You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: Bumblefoot not happy? Speculating....
Weezer isn't better than Nirvana. Come on. You can make a solid argument for REM/Stipe though.
All a matter of opinion I guess. Me I'd prefer listening to Weezer. At least lately. And while we're discussing. I'd even say that Dave Grohl is better than Cobain. Yeah I said it.
Re: Bumblefoot not happy? Speculating....
Grohl IS better than Cobain. Morbid as it is, I sometimes wonder if Grohl would have ever reached his potential if Kurt hadn't died. And not just The Foos. All of his side projects guesting and producing for others, The Crooked Vultures... Would he have had his fingers in so many pies if Nirvana was an ongoing concern? Don't know.
- Intercourse
- Rep: 212
Re: Bumblefoot not happy? Speculating....
Is this not like arguing over guitars, cars, food, women or anything that needs to incorporate personal taste?
Re: Bumblefoot not happy? Speculating....
I use the 4 finger test to try to objectively judge bands/artists-
1.instrumentation/lyrics
2.influence
3.sales/popularity
4.critical acclaim
I think Nirvana takes Weezer in all 4 spots...better songs and music, more popular...much more influential and critically acclaimed. It's a no brainer.
Re: Bumblefoot not happy? Speculating....
Grohl IS better than Cobain. Morbid as it is, I sometimes wonder if Grohl would have ever reached his potential if Kurt hadn't died. And not just The Foos. All of his side projects guesting and producing for others, The Crooked Vultures... Would he have had his fingers in so many pies if Nirvana was an ongoing concern? Don't know.
I was going to say that Cobain wasn't even the most talented in Nirvana, but I was trying not to be too disrespectful to the Cobain lovers.
Re: Bumblefoot not happy? Speculating....
Of course, and in my opinion, that should be a given. But I also think sometimes we have to consciously try to separate our personal tastes in order to be as "objective" as is possible in matter like these.
That's why people can say, for example, Billy Joel belongs in the mix, even if they don't personally like him.
Re: Bumblefoot not happy? Speculating....
smoke wrote:Grohl IS better than Cobain. Morbid as it is, I sometimes wonder if Grohl would have ever reached his potential if Kurt hadn't died. And not just The Foos. All of his side projects guesting and producing for others, The Crooked Vultures... Would he have had his fingers in so many pies if Nirvana was an ongoing concern? Don't know.
I was going to say that Cobain wasn't even the most talented in Nirvana, but I was trying not to be too disrespectful to the Cobain lovers.
And like you, I don't mean any disrespect either. I like Cobain. It's just that literally NO ONE had any idea at the time of what a friggin juggernaut Grohl was, other than being a beast on the drums. That really only came about well after his death. Well after the first Foos album, too.
Re: Bumblefoot not happy? Speculating....
I use the 4 finger test-
1.instrumentation/lyrics
2.influence
3.sales/popularity
4.critical acclaimI think Nirvana takes Weezer in all 4 spots...better songs and music, more popular...much more influential and critically acclaimed. It's a no brainer.
I agree for the most part (at least on 2 - 4), but I still think Rivers is a better songwriter than Cobain. I'd also say while Weezer isn't what I think of as a guitar band, Cobain couldn't have played most of their material with the skill level he had on guitar.
