A genie gives you the chance to resurrect a singer that died to soon

[mdccclxix]

Originally Posted by RedsManRick

I'm surprised so few other people chose Freddie Mercury. Maybe I just don't get Jim Morrison, but I don't see how he belongs on the list with 4 others who were so unique/culture changing.

I see what Morrison did as being very difficult to replicate. I don't elevate it as highly as it's been in years past, but I look back at what he did and what's come since and cannot find many replacements. I suppose you could call it early punk attitude mixed with early southern rock mixed with early singer songwriting, but it's really just some dude who didn't give a flip for 5 years. I find that people not giving a flip in the 60's was often much different and more radical than today.

[*BaseClogger*]

Originally Posted by mdccclxix

I wouldn't know Foo Fighter's prime from any other time. They've always been insipidly vanilla and predictably forced with every song I've heard. I actually really dislike the Foo Fighters, can you tell? What's funny, though, is I bet I'd really like an acoustic album from them. I see their approach as very needlessly loud. It's silly what Grohl decides to scream about and it comes off as gratuitous. Nirvana in a rout if you ask me.

I believe one side of their double album, In Your Honor, is acoustic.

I think you can pretty easily find acoustic versions of a lot of their songs too. Have they done an Unplugged?

[mdccclxix]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5DT618KMIvw

Funny here is an acoustic, it's not what I hoped for - lot's of senseless screaming. Start at the 1:30 mark.

[westofyou]

Nice

[*BaseClogger*]

^^^

All I got from that is Steven Tyler has always looked like a weirdo...

[*BaseClogger*]

Here's an acoustic version of their best song:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eO_15bcZTq8

(I like the electric version a lot better)

[camisadelgolf]

Originally Posted by *BaseClogger*

What I take from all of this is you seem to be arguing a band that sticks around and writes a few really good songs and releases them on otherwise mediocre albums year-after-year is superior to a band that burns brighter, albeit for only a few albums, and then disappears, simply because the former band accumulates more material and as a result more good songs? So we should measure a band's quality based upon gross number of good songs recorded during their careers?

That's actually not even close to what I said.

[Revering4Blue]

Originally Posted by *BaseClogger*

I believe one side of their double album, In Your Honor, is acoustic.

I think you can pretty easily find acoustic versions of a lot of their songs too. Have they done an Unplugged?

Skin & Bones is live acoustic import Foo Fighters CD.

http://www.amazon.com/Skin-Bones-Foo.../dp/B000IU3XTW

[*BaseClogger*]

Originally Posted by camisadelgolf

That's actually not even close to what I said.

Lets put it this way: if you had to rank the Nirvana albums with the Foo Fighters discography how would they compare?

[camisadelgolf]

Originally Posted by *BaseClogger*

Lets put it this way: if you had to rank the Nirvana albums with the Foo Fighters discography how would they compare?

Although this is very different from my personal tastes, here you go:
Foo Fighters s/t
Foo Fighters One by One
Nirvana Bleach
Foo Fighters Wasting Light
Nirvana In Utero
Foo Fighters There Is Nothing Left to Lose
Foo Fighters Echoes, Silence, Patience & Grace
Nirvana Nevermind
Foo Fighters The Colour and the Shape
Foo Fighters In Your Honor

Just to iterate, my personal list looks nothing like that.

[nate]

Originally Posted by RedsManRick

I'm surprised so few other people chose Freddie Mercury. Maybe I just don't get Jim Morrison, but I don't see how he belongs on the list with 4 others who were so unique/culture changing.

High five!

If we're talking about SINGERS, Freddie is about the only one that screams "SINGER" on the list. He was also a great songwriter and musician.

Lennon was a great conveyer of songs, musician and songwriter. But he wasn't half the singer Freddie was.

Jimi was kind of a mumble-talking-singer but it worked for him because he had a cool tone and that whole guitar thing going on.

Cobain's singing was kind of like Jimi's but instead of guitar, he helped popularize a new genre of rock.

Morrison's singing was kind of like Jimi's and Cobain's and he wore leather pants.

[*BaseClogger*]

Originally Posted by camisadelgolf

Although this is very different from my personal tastes, here you go:
Foo Fighters s/t
Foo Fighters One by One
Nirvana Bleach
Foo Fighters Wasting Light
Nirvana In Utero
Foo Fighters There Is Nothing Left to Lose
Foo Fighters Echoes, Silence, Patience & Grace
Nirvana Nevermind
Foo Fighters The Colour and the Shape
Foo Fighters In Your Honor

Just to iterate, my personal list looks nothing like that.

Wait... then who's list is this? Because there aren't many people who would have Bleach at the top of a Nirvana list and The Colour and the Shape at the bottom of a Foo Fighters list...

[camisadelgolf]

Originally Posted by *BaseClogger*

Wait... then who's list is this? Because there aren't many people who would have Bleach at the top of a Nirvana list and The Colour and the Shape at the bottom of a Foo Fighters list...

People have terrible taste, and mine is elite. But truth be told, The Colour and the Shape is my favorite Foo Fighters album even though a lot of it is boring. Basically, it's rich on great ideas but lacking in songs that are great from start to finish.

[*BaseClogger*]

Originally Posted by camisadelgolf

People have terrible taste, and mine is elite. But truth be told, The Colour and the Shape is my favorite Foo Fighters album even though a lot of it is boring. Basically, it's rich on great ideas but lacking in songs that are great from start to finish.

It's still not a "people" list because you have Bleach the highest...

[camisadelgolf]

Originally Posted by *BaseClogger*

It's still not a "people" list because you have Bleach the highest...

Your taste apparently isn't good enough to "get" Bleach.