The Beatles made Pop songs and Psychedelic Pop, The Stones made gritty Rhythm & Blues rock & roll... they've still been compared since the dawn of man and despite having different sounds, everyone has a favourite or at least an opinion. Why do they have to sound exactly the same for there to be a comparison?
Plus if the front man of a band says he tried to rip off another band, there's cause for a comparison right there.
They did sound alike, but Nirvana appealed to the masses.
But even if they don't sound a like, why can't you compare them?
__________________
I don't feel and I feel great.
Last FM
|
Threaded Mode