Red Mosquito

Tj wrote:

stip wrote:

Tj wrote:the current generation of rising musicians are folks who would have grown up listening to pearl jam/foo fighters/etc. Eventually we will see who gets cited more as an influence, who gets covered, and so on.

I don't think this is true at all. Those days are past. The bands that would have grown up listening to Pearl Jam are the likes of The Strokes and the Killers Today's bands your talking Panic at The Disco era or like Paramore at the earliest. Really if you are 22 what were you listening to 10 years ago? Mumford and Sons or something maybe the band Fun I'm not sure I'm over double that age 20 years is probably the cut off for current crop of new college age bands.

rising is not thr right word to use (though it was mine). Im thinking artists who would have been around for a while and eatablished as the major mainstream voices, not the hot new thing.

but maybe that will never be pearl jam. they made some unprecedented choices ij music industry history, and this is the consequence.

Ok then yes there are a good amount that do list Pearl Jam that are in their 40's Jason Isbell Eric Church Dierks Bentley of course Brandi Carlile the Avett Brothers etc. I think Pearl Jam's ethos has actually helped them not in that regard.

eddie vedder played with post malone like 2 days ago. i heard paramour cover 'burning down the house' earlier this week and i'm pretty sure that song came out before anyone in that band was born.

tragabigzanda wrote:You guys were all “don’t talk about IDLES in the Pearl Jam thread!” but now you’re arguing about Foo Fighters.

Yeah I know

JESUS F CHRIST, PLEASE RELEASE THE ALBUM, PEARL JAM. END THIS.

What if the new album wins a lot of Brit Awards?

I don’t even know what the Brit Awards are

bodysnatcher wrote:I don’t even know what the Brit Awards are

Idles should have loads.
They are very Brit.

Jorge knows everything about them

Apparently the foos have like 5

Val wrote:

bodysnatcher wrote:I don’t even know what the Brit Awards are

Idles should have loads.
They are very Brit.

They won Best Breakthrough Artist in 2019!

VinylGuy wrote:Jorge knows everything about them

Apparently the foos have like 5

I work for the Brit Awards

warehouse wrote:

Kevin Davis wrote:

unLEASHed wrote: Relevance in music history, not popularity at any given moment…different things. Lets put it this way, what will the Foo Fighters remembered for? sorry I cant see it. Im not looking at this from the taste point of view alone, thats your opinion on my take on this subject. we can dance around this subject all we want in many arts, cinema is a good example, how many movies never won an oscar or made a dent in worlwide box office and are much more relevant, and influential than the ones who did? this is my take on this, time will tell who is right or wrong.

Genuine question, no combative intent here at all: What do you think PJ will be remembered for that Foo Fighters won't be?

the lead singer's voice. dave grohl is a great frontman, but eddie vedder's voice is as good as anyone. i know he's not the same singer he was, but when he was at the top of his game he was incredible.

stone gossard's riffs. especially 'alive', but 'black', 'go', 'do the evolution' are almost as memorable. it's like he's combining blues sounds and funk rhythms.

the foo fighters are fine, i think the albums grohl did by himself are great, and i'm sure they will be remembered fondly in rock music history. i don't think they can hold pearl jam's jock. they are more like weezer or green day than they are pearl jam.

Its strange these days when everyone else pays for somebody else’s mistake!

warehouse wrote:

Kevin Davis wrote:

unLEASHed wrote: Relevance in music history, not popularity at any given moment…different things. Lets put it this way, what will the Foo Fighters remembered for? sorry I cant see it. Im not looking at this from the taste point of view alone, thats your opinion on my take on this subject. we can dance around this subject all we want in many arts, cinema is a good example, how many movies never won an oscar or made a dent in worlwide box office and are much more relevant, and influential than the ones who did? this is my take on this, time will tell who is right or wrong.

Genuine question, no combative intent here at all: What do you think PJ will be remembered for that Foo Fighters won't be?

the lead singer's voice. dave grohl is a great frontman, but eddie vedder's voice is as good as anyone. i know he's not the same singer he was, but when he was at the top of his game he was incredible.

stone gossard's riffs. especially 'alive', but 'black', 'go', 'do the evolution' are almost as memorable. it's like he's combining blues sounds and funk rhythms.

the foo fighters are fine, i think the albums grohl did by himself are great, and i'm sure they will be remembered fondly in rock music history. i don't think they can hold pearl jam's jock. they are more like weezer or green day than they are pearl jam.

Really the men of Pearl Jam should be holding their own jocks rather than asking grown adults to do it for them, especially successful ones who don't need the work.

let's be real, both bands can afford personal jock-holders lol

jock the leash! jock the leash! get out of my fucking brace!

Ms Harmless wrote:jock the leash! jock the leash! get out of my fucking brace!

omg

unLEASHed wrote:

15showsandcounting wrote:

oneway23 wrote:

E.H. Ruddock wrote:

oneway23 wrote:Bush is still an active entity?

They say in a Pearl Jam forum

Most people under 35 likely aren't aware of either, honestly, though, I'd say PJ has had a more consistent career in the public eye.
Not a competition, though...I genuinely didn't know they were still around.

What bands from that era are bigger than PJ? Foo Fighters for sure. U2. DMB. Green Day. Not Bush imo.

Neither Foo Fighters or DMB or even Green Day are anywhere near the real dimension Pearl Jam has at least in Europe…I dont consider U2 from the same “era”. The others are rock bands), U2 and PJ are rock institutions by now.

Bush is just a novelty act by now.

Good to hear. I don't think that's nearly the same in America.

Jorge wrote:I get the impression that Foo Fighters are currently a lot bigger than Pearl Jam. They have many more monthly listeners on Spotify too.

I think only a Pearl Jam fan would argue otherwise.

Jorge wrote:

VinylGuy wrote:Jorge knows everything about them

Apparently the foos have like 5

I work for the Brit Awards

Tell us more about them!

If we're talking just influential and legacy, I don't see Foo Fighters on Pearl Jam's level, I agree, but Green Day is also elite-level IMO

Val wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:jock the leash! jock the leash! get out of my fucking brace!

omg

the resident "angry" "woke" trans woman at your service

15showsandcounting wrote:

Jorge wrote:I get the impression that Foo Fighters are currently a lot bigger than Pearl Jam. They have many more monthly listeners on Spotify too.

I think only a Pearl Jam fan would argue otherwise.

That was never my point… the “currently more popular”….

There is a list of things that make pearl jam a much more relevant/important band for music history. Someone used the word ethos…thats part of it…

One of the best live bands ever, the way they were against theyre own popularity for credibility, the frontman, the music in itself (which is even more divisive between die hard fans than outside, some would have prefered the ten, vs way…that was not the way for them)

Theyre political and social stances (like it or not, that plays a part in theyre overal “ethos”).

But hey…Ed could just write 4567 versions of just breathe and get all the radio play time and be popular or they can give us a DoTC out of the left field. They wanted credibility in the long run…not basic popularity…

Anyway, we can go back loving or hating DM and talk about the drums!