were far more accomplished and interesting to listen to.

 

This is true. But there is a reason Nirvana reached a wider audience than The Pixies, and I would argue that that is better songs. And I prefer Pixies, but when it comes down to memorable songs, Nirvana wins and Nevermind is a phenomenal pop album.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pearl Jam.

 

Ten is the best album of the early nineties and Eddie Vedder is hands down my favourite vocalist of all these bands.

 

It is the only great album they ever made. With Vs the next. All downhill after that. And it went down hill fast for me.

 

I did love them live up till Yield........then their concerts became a chore for me.....I actually walked out on them on the Binaural tour. Standing around for 2-3 minutes between songs discussing what to play next.....like I was at a f***ing band practice.

 

Not my cup of tea at that point.

 

Ten is an amazing album to this day and is still magical. The band hated how produced it sounded......but to this day it is that slicker production that makes it so damn good. The harmonies sounded crisp, the drums were crisp and the guitars were audible. I never liked Brendon O’Brians production with them.

 

They wanted to sound like Neil Young.....it turned me off.

 

Also.....Temple Of The Dog is easily the second best album of the grunge period......hands down a work of art.

Count me in on Temple of the Dog. :ebert:
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pearl Jam.

 

Ten is the best album of the early nineties and Eddie Vedder is hands down my favourite vocalist of all these bands.

 

It is the only great album they ever made. With Vs the next. All downhill after that. And it went down hill fast for me.

 

I did love them live up till Yield........then their concerts became a chore for me.....I actually walked out on them on the Binaural tour. Standing around for 2-3 minutes between songs discussing what to play next.....like I was at a f***ing band practice.

 

Not my cup of tea at that point.

 

Ten is an amazing album to this day and is still magical. The band hated how produced it sounded......but to this day it is that slicker production that makes it so damn good. The harmonies sounded crisp, the drums were crisp and the guitars were audible. I never liked Brendon O’Brians production with them.

 

They wanted to sound like Neil Young.....it turned me off.

 

Also.....Temple Of The Dog is easily the second best album of the grunge period......hands down a work of art.

Count me in on Temple of the Dog. :ebert:

 

their one album is great.

 

Mick

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pearl Jam is the new AC/DC... everything sounds the same.

For me, it's an odd contradiction of tremendous variety (VS., Vitalogy) that got repetitive. The sound isn't dynamic enough nor the structure complex enough to carry my interest forward album after album like Zeppelin, say.

 

I love Vedder's solo stuff, though. The stripped down music, where his voice is the primary instrument, captivates me. Into The Wild soundtrack, for example.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pearl Jam is the new AC/DC... everything sounds the same.

For me, it's an odd contradiction of tremendous variety (VS., Vitalogy) that got repetitive. The sound isn't dynamic enough nor the structure complex enough to carry my interest forward album after album like Zeppelin, say.

 

I love Vedder's solo stuff, though. The stripped down music, where his voice is the primary instrument, captivates me. Into The Wild soundtrack, for example.

 

I was listening to Ten last nifght.

 

ok so i'm enjoying it.

 

a while later. i swear this happened. i was like This is great but we gotta be almost done. I look. Track 5, lol

 

it's great but it seems like it's been on longer than it has been. making it seem an eternity. even though it's about 53 minutes. it was this weird like time warp thing, lol

 

neat trick huh.

 

Mick

Edited by bluefox4000
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nevermind isn't anywhere close to the best album in the combined discographies of these bands.

 

it's great but not anywhere close to the best

 

#rerushedbait :laughing guy:

 

Mick

 

Side 2 is too samey. Side 1 is too overplayed and overrated (seriously, they're pretty much just some catchy pop punk tunes with an edge). If you don't live under a rock, listen to Drain You and Something In The Way, then you don't really need to hear the album in full. And really you could drop Drain You.

What's wrong with catchy pop punk tunes with an edge? They've not overstuffed over produced rock songs?

 

Nothing wrong, but not as special as Rolling Stone would have folks believe.

The go to Rolling Stone magazine argument is so tiresome.

 

Okay, replace Rolling Stone with the general views of popular cultural critics. Just because the argument is tiresome doesn't make it wrong.

 

My personal problem with Nirvana is simple, but two fold.

 

1. Musically speaking, they aren't really special.

 

2. They are frequently and often consistently treated as though 1 is entirely false.

 

 

I realize Nirvana themselves have nothing to do with 2, but it nevertheless impacts my view towards them. I can enjoy their music when the mood strikes me. They have some great songs, and they have at least as many rather plain songs that tend to read as, albeit enthusiastic, filler to me ears. To me, in the history of pop and rock music, they are par for the course of bands which have achieved long term success, and maybe a little less than average. So when I read of the seemingly vast majority opinion than they are among the greatest bands of all time, or that Nevermind is one of the greatest albums of all time, or (especially) that Cobain was one of the greatest guitarists of all time, these ideas all run wildly contrary to my outlook on popular music. And when I go back to the music to investigate what causes so many people to think these things, I often conclude their cultural impact has outshined their musical quality in the construction of their legacy. They were a big hit that flipped pop culture on its head, to such a degree as had not been seen since Beatlemania, and that grants them greatness to many people whether or not their music was itself great. And I do hold that, had Nirvana only attained as much popularity and success as their Seattle contemporaries, say Soundgarden or Alice In Chains, they would not be so widely considered as one of the all time greats.

You have no idea. You can argue with an imagined outcome all you want. What happened is what happened. Personally, I couldn't care less what a critic thinks or album sales or what a fan base thinks. All I know is when Nevermind hit it was electric. Song after song was a gut punch to what was popular at the time. Rock music was re-energized.

 

I thought The Ramones did that first in the 70s, and for some reason they aren't considered on the same level as Nirvana.

Sure they are. The Ramones are one of the greatest bands of all-time. Just ask all the people who wear their tee shirts but never heard a song other than "I Want to Be Sedated".

 

I didn't realize they had other songs. Are you sure on this? :)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. Surprised by all the Pearl Jam love. A few songs aside I always found them a tad boring.

 

For the me the two front runners are AIC and STP and I picked based on who I am most likely to listen to now days.

 

STP

AIC

Soundgarden

Pearl Jam

Nirvana

 

Incidentally, I saw both AIC and STP in concert together three weeks ago and while both were excellent, I enjoyed STP more, but Ghost blew everyone away that night!

Edited by thesweetscience
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. Surprised by all the Pearl Jam love. A few songs aside I always found them a tad boring.

 

For the me the two front runners are AIC and STP and I picked based on who I am most likely to listen to now days.

 

STP

AIC

Soundgarden

Pearl Jam

Nirvana

 

Incidentally, I saw both AIC and STP in concert together three weeks ago and while both were excellent, I enjoyed STP more, but Ghost blew everyone away that night!

 

that would actually how i would rank these bands.

 

Mick

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. Surprised by all the Pearl Jam love. A few songs aside I always found them a tad boring.

 

For the me the two front runners are AIC and STP and I picked based on who I am most likely to listen to now days.

 

STP

AIC

Soundgarden

Pearl Jam

Nirvana

 

Incidentally, I saw both AIC and STP in concert together three weeks ago and while both were excellent, I enjoyed STP more, but Ghost blew everyone away that night!

 

that would actually how i would rank these bands. only switching the first 2

 

Mick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...