Pearl Jam V Nirvana

Deine Mutti

Pearl Jam are better for the simple reason that Nirvana will never be as good as Pearl Jam for the simple reason that Kurt Cobain killed himself so they can't make music anymore.......... Anyway just vote!

MisterAnarchy

Pearl Jam are better.
Ten is one of the best albums of the 90's .
They are a shadow of themselves now though but their catalogue is more impressive than Nirvana.
This thread is gonna provoke some emotions.

Corruptedmorals

That's a bull**** reason Deine Mutti. Some music is timeless, and besides 'With the Lights Out' box set was released last month. Full of rare/unreleased stuff.

Steven

Deine Mutti wrote:

Pearl Jam are better for the simple reason that Nirvana will never be as good as Pearl Jam for the simple reason that Kurt Cobain killed himself so they can't make music anymore.......... Anyway just vote!

Under that logic, Girls Aloud are better than Queen. Don't make me use my big, common sense granting stick.

Doctor J

Ah yes, great, another post comparing two bands with little but geography, era and flannel shirts in common. Excuse me if I don't do the happy dance.

Why must people always try and compare bands and try and make music into a poxy competition? :mad:

Sheol

competition is useless..and everyone decides for themselves which band is 'better'

...but still..those two band where the 2 major bands of the 90s seattle 'grunge' wave..if there was ever such a thing as grunge..and they were compared and contrasted to exhaustion...nirvana has this kinda legendary status, cause kurt is dead and he will remain this rebel and idol and can never make another album that might dissapoint his fans...whereas pearl jam are still alive and rocking...and personally i like all of their stuff...alltough without doubt they didnt manage come close to the success of ten again...

hm..next thread should compare pearl jam to creed..then i'm def back in primary school..;)

CrazyTalk

pearl jam are so much better in my opinion. but everyone is entitled to theirs.
i just think they had more talent. kurt cobain could write catchy tunes but i dont think he could sing at all.
they only rose to icon status after his suicide, funnily enough, if they fafded away they wouldnt be worshipped the way they are.

Doctor J

CrazyTalk wrote:

they only rose to icon status after his suicide

Hmmm, I seem to remember them being pretty big before he died.

NeMiSiS

Yet again.
They both ****ing rock more than you ever will.
Tom

0utshined

Doctor J wrote:

Hmmm, I seem to remember them being pretty big before he died.

What he said.
This poll is Shít though. Where's the Atari Lynx option?

Drevin Fairy

Dont you think, to quote ACDC, its better to burn out than to fade away.
Saying that Pearl Jam are better than Nirvana just because Kurt killed himself is plain stupid. Just because a band has been around longer, it doesnt make them better. If a band release 3 great albums and then split, its better than a band making 14 bad albums and still being around.
Don't kill me, this is just my opinion

NeroTheExtreme

That was Neil Young you're quoting, not AC/DC! (or Angus Young for that matter!)
To be honest, Nirvana gets the vote here from me, because sure, Ten was a great album, but they went rapidly downhill from there in my honest opinion, I snored through vitalogy and then stopped bothering after that.

Nirvana to me were on the up. Bleach was a class debut, then you had Nevermind, which in it's own right was a great album too, unfortunately MTV thought so as well and as a direct result, the album badly suffered over-exposure. In Utero was an album i fscking hated, commercialised noise and it spelled the end for the band anyway. Even if Cobain hadn't offed himself ten years ago, the band would have split anyway.

Pearl Jam on the other hand, ever since ten, all people recognise them for is their squabbling with Ticketshafter for half of the 90s. Come on, all five of you, raise your hands as to who bought Bi-Bore-al a few years back?

Just my opinion, say what you want, i couldn't give a sh1t
Nero

cournioni

Pearl Jam, because they made better music. Alice in Chains are better than the two of them. Soundgarden too.

NeroTheExtreme

I miss AIC and Soundgarden
I think i'll stick on BadMotorFinger on

Nero

Sheol

NeroTheExtreme wrote:

Pearl Jam on the other hand, ever since ten, all people recognise them for is their squabbling with Ticketshafter for half of the 90s. Come on, all five of you, raise your hands as to who bought Bi-Bore-al a few years back?

i did...well not back then..but a few years back...and well, if you're used to the style of ten or vs maybe..then it would seem boring of course..but i still think it's a great album with beautiful songs and lyrics...mho...

and i really respect pj for their political statements...anti-bush and stuff...and all the causes they support...

soundgarden was great too...anyone listened to the temple of the dog stuff?

shivface

NeroTheExtreme wrote:

I miss AIC

oh, me too

Mossy Monk

Steven wrote:

Under that logic, Girls Aloud are better than Queen. Don't make me use my big, common sense granting stick.

brilliant, just brilliant

Doodee

Heh,

I'll just say that i believe Grunge rocks. No matter what bands your looking at.

RebelRockChick

I prefer Pearl Jam to Nirvana. I agree Alice In Chains were better than both!

|Sarah|

I am MAN

Nirvana.

Drevin Fairy

NeroTheExtreme wrote:

That was Neil Young you're quoting, not AC/DC! (or Angus Young for that matter!)
To be honest, Nirvana gets the vote here from me, because sure, Ten was a great album, but they went rapidly downhill from there in my honest opinion, I snored through vitalogy and then stopped bothering after that.

Nirvana to me were on the up. Bleach was a class debut, then you had Nevermind, which in it's own right was a great album too, unfortunately MTV thought so as well and as a direct result, the album badly suffered over-exposure. In Utero was an album i fscking hated, commercialised noise and it spelled the end for the band anyway. Even if Cobain hadn't offed himself ten years ago, the band would have split anyway.

Pearl Jam on the other hand, ever since ten, all people recognise them for is their squabbling with Ticketshafter for half of the 90s. Come on, all five of you, raise your hands as to who bought Bi-Bore-al a few years back?

Just my opinion, say what you want, i couldn't give a sh1t
Nero

I do applogise for getting my quotes mixed up
Nirvana or Pearl Jam?

Nirvana

Spalk0

Nirvana all the way!

Schnozzberries

Its kind of dumb to put these two bands up against each othe because i dont really think they are similar enough for that...but Nirvana all the way...And Kurt did not kill himself...That crazy*** ***** Courtney love did......Its like totally impossibale that he did

I am MAN

Dont start a stupid discussion about his death on this thread.

Sheol

I am MAN wrote:

Dont start a stupid discussion about his death on this thread.

hey..does your nick come from 'i am mine'? :

Rozabeez

Doodee wrote:

Heh,

I'll just say that i believe Grunge rocks. No matter what bands your looking at.

meh, what he/she said.

I am MAN

I am MINE? what?

No.

princess penny

this whole thread reeks of

"im with the movement" or
"whatever you say, I'll do" or
"i am a sheep" or

now my head is gonna get chopped off

Corruptedmorals

Schnozzberries wrote:

Its kind of dumb to put these two bands up against each othe because i dont really think they are similar enough for that...but Nirvana all the way...And Kurt did not kill himself...That crazy*** ***** Courtney love did......Its like totally impossibale that he did

It's also completely impossible that she did, so get your facts straight.

Back on topic....I voted Nirvana. But where's the Atari Jaguar option?

Sheol

I am MAN wrote:

I am MINE? what?

No.

dunno..just cause it's a pj thread...i am mine..a song by them..nevermind...sorry...

Mutz

Oww my head!

All of your reasoning sucks.

I prefere Pearl Jam for the simple reason that they carry many a good memory for me. I like Nirvana too but not as much.

Mutz

James Hunt

Smashing Pumpkins all the way.

Steven

princess penny wrote:

this whole thread reeks of

"im with the movement" or
"whatever you say, I'll do" or
"i am a sheep"

We tend not to tolerate too many sheep here on this board, but it appears a new demographic has appeared. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the rejectionist.

this whole post reeks of

"im against the movement" or
"whatever you say, i won't do" or
"i drive on the wrong side of the road because no one else does and that makes me cool, which is a label i reject, maaaan"

You've been listening to too much Good Charlotte.

Geranium

Drevin Fairy wrote:

Dont you think, to quote ACDC, its better to burn out than to fade away.
Saying that Pearl Jam are better than Nirvana just because Kurt killed himself is plain stupid. Just because a band has been around longer, it doesnt make them better. If a band release 3 great albums and then split, its better than a band making 14 bad albums and still being around.
Don't kill me, this is just my opinion

I think that he was just trying to say that he couldn't decide which were better and was using that example to show that they are so equal it's impossible to choose so you'd have to use something as silly as that to decide. But I agree with you on the fading out thing. It's embarrassing to see alot of what the big thrash bands are doing these days....

Static-SC

Pearl Jam are a better band in every way.. Nirvana are a totally over-rated band..

princess penny

Steven wrote:

We tend not to tolerate too many sheep here on this board, but it appears a new demographic has appeared. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the rejectionist.



You've been listening to too much Good Charlotte.

your post is profoundly enlightening, i fall at the feet of people like you, oh help me reach the depths of self deepness humble one. :rolleyes:

Occupation: No Thanks :eek:

Steven

You read my profile? We pathetic conformists call that a joke. Maybe you should consult your fellow rejectionists on how best to denounce it as a tool of the man

That aside, both bands were clearly very influential and were both insanely popular at their peak. I'd prefer Nirvana because they were killed for speaking out against the man and were replaced by doubles, except for Cobain because they couldn't get the hair right.

Ok, not really. I'd go with Nirvana because Pearl Jam lyrics were a bit too simplistic for me. That's the advantage of having a completely unintelligible front man :cool:

Also, Soundgarden smack them both down.

princess penny

god you're a ****ing genius with the jokes then, us pathetic rejectionists call that hypocracy.
Just what do you think i am fool? not everyone fits into your little 'catergories' and no matter how hard you try they still wont judging on one post that is.

the irony is that i am exactly the opposite of what you think i am, its good to know in my own fragile mind

good day

p.s pearl jam are miles better

Steven

Actually, it'd be hypocrisy if it wasn't a joke. Sorry, I didn't mean to make this all personal. I just thought your post was hilariously stereotypical even if you're not.

Oh, and Elvis lives with Kurt Cobain and Freddy Mercury about 15 minutes down the road from me. They have a nice little flower shop.

pyure

nirvana all the way

pearl jam arent really my kind of thing, and saying ten is one of the albums of the 90s is a joke. it wouldnt make my top 20.

princess penny

i said it was hypocrisy implying that it wasnt a joke, i just didnt see an exclamation mark where you have it written thats all.

to clear up your cynism what i meant was everyone that sided with pearl jam said it was because of 'ten' and everyone who sided with Nirvana are part of a movement anyway. At least pearl jam tried to break free of that and so evolved from ten. many may disagree, its just my humble opinion, an opinion based on knowledge of music.

sorry that i made it personal, labels just aren't my idea of friendly especially ones that i am furthest from