Red Mosquito

unLEASHed wrote:

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!

I'd agree Pearl Jam is a more significant part of music history and at their peak were more culturally impactful than the Foo Fighters.

"one of the best live bands ever" is a reputation that Pearl Jam has always had, but hasn't really deserved for half of their career; the Jamily continues to parrot it but I do wonder who outside the fandom really hails them as such

Daft Punk seems like a real odd point of comparison. But they are currently more popular than Pearl Jam, and possess a stronger hat game.


Pearl Jam does have over 6 times the monthly listens of IDLES, plus appropriate capitalization and they didn't need to post their own Spotify bio.

I don't need PJ to be Michael Jackson to keep loving them

stip wrote:Daft Punk seems like a real odd point of comparison. But they are currently more popular than Pearl Jam, and possess a stronger hat game.


Pearl Jam does have over 6 times the monthly listens of IDLES, plus appropriate capitalization and they didn't need to post their own Spotify bio.

you're one of the funniest posters here but you don't wear it on your sleeve

No band is important or significant. None of these bands has a legacy. All of this is so transient.

RIP PJ

stip wrote:Daft Punk seems like a real odd point of comparison. But they are currently more popular than Pearl Jam, and possess a stronger hat game.


Pearl Jam does have over 6 times the monthly listens of IDLES, plus appropriate capitalization and they didn't need to post their own Spotify bio.

On the whole spotify thing…The Doors and Led Zeppelin also have less montly listens than the Foo Fighters…guess that makes them less relevant for music history too!

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.

unLEASHed wrote:
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!

Interesting. I can absolutely imagine a scenario where Eddie Vedder's voice and words register on a really sincere level with future listeners and where the band's political and social actions are held up as an ethical model; I can just as easily imagine a scenario where Pearl Jam's music seems overly dour and self-serious to future listeners, where Grohl's sense of humor and over-the-top showmanship seems refreshing. I don't think there's any telling what later generations might latch onto in the music of a previous generation that gives it new life, and I think it's interesting how we project this concept of "relevance" out into a future that we can't predict and at some point won't even be around to see, always based solely on the values of what see as important in the here-and-now, and how we keep narrowing the field until the only thing that's material to the conversation is whatever supports the point we're trying to make (i.e. "Yes, Nickelback is still popular, but not in the right ways for me to say that they're 'relevant'," "Yes, Foo Fighters are massively popular now, 30 years into their career and 15 years after any memorable hits, but we can't really say they're relevant unless that popularity lasts 50 more years" -- why not 100? 200? 1000?). None of this is meant to be critical; I do the same thing. I just find the thought process behind it all fascinating -- or probably would be, if anyone besides me cared enough to unpack it...

tragabigzanda wrote:IDLES are more important than both bands combined today

Interested in hearing more about this. (Again, not because I inherently agree or disagree -- I just have no idea how people measure such things and am curious what yardsticks people are using.)

unLEASHed wrote:

stip wrote:Daft Punk seems like a real odd point of comparison. But they are currently more popular than Pearl Jam, and possess a stronger hat game.


Pearl Jam does have over 6 times the monthly listens of IDLES, plus appropriate capitalization and they didn't need to post their own Spotify bio.

On the whole spotify thing…The Doors and Led Zeppelin also have less montly listens than the Foo Fighters…guess that makes them less relevant for music history too!

So there are two easily conflated streams to this conversation that are worth separating out since we have two weeks until March Madness and two months until the album:

1. Current relevancy. I think something like Spotify streams are absolutely a relevant data point here. Not the only one, obviously, but important. How many people right now are actually listening to PJ vs other bands. Now this probably does skew the conversation towards spotify listeners (which I guess skew younger). For a long time all my pearl jam listening was just songs I loaded onto itunes. Pearl Jam have a Sirius station, but I'm assuming that audience runs older. And while this is irritating now that I'm older, cultural relevance does tend to mean 'what do younger people listen to'. And it's not pearl jam, as much as it should be. Lots of reasons for that, which are fascinating to unpack


2. Importance to the history of music. Pearl Jam were for a time arguably the biggest band in the world. Helped define a genre that dominated half a decade. Created an oft imitated but never repeated sound. The bootlegs in 2000. Deliberately took steps to reduce their cultural relevance at the height of their popularity, which remains one of the coolest and most punk/anti-corporate moves in music history that does not get a fraction of the attention it deserves. Pearl Jam were unarguably an important part of music history. But (again, by design) they froze themselves at a moment in history in a way that made them the worlds biggest cult band, rather than the world's biggest band. And it means they really only matter to the people in the cult.

Spotify Montly Listens - Pearl Jam and their classic rock forebears (in the millions)


The Beatles: 34.5
The Rolling Stones: 28.6
The Who: 8.6
Pink Floyd: 18.6
Led Zeppelin: 18.2
Bruce Springsteen: 16.2
Pearl Jam: 13.7 (note that Eddie has 3 million additional as a solo artist. Temple of the Dog has 1.6)
The Doors: 11.9
Tom Petty: 11.1
The Ramones: 6.3
Neil Young: 3.6
Grateful Dead: 2.3


And Pearl Jam next to the other giant artists of their era

Red Hot Chili Peppers: 33.3
Nirvana: 30.9
Green Day: 30.5
Radiohead: 26.3
Metallica: 25.2
U2: 22.2
Foo Fighters:20.8
Oasis: 20.5
R.E.M.: 17.6
Pearl Jam: 13.7
Smashing Pumpkins: 10.9
Counting Crows: 10.2
Rage Against the Machine: 9.8
Alice in Chains: 7.5
Soundgarden: 7.4
Stone Temple Pilots: 6
Tool: 4.3
Bush: 3.3
Live: 3.1
Dave Matthews Band: 2.4

Always been crazy to me that the Chili Peppers are so popular.

stip wrote:

unLEASHed wrote:

stip wrote:Daft Punk seems like a real odd point of comparison. But they are currently more popular than Pearl Jam, and possess a stronger hat game.


Pearl Jam does have over 6 times the monthly listens of IDLES, plus appropriate capitalization and they didn't need to post their own Spotify bio.

On the whole spotify thing…The Doors and Led Zeppelin also have less montly listens than the Foo Fighters…guess that makes them less relevant for music history too!

So there are two easily conflated streams to this conversation that are worth separating out since we have two weeks until March Madness and two months until the album:

1. Current relevancy. I think something like Spotify streams are absolutely a relevant data point here. Not the only one, obviously, but important. How many people right now are actually listening to PJ vs other bands. Now this probably does skew the conversation towards spotify listeners (which I guess skew younger). For a long time all my pearl jam listening was just songs I loaded onto itunes. Pearl Jam have a Sirius station, but I'm assuming that audience runs older. And while this is irritating now that I'm older, cultural relevance does tend to mean 'what do younger people listen to'. And it's not pearl jam, as much as it should be. Lots of reasons for that, which are fascinating to unpack


2. Importance to the history of music. Pearl Jam were for a time arguably the biggest band in the world. Helped define a genre that dominated half a decade. Created an oft imitated but never repeated sound. The bootlegs in 2000. Deliberately took steps to reduce their cultural relevance at the height of their popularity, which remains one of the coolest and most punk/anti-corporate moves in music history that does not get a fraction of the attention it deserves. Pearl Jam were unarguably an important part of music history. But (again, by design) they froze themselves at a moment in history in a way that made them the worlds biggest cult band, rather than the world's biggest band. And it means they really only matter to the people in the cult.

1. I agree with your point here, also helps that the Foos were much more active in the past 20 years than pearl jam in releasing new music…also helps.

2. my point is that pearl jam has already achieved something the Foos never will, popular has they are right now or not…and its precisely that cult combined with the fact that they were once the biggest band in the world, makes them something else in rock history that the Foos will never achieve…quality aside of this discussion. When pearl jam are presented has the last band standing/ survivots from arguably the last big rock movement, that means somethin, and always will.

stip wrote:Spotify Montly Listens - Pearl Jam and their classic rock forebears (in the millions)


The Beatles: 34.5
The Rolling Stones: 28.6
The Who: 8.6
Pink Floyd: 18.6
Led Zeppelin: 18.2
Bruce Springsteen: 16.2
Pearl Jam: 13.7 (note that Eddie has 3 million additional as a solo artist. Temple of the Dog has 1.6)
The Doors: 11.9
Tom Petty: 11.1
The Ramones: 6.3
Neil Young: 3.6
Grateful Dead: 2.3


And Pearl Jam next to the other giant artists of their era

Red Hot Chili Peppers: 33.3
Nirvana: 30.9
Green Day: 30.5
Radiohead: 26.3
Metallica: 25.2
U2: 22.2
Foo Fighters:20.8
Oasis: 20.5
R.E.M.: 17.6
Pearl Jam: 13.7
Smashing Pumpkins: 10.9
Counting Crows: 10.2
Rage Against the Machine: 9.8
Alice in Chains: 7.5
Soundgarden: 7.4
Stone Temple Pilots: 6
Tool: 4.3
Bush: 3.3
Live: 3.1
Dave Matthews Band: 2.4

How does Neil Young have 3.6M streams on Spotify with no music on it. What a legend!?

that's fair.

People forget that at the moment Pearl Jam walked away (and kind of gave the finger to the industry, which did not appreciate that), Vs outsold In Utero (at least in their first weeks) about 5 to 1.

Holy Cow
This discussion has gotten WAY off track.

The bridge of Dark Matter is fantastic and it has gotten better with each listen.
It's my favorite part of the song

IDLES don't even know how to write a bridge and are just a flavor of the month.
They're not even the best post punk redux band out there right now.

As for the Foo Fighters. The only reason they are more popular than Pearl Jam right now, is because the majority of the world have terrible taste in music, and because Dave Grohl is a needy whore who can't control himself when it comes to seeking constant validation from the mainstream. Everything the man does is driven by self promotion. The Foo Fighters haven't been remotely interesting in a long time. Their first 2 or 3 albums are okay at best - mostly inconsistent & nothing on the level of importance or cultural significance of any of the first 5 or 6 Pearl Jam records.

EVERLONG & Dave's drumming on Them Crooked Vultures and QOTSA, are the only work of his that could be considered legendary. All the rest is just filler and no killer.

Can't wait for the new Pearl Jam record.