Nirvana or Foo Fighters?

[HobbeBrain]

Me and a friend were having an argument over these two bands. He thinks that Nirvana are a far superior band to Foo Fighters and obviously I disagree. So, dear forumers, what do you think?

Personally I think Nirvana aren't even that good. I mean, they're alright - Lithium, for example is a great song. But to be honest, they are incredibly mediocre. EVERY SINGLE ONE of their songs follows the same pattern:

1. Catchy intro on an acoustic guitar
2. Mumble
3. SCREAM
4. Mumble
5. SCREAM
6. Play the guitar/Mumble differently
7. SCREAM.

Whereas Foo Fighters have a different song structure for each song, and pretty much every album. They all have a different feel, still rocky, but different - moreso than Nirvana.

Another thing - Foo Fighters songs are all about life, and things that happen therein. Too be blunt, Nirvana songs are just Kurt Cobain having a depressing moan.

ANYWAY. Opinions, please?

 

[Azer249]

I dont think all of nirvanas songs follow the same pattern.

for instance dosent. But still i prefer them over foo fighters. But i like the both. so. D:. I listened to nirvana first and still do more than Foo-Fighters so. Nirvana!

 

[Dark Drakan]

Nirvana were brilliant and always seemed to steer more towards the grunge scene rather than the fast paced rock The Foo Fighters now have. However Nirvana did mix it up a decent amount and to quote Kurt 'I wanted to be totally Led Zeppelin in a way and then be totally extreme punk rock and then do real wimpy pop songs'. He just wanted to make music in a variety of ways however he had stated before he died that he was bored by their current formula.

They are 2 different bands with different styles and although Dave Grohl was involved in both their styles differ a lot so really hard to compare them. Plus Nirvana had 7 years of starting from the bottom and working their way up and Foo's have had 17 years to mix their styles and experiment and the experience and musical knowledge Dave has helped them a lot. I like both bands for different reasons...

 

[Angel]

Couldn't get on with Nirvana- it was "the band" to like when I was in middle school but really not my thing at all. Do like the Foo's very much indeed but again, not all their stuff is to my liking.

 

[Zjuggernaut]

Never did like Nirvana that much except their well known ones, much more of a Foo Fighters fan because it was more my time.

 

[Tsuyu]

I prefer my Dave Grohl Tenacious D-style anyway.

 

[TRA Rotid]

I don't like either. I'd rather take a sip of Mumford and Sons.

 

[Arseface]

They're both good bands?

 

[D3m190d]

I absolutely don't care for either one. But the name Nirvana is cooler.

 

[HobbeBrain]

They're both good bands?

Aye. But which is better is the question.

Also, could some mod take off the multiple votes thing... I don't know why I ticked that -o-

 

[Arseface]

Aye. But which is better is the question.

Also, could some mod take off the multiple votes thing... I don't know why I ticked that -o-

No, the question is why should I pick an arbitrary favourite when I like them both?

I know I troll you for your musical taste Hobbe, but its something that actually arguing about is stupid.

 

[HobbeBrain]

No, the question is why should I pick an arbitrary favourite when I like them both?

Thread title:
Nirvana or Foo Fighters?


I think this means the question is

Nirvana or Foo Fighters?


If you're only going to comment to tell me that it's stupid to ask you to pick a favourite don't bother commenting.

 

[Quistrix]

I prefer Dave Grohl better when he sings.

'Nuff said.

 

[Firis]

I enjoy both, neither are a favourite of mine, but they both are great in their own ways. But to say Nirvana sounds the same? Have you heard them? Bleach and In Utero sound completely different.

 

[HobbeBrain]

I enjoy both, neither are a favourite of mine, but they both are great in their own ways. But to say Nirvana sounds the same? Have you heard them? Bleach and In Utero sound completely different.

Neither are bad songs but as I said, they follow basically the same structure, except Blew starts with a bass, not a guitar.

Looking at two Foo Fighters songs:

Same band, completely different sounding songs.

 

[Dark Drakan]

Neither are bad songs but as I said, they follow basically the same structure, except Blew starts with a bass, not a guitar.

Looking at two Foo Fighters songs:

Same band, completely different sounding songs.

Blew and Rape Me were made 5 years apart and Monkey Wrench and Wastling Light were made 14 years apart. Can do a lot of changing musically in that time and mixing up your styles of song writing. People dont really want bands to change quickly until they get a certain style first then they want them to change things up and move with the times usually. Even though people still want Metallica to create songs like they did in the 80's. :lol:

 

[HobbeBrain]

Blew and Rape Me were made 5 years apart and Monkey Wrench and Wastling Light were made 14 years apart. Can do a lot of changing musically in that time and mixing up your styles of song writing. People dont really want bands to change quickly until they get a certain style first then they want them to change things up and move with the times usually. Even though people still want Metallica to create songs like they did in the 80's. :lol:

Aye... well how about Monkey Wrench and this:

Different to Monkey Wrench, 5 years apart.

 

[Dark Drakan]

Aye... well how about Monkey Wrench and this:

Different to Monkey Wrench, 5 years apart.

6 years but fair enough however people have also pointed out that Nirvana had different sounding tracks too and less overall time to evolve their sound. Plus Foos band members had more experience behind them than Nirvana did and Foos sound was a more professional one because of it. Most of Nirvanas recordings sounded raw and they didnt tinker with them much before release. Nirvana werent even signed by a major record label until 3 years after they were formed and 4 years later Cobain was dead.

 

[HobbeBrain]

6 years but fair enough however people have also pointed out that Nirvana had different sounding tracks too and less overall time to evolve their sound. Plus Foos band members had more experience behind them than Nirvana did and Foos sound was a more professional one because of it. Most of Nirvanas recordings sounded raw and they didnt tinker with them much before release. Nirvana werent even signed by a major record label until 3 years after they were formed and 4 years later Cobain was dead.

All this is true, and nothing wrong with it, but I'm just asking the basic question of which bands produces the better songs. Don't get me wrong I like Nirvana and have a lot of respect for them, but musically, I prefer Foo Fighters, even though I agree Nirvana worked harder to get where they got. I mean, Dave Grohl was already famous when he formed Foo Fighters, Kurt had to start from scratch.

Also, 6 years? The Colour And The Shape (Monkey Wrench) was 1997, One By One (Times Like These) was 2002... that's 5 years... right?

 

[Dark Drakan]

All this is true, and nothing wrong with it, but I'm just asking the basic question of which bands produces the better songs. Don't get me wrong I like Nirvana and have a lot of respect for them, but musically, I prefer Foo Fighters, even though I agree Nirvana worked harder to get where they got. I mean, Dave Grohl was already famous when he formed Foo Fighters, Kurt had to start from scratch.

Also, 6 years? The Colour And The Shape (Monkey Wrench) was 1997, One By One (Times Like These) was 2002... that's 5 years... right?

Times Like These (single) was 2003 thats what I saw when looking didnt think about the album. :lol:

I think Foo Fighters are the more complete band and would be more exciting to see live but I cant ignore the influence that Nirvana had on the music industry and 24 years later are still admired. I grew up listening to Nirvana among a lot of the bands that inspired Cobain (Led Zeppelin, AC/DC, Black Sabbath, Aerosmith, Queen, and Kiss) amongst many others of course and still sound so raw and brilliant today. Grohl is just a brilliantly talented man to be able to play so many instruments as well as being a singer and song writer hes one of the most complete front men around.