Is Pearl Jam better than Nirvana?inb4: they both suck
>>55051403Nirvana is much better than pearl Jam.Grunge as a genre has aged horribly though.
I never listened to a whole Pearl Jam album, but Nirvana made one really good one and two alright ones, so there is that.
>>55051426I think Pearl Jams version of grunge has adged worse than Nirvana's. Pearl Jam now sounds like stale yodely dad rock to me. Nirvana had the energy and immediacy to still sound relevant.
>>55051505*aged not adged
>>55051505I agree 100%, pearl jam is fucking garbage
>>55051403PJ is much worse, one of the most boring bands iv ever listen to tbh, Vitalogy is kinda not so bad tho
Ten was the only album of theirs worth listening to, with future albums just having a few good songs if that.
>>55051403Pearl Jam because Vedder is still alive
Vitalogy is better than anything Nirvana ever made.In Utero fans who pretend that album is nothing but Nevermind 2.0 in terms of musicality and proficiency are the fucking worst.
dunnoI feel like PJ is more responsible for the birth of boring and uninspired buttrock, because that's what they started doing as they aged. Nirvana may be not that great but they stand out more, like they were a sparkle that died (kek) out pretty quickly while PJ had all the time they wanted to become lame as fuck.
>>55051844Nevermind was dope, though. And In Utero took care of the overproduction problem.
>Pseudointellectual teen rebellion-themed elevator music riding a Viacom-induced trendvs>Sheltered wanna be punk-rockers who lucked out and hated their successtough call OP
>>55051915The wannabe punks had two amazing songwriters, out of three band members.
>>55051957I will definitely concede that point, and to Nirvana's credit, Nevermind was at least balls-out harsh compared to the mainstream metal of the time, and their constant namedropping of less well-known acts in the press probably introduced a lot of potential edgelords to decent music.PJ on the other hand were just douchebags dressed up as stoners with sophomore English word salad lyrics that you couldn't even understand half the time.
>>55051911It's not as bad as everyone thinks they are, especially the mid to end sections. It's just in terms of songwriting, the two albums are really similar. Adding fuzz or distortion doesn't it make it "experimental".
Rank the Big 4 albums from Best to Worst:>nevermind>superunknown>ten>dirt
>nirvana >good
Pearl Jam isn't my thing, but idk why y'all think they're so bad. I got Ten for Christmas last year and I thought it was really good, especially for driving music.I do love me some 'vana tho
>>55052204Superunkown > Ten = Nevermind = DirtI have difficulty ranking those last three albums. I prefer Vitalogy over Ten though.
>>55051957one of them was pretty patrician for a pre-internet kid living in a shithole
>>55052246Ten just didn't ring true at the time. It sat right at home with the hair metal and hard rock going on at the same time, and it was easily replicated by label-designed bands. >Beavis and Butt-head watching an STP video: "Maybe these guys came first and Pearl Jam ripped them off?"
>>55052421Forgive me if I sound like I have a hate-on for PJ, but I kinda do. They were so sentimental and middle-of-the-road when the other Seattle bands weren't afraid to get weird and do as much experimenting as they could with Geffen signing the paychecks.
>>55052204dirt >>>>> ten >>> nevermind > superunknown