Bigfooty General Metal Thread Mk.VII

Remove this Banner Ad

fu** I am over video conferences. Virtually tapped out for the year. Sitting on couch one hour into a two hour conference and trying to stay awake.
Wear headphones.

That way you can listen to metal while tuning into the video conference. Save the headbanging for when your manager talks, it'll look like you're nodding in agreement.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Alice in Chains - Dirt.
Nirvana - Bleach.

Lyrically, two of the darkest albums ever made, even more so because they were dealing with human weakness and what it does to the psyche, and the horrors that are given expression by that (except for About A Girl of course, which was an early expression of Kurt's Beatles fandom and pop sensibilities; Nevermind really is a 90s alternative rock take on 60s pop-rock).

AIC are unfairly lumped in with grunge, Nirvana fairly, but this does show the best of that late 80s-early 90s scene, not rubbish like ****ing Pearl Jam.

I only started paying attention to AIC in recent years and rate them. I also don’t mind Soundgarden (who I paid more attention to due to AIC). Passed on them both for years - in saying so was right into death metal when these bands were peaking so they were never gonna do it for me at that time and place. Both bands have a fair metal influence IMO. Don’t mind Nevermind and saw Nirvana on that tour - decent stripped back rock with a fair bit of anger. Other Nirvana not so much. I think I saw Soundgarden the year the Ramones were on the Big Day Out - don’t remember much other than the Ramones set from that day. Had a GF who was a big fan of Mudhoney and could tolerate them too. Pearl Jam are offensive and the less said about them the better.

Of the Big 4 grunge bands, Alice in Chains certainly cross the metal threshold; Soundgarden for mine are borderline.

Nirvana can be aggressive, but they clearly have a much more punkish/alt-rock influence than a metal one. Pearl Jam are really just 'grungified' classic rock.

My favourite are Alice in Chains - not just because they're the heaviest, but also because of Staley's powerful vocals, Cantrell's creativity and a solid rhythm section. Plus, unlike Soundgarden or Pearl Jam, they didn't waste notes very often. I haven't listened to much of post-Staley AIC - what I've heard is alright, but they're missing a large part of what made them great to begin with.

I do like Nirvana - no doubt Cobain was a talented lyricist and songwriter, but I feel that he was a negative influence as a guitarist, because he has inspired a generation or two of largely talentless power chord merchants. Bleach does lack the propulsive quality that Dave Grohl gave to the band, but the songwriting is still largely in place. In Utero is rather up and down, because it was obvious that Cobain was trying to alienate much of his audience.

Soundgarden have the best vocalist (Cornell) and a very good rhythm section. Compositionally they are interesting due to their unusual time signatures, and on a gut level they can certainly hit hard, but for mine their songwriting was not consistently tight enough to consistently compete with AiC or Nirvana.

I've never quite understood Pearl Jam's prolonged appeal in this country. Granted, Australians prefer classic rock (AC/DC) over outright metal like Black Sabbath, but for mine their songwriting is not tight or consistent enough. Some of the riffs they came up with on Ten absolutely cooked, but even on that album I thought that their songs were somewhat compromised by overlong jams. It's kind of like they sought to emulate Journey's success in the US - their songs often have a surprisingly similar structure - verse, chorus, verse, chorus, long solo, before sometimes ending with the chorus. However, there were just a few problems: 1) Journey weren't that great a band, 2) Vedder is a step behind Perry in terms of vocal ability and 3) McCready/Gossard aren't in the same bracket as Neal Schon, so their jams failed to capture the imagination in the way that Schon's soloing sometimes could. Many Australians would place them at #1, but for mine they are #4.
 
Yeah I really liked Uada’s ‘Cult of a Dying Sun’ from 2018. New one is pretty good too. Production is quite organic if that’s the right word.

I listened to Djinn before any others, then Devoid of Light followed by Cult of A Dying Sun. I reckon they all stand up. It's an interesting genre where I either love the music or hate it, I can't find any middle ground of OK tunes.
 
Of the Big 4 grunge bands, Alice in Chains certainly cross the metal threshold; Soundgarden for mine are borderline.

Nirvana can be aggressive, but they clearly have a much more punkish/alt-rock influence than a metal one. Pearl Jam are really just 'grungified' classic rock.

My favourite are Alice in Chains - not just because they're the heaviest, but also because of Staley's powerful vocals, Cantrell's creativity and a solid rhythm section. Plus, unlike Soundgarden or Pearl Jam, they didn't waste notes very often. I haven't listened to much of post-Staley AIC - what I've heard is alright, but they're missing a large part of what made them great to begin with.

I do like Nirvana - no doubt Cobain was a talented lyricist and songwriter, but I feel that he was a negative influence as a guitarist, because he has inspired a generation or two of largely talentless power chord merchants. Bleach does lack the propulsive quality that Dave Grohl gave to the band, but the songwriting is still largely in place. In Utero is rather up and down, because it was obvious that Cobain was trying to alienate much of his audience.

Soundgarden have the best vocalist (Cornell) and a very good rhythm section. Compositionally they are interesting due to their unusual time signatures, and on a gut level they can certainly hit hard, but for mine their songwriting was not consistently tight enough to consistently compete with AiC or Nirvana.

I've never quite understood Pearl Jam's prolonged appeal in this country. Granted, Australians prefer classic rock (AC/DC) over outright metal like Black Sabbath, but for mine their songwriting is not tight or consistent enough. Some of the riffs they came up with on Ten absolutely cooked, but even on that album I thought that their songs were somewhat compromised by overlong jams. It's kind of like they sought to emulate Journey's success in the US - their songs often have a surprisingly similar structure - verse, chorus, verse, chorus, long solo, before sometimes ending with the chorus. However, there were just a few problems: 1) Journey weren't that great a band, 2) Vedder is a step behind Perry in terms of vocal ability and 3) McCready/Gossard aren't in the same bracket as Neal Schon, so their jams failed to capture the imagination in the way that Schon's soloing sometimes could. Many Australians would place them at #1, but for mine they are #4.
I am completly different. Only like Pearl Jam. And mostly Vitalogy only, found their other releases a bit disappointing. Probably mostly due to being the only release I bought back in the days when I was young.

Nirvana hard to avoid but boring for me. Other two I have hardly ever heart.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I listened to Djinn before any others, then Devoid of Light followed by Cult of A Dying Sun. I reckon they all stand up. It's an interesting genre where I either love the music or hate it, I can't find any middle ground of OK tunes.

Yeah I’m kinda reluctant to dig too deeply into the genre (there’s sooo many similar bands in this space nowadays)but there’s a couple that I really like and I’m happy at that. Any others you listen to that perhaps I’m missing??
 
Yeah I’m kinda reluctant to dig too deeply into the genre (there’s sooo many similar bands in this space nowadays)but there’s a couple that I really like and I’m happy at that. Any others you listen to that perhaps I’m missing??

Kvaen go alright, but those 3 bands are where I'm at currently. Only so much disappointment I can handle when going through the "Fans Also Like" on Spotify. Maybe I'm not as patient as I used to be.
 
I am completly different. Only like Pearl Jam. And mostly Vitalogy only, found their other releases a bit disappointing. Probably mostly due to being the only release I bought back in the days when I was young.

Nirvana hard to avoid but boring for me. Other two I have hardly ever heart.

What this proves to me is that people's music tastes tend to develop in their formative years (certainly before age 30). Also not surprised that you favour Pearl Jam, even though I respectfully don't. One of my old high school teachers was a complete Pearl Jam nut, actually - he could tell you anything and everything about that band - but I was bemused to discover that he had hardly even heard the other three.

For mine, Vitalogy takes Ten's biggest issue (overlong songs) and compounds it.
 
When I grabbed it I had to ask a girl that worked there where is it.. Surprisingly she knew what I was on about & showed me that it's in the Alternative section AEUHH!!?? I guess if I duck in there to grab the new Sodom I'll head straight to the Classical section!

Also I changed my mind, I'm diggin' Bungle more atm, getting my head around all the riffs. Still recommend DC though, it will only be $8 there now..

Alternative section


Fmd
I only ever look in the metal section
 
Two grunge albums that stand head and shoulders above for me are Dirt and Badmotorfinger.

Nirvana obviously some great songs but get tired of them quickly.

Pearl Jam have a handful of songs that I love and then it drops away dramatically. Sitting through a whole album is an exercise in patience and concentration.

Soundgarden are the best imo.
 
Of the Big 4 grunge bands, Alice in Chains certainly cross the metal threshold; Soundgarden for mine are borderline.

Nirvana can be aggressive, but they clearly have a much more punkish/alt-rock influence than a metal one. Pearl Jam are really just 'grungified' classic rock.

My favourite are Alice in Chains - not just because they're the heaviest, but also because of Staley's powerful vocals, Cantrell's creativity and a solid rhythm section. Plus, unlike Soundgarden or Pearl Jam, they didn't waste notes very often. I haven't listened to much of post-Staley AIC - what I've heard is alright, but they're missing a large part of what made them great to begin with.

I do like Nirvana - no doubt Cobain was a talented lyricist and songwriter, but I feel that he was a negative influence as a guitarist, because he has inspired a generation or two of largely talentless power chord merchants. Bleach does lack the propulsive quality that Dave Grohl gave to the band, but the songwriting is still largely in place. In Utero is rather up and down, because it was obvious that Cobain was trying to alienate much of his audience.

Soundgarden have the best vocalist (Cornell) and a very good rhythm section. Compositionally they are interesting due to their unusual time signatures, and on a gut level they can certainly hit hard, but for mine their songwriting was not consistently tight enough to consistently compete with AiC or Nirvana.

I've never quite understood Pearl Jam's prolonged appeal in this country. Granted, Australians prefer classic rock (AC/DC) over outright metal like Black Sabbath, but for mine their songwriting is not tight or consistent enough. Some of the riffs they came up with on Ten absolutely cooked, but even on that album I thought that their songs were somewhat compromised by overlong jams. It's kind of like they sought to emulate Journey's success in the US - their songs often have a surprisingly similar structure - verse, chorus, verse, chorus, long solo, before sometimes ending with the chorus. However, there were just a few problems: 1) Journey weren't that great a band, 2) Vedder is a step behind Perry in terms of vocal ability and 3) McCready/Gossard aren't in the same bracket as Neal Schon, so their jams failed to capture the imagination in the way that Schon's soloing sometimes could. Many Australians would place them at #1, but for mine they are #4.

Awesome summary :thumbsu:

I can't comment much on AIC or Soundgarden as I really haven't heard enough of either, but I never understood the In Utero>Nevermind argument. To me Nevermind is a masterpiece, and arguably picks up in the second half as the songs get more personal. Songs like Territorial Pissings, Lounge Act and Drain You will probably always be my favourites. Perfect songwriting. In Utero had some good tracks, and the aesthetics of it are cool and interesting but there's just not enough incredible songs for what is deemed a classic album. I've always thought Heart Shaped Box was a little overrated as a single, and it's running time I've always found to be pretty excessive. Just never picks up much steam.

Pearl Jam are a decent band, but not that grunge sounding, as you allude to. I've always maintained Ten is way too top heavy, and declines pretty rapidly in the second half. I love Release though, and I think it forecasted their future sound a bit. Could easily close out an album like No Code, which IMO is as good a Pearl Jam LP as any.

It's a bit of muddled genre, with nothing particularly distinctive, just a bit of a dirty vibe rooted in DIY punk. Bands like Husker Du and The Melvins are far better examples of the true grunge sound (and even then they can sound pretty far removed from it), and I've always found it a little unusual and amusing that the Big 4 grunge bands sound nothing like each other and bare only a vague resemblance to the original grunge sound.
 
I've never quite understood Pearl Jam's prolonged appeal in this country.
I've never got how MMM have been playing the same dogshit for 25 years.. The amount of times I've flicked past the station & heard the droning voice of that singer.. At least you guys have Rebel Radio up there
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top