Alice in Chains...because they have...talent. They didn't revolutionize anything, but the guitar work was great, the songs were solid, and Layne had an awesome voice.
Nirvana just ripped of the lesser known Washington bands hardcore, like the Melvins, Mudhoney and Screaming Trees/Mark Lanegan. But no one really knows who those people are, which is why Nirvana never got caught. At least Alice was foreward with who they were; they were a rock/hard rock band, and they made no qualms about it.
I like Mudhoney, Melvins, Screaming Trees and Nirvana......
they were definitely a heavy influence on Nirvana, but not a rip-off.
A lot of the bands in Seattle back in the late 80's had that sound.
They combined punk song-writing and ethics with classic rock riffs
and heavy-ness. Not so much a rip-off as cross-polination of influences.
Nirvana also had a strong pop influence from The Vaselines and Fastbacks.
If anything, Nirvana may have ripped-off GODZILLA by Blue Oyster Cult,
and EIGHTIES by Killing Joke.
Well this is totally the wrong place for this kind of thread but before it gets closed down...
Alice in Chains Owns Nirvana and anything they ever put out. One day Kurt Kobain woke up sober and heard his own music, that's why he blew his head off.
Chains Rules!
And as for you Mr. Smiley, please change your sig, it causes me so much pain to see my hero getting his ass handed to him...Damn you Silva!!!
Originally posted by Zahit
i guess we're waiting around for a witty remark followed by the phrase: closing.
And in the mean time: Nirvana is much better. Better lyrics, better melodies, better riffs. But this is all only my opinion of course.
But it is a fact Nirvana was/is much more important in the music history than Alice in Chains.
Originally posted by who?-kid
Yup.And in the mean time: Nirvana is much better. Better lyrics, better melodies, better riffs. But this is all only my opinion of course.
But it is a fact Nirvana was/is much more important in the music history than Alice in Chains.
Blah! Better lyrics my eye. Better melodies like drinking pee is better than drinking wine.
Important to music history? You mean because there was a thousand other bands just like them at the time and anyone of them could have taken there place? They weren't the first and they weren't even the best at what they do and that's just sad 'cause they didn't do much.
Originally posted by long pig
Nirvana.
AOC is technically better at everything, but I always dug Nirvana more.
I spit on that! And I hurl fish flavored jam at you!
Originally posted by MERCILOUS
Important to music history?
It's without any doubt one of the most influential bands of the nineties. They didn't invent grunge. They just put it on the world map. We can't say the same of Alice in Chains.You mean because there was a thousand other bands just like them at the time and anyone of them could have taken there place?
Could could could... but they didn't, did they ?They weren't the first and they weren't even the best at what they do and that's just sad 'cause they didn't do much.
Of course they weren't the first. It's impossible to say : here, this one was the first. D'uh. But they were certainly one of the first who made raw music with solid melodies that sold millions of albums.I spit on that! And I hurl fish flavored jam at you!
Very mature counter argument.
Originally posted by who?-kid
That's right. Like them or hate them, you can say what you want, but the fact remains that Nirvana was really important in the music history. Isn't this common knowledge ?
No they weren't.
Originally posted by who?-kid
It's without any doubt one of the most influential bands of the nineties. They didn't invent grunge. They just put it on the world map. We can't say the same of Alice in Chains.
Who did they influence?
Originally posted by who?-kid
Could could could... but they didn't, did they ?
Oh right, when Nirvana came out they were the only ones around, I completely forgot they carried the grunge movement all by themselves.
Originally posted by who?-kid
Of course they weren't the first. It's impossible to say : here, this one was the first. D'uh. But they were certainly one of the first who made raw music with solid melodies that sold millions of albums.
Not impossible, quite possible.
Originally posted by who?-kid
Very mature counter argument.
I'm glad you noticed.
Originally posted by long pig
Ha! I fart in your general direction Merc.Anyone in rock from the last 10 years is influenced by Nirvana, good or bad.
AIC was a bit......too little too late.Nirvana owns. 😈
Anyone in rock? No one who was worth a damn.
AIC wasn't that big cause they were doing there own thing. Not following fads doesn't get you too far.