jvandyck87
5x Platinum Member
Joined: July 2007
Posts: 5,213
|
Post by jvandyck87 on Mar 22, 2009 3:04:47 GMT -5
If we're not too genre-restrictive, I'd throw Smashing Pumpkins in there too. My rankings would go:
Alice In Chains > Smashing Pumpkins > Pearl Jam > Stone Temple Pilots > Soundgarden > Nirvana
Though I'd put my favorite Soundgarden songs like "The Day I Tried To Live" and "Outshined" (and obviously "Black Hole Sun") up there with the best AIC songs.
|
|
Pipa
Diamond Member
Sinner
1 week at #1: Of Monsters and Men - Alligator
Joined: December 2004
Posts: 10,448
My Charts
|
Post by Pipa on Mar 22, 2009 11:07:30 GMT -5
I'm more:
Soundgarden > Alice In Chains > Stone Temple Pilots > Nirvana > Smashing Pumpkins > Pearl Jam
In other words, I don't agree with any of you.
|
|
|
Post by American Idiot on Mar 22, 2009 11:22:07 GMT -5
Over the past five to ten years or so, radio has completely turned me away from a lot of these 90s bands that they still play to death and whenever an oldie but goody comes on now, I change the station. These were all great candidates for which bands I'm talking about, and the only other one I can think of to add to it is Metallica, even if they don't fit into the genre of the others. I've still never gotten tired of the Smashing Pumpkins and probably never will. I still listen to Pearl Jam's newer music, Velvet Revolver, Audioslave, and Chris Cornell and Scott Weiland's solo stuff, but change the station when one of these stale old hits come on.
I'd have to go with... Smashing Pumpkins > Pearl Jam > Stone Temple Pilots > Nirvana > Soundgarden > Alice In Chains
|
|
|
Post by Walking Contradiction on Mar 22, 2009 12:40:26 GMT -5
For me, it's... Smashing Pumpkins > Nirvana = Alice in Chains > Pearl Jam = Soundgarden > STP
I've definitely gotten sick of Pearl Jam's biggest hits (especially the ones from Ten), as well as the Nevermind singles. I think the In Utero stuff has stood up better to heavy play, along with the AIC, Soundgarden, and Pumpkins hits, but I could still go a good while without hearing them again. As for STP, I've only ever really liked the Tiny Music era, and I'm even a bit worn out on those songs at this point.
|
|
pen
9x Platinum Member
A true gentleman leaves no puzzle unsolved.
Joined: July 2005
Posts: 9,408
|
Post by pen on Mar 22, 2009 13:12:13 GMT -5
Scott Weiland's solo material blows.
|
|
|
Post by My Life Is A Stereo on Mar 22, 2009 21:33:05 GMT -5
Pretty much all of the bands mentioned here will be stuck with me til the day I die. I personally don't "overlisten" to anything that I really like on purpose. It never really gets old for me and I can play it anytime I want to hear it, I dont bother with radio for that reason. The groups that I really love will never lose their place.
Oddly, I never really got into Alice In Chains.
Now, I'm gonna go listen to "my classics" ..... ahhhhhhhhh....that's nice.....think I'll throw in some Offspring "intermission" just to really bring it home.
Oh and for the record, this song is good, and for really one reason only, because its sound is obviously from the "10" era and there is nothing wrong with that for me.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2009 16:46:50 GMT -5
This is one of my favorite songs on Alternative radio right now, but the fact that it's really 18 years old kind of cheapens it all for me. It's more like "This is a really great old song" rather than "Wow, this is their best song in awhile!"
|
|
|
Post by allnightmarelong on Mar 24, 2009 17:07:20 GMT -5
such an excellent song! guess I'll have to buy it on itunes cause I'm not purchasing Ten again!
|
|
Matt4319
Administrator
Joined: September 2003
Posts: 15,215
Staff
|
Post by Matt4319 on Mar 24, 2009 22:32:19 GMT -5
This is one of my favorite songs on Alternative radio right now, but the fact that it's really 18 years old kind of cheapens it all for me. It's more like "This is a really great old song" rather than "Wow, this is their best song in awhile!" It's actually only 6 years old. It was on 2003's Lost Dogs as an instrumental, but it's being tacked onto the re-release of Ten. This going to #1 is like Coldplay's "Life In Technicolor II" shooting to the top in 2013 or something.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2009 22:43:15 GMT -5
This is one of my favorite songs on Alternative radio right now, but the fact that it's really 18 years old kind of cheapens it all for me. It's more like "This is a really great old song" rather than "Wow, this is their best song in awhile!" It's actually only 6 years old. It was on 2003's Lost Dogs as an instrumental, but it's being tacked onto the re-release of Ten. This going to #1 is like Coldplay's "Life In Technicolor II" shooting to the top in 2013 or something. I rarely quote Wikipedia, but the article for this song says it was originally recorded in March of 1991 and was even performed at a concert in LA in 1991. Here's confirmation of the performance from their official site. www.pearljam.com/song/brotherI guess this is a "remix". I'm not a hardcore Pearl Jam fan or anything to know the full history of this song but it appears that it dates back to the Ten sessions in one form or another. What I gathered was that it was written in 1991, the instrumental was released in 2003, and then it was re-recorded for 2009.
|
|
rowellfarm490
9x Platinum Member
Joined: October 2003
Posts: 9,398
|
Post by rowellfarm490 on Mar 24, 2009 22:52:20 GMT -5
Heard this for the first time today. It's not that great. Just because it's Pearl Jam doesn't mean that it has to shoot to the top, especially if it's not even a new song.
|
|
PHOBES
3x Platinum Member
Until We Have Faces (02-01-11)
Joined: February 2008
Posts: 3,317
|
Post by PHOBES on Mar 25, 2009 12:17:33 GMT -5
Just because it's Pearl Jam doesn't mean that it has to shoot to the top. What is this you speak of? Perhaps it's what they outside the chart world refer to as "logic"? I completely agree, I like the song ok, but it's not fantastic. But hey, I know I bought it just because it's new Pearl Jam. EDIT: Ok, so maybe it's not "new" per se, but you get what I mean.
|
|