let me clear this up by taking a short lyric from the song 'photograph' by nickelback

'Kim's the first girl I kissed
I was so nervous that I nearly missed
She's had a couple of kids since then
I haven't seen her since God knows when
Oh oh oh
Oh god I, I'

wow... deep, moving, poetic, different... just what every great mainstream band is like totally awesomez!

if you are brave enough to actually listen to him sing it... be my guest YouTube - "Photograph" by Nickelback

now that's br00tal.

Now come on. If that's not great comedy, then what is? That's the funniest sh*t I've seen in a song lyric since:

"Birthdays was tha worst days,
now we sip champagne when we thirstay"

What a lot of people don't understand is that Kroeger's genius rests largely in his comedic prowess and raw wit.

I still cant tell whether you are serious or not....

Who's the genius behind that?

The Notorious B.I.G., song: Juicy (1994).

I still stand by my assertion that we could all have it much worse than Nickleback.

A certain well-known sub-section of popular culture? What sub-section is that? Where in popular culture do you ever hear about things like Jungian psychology and transcendence? And who are you to say whether or not Tool "cater" to anyone? Perhaps I'm just misunderstanding, but you're making it sound like you actually believe that the band picked out a particular supposed "sub-section of popular culture" and did everything they possibly could as musicians to appeal to that sub-section.

Exceedingly strong and effective marketing ploys? Such as? Christ, very few people even knew what the hell the band looked like until a good decade after they formed, not to mention they only release a new LP about every four to five years. Sure, they're commercial in that they appeal to a sufficiently wide audience and sell quite a few albums, but to seemingly imply that their prime objective is mainstream success is completely imbecilic.

No, not like that. I'm not saying they picked them out. But both they AND the corporations who took them on in the first place knew that that was where their own vision would find its appeal. And I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that. Simply that it IS a market, and Tool are a commercial product who cater to it. Not that that's their aim exclusively. They are artists in their own rights, of course.

No, it's not their prime objective, course it isn't. But among their objectives is selling a large number of records to a niche audience. Undeniably so.

If you want to discuss marketing ploys, that's a whole topic in its own right. But again, I wasn't using it as a criticism. Tool have ingeniously built up a fanbase through their own devices like few other bands have.

I feel Tool's main merits exist when viewing their achievements as a commercial project. Musically and lyrically, not so much at all. It's telling enough that a lot of fans are embarrassed just to list Tool among their favourite bands.

Ah sorry then, misunderstood.

But I'm pretty sure people are only embarrassed to list Tool among their favourite bands because Tool fans are known for being a bunch of dicks, lol.

I haven't heard every song they've written but I've heard far more than their hits. And I find them very samey.

:rofl:

This is dumb. It's like the Beatles vs. the Monkeys...

Monkees even..

http://www.sheagunther.org/blog/blog...manbearpig.jpg
He's thuper therial!!!

Tool.

First off I voted for Tool. However, I don't believe that they are the best band like the poll asks. I don't believe that they are really any better than Nickelback either, I just prefer their music more. Anyway, The two bands are too different from each other to truly compare them. What this poll is actually asking is do you prefer Progressive Metal or Post-Grunge Hard Rock. I guess that's what genres I'd put them in.

I see Tool as more of a counter-grunge band than prog. And taking Nickelback's catalogue as a whole, I see them as more of a gumbo of late 70s/early 80s romantic pop metal, Christian disco and Canadian acid-folk than Post-Grunge. Nickelback's post-grunge attributions come largely as a result of Kroeger's gravelly, phlegm-assisted, I'm-a-walkin'-talkin'-anti-smoking-campaign vocals.

I dont like Nickelback because of the really annoying country influence (which, for some reason, no one wants to admit).

Sorry, I forgot to add that. To rephrase:

A gumbo of late 70s/early 80s romantic pop metal, Christian disco, Canadian acid-folk and West Mexican country rock.

I find your logic disturbing. Because a band tries to sell records they're commercial? Red-era KC tried to sell records by installing a pop vocalist, but that doesn't make them commerical.

Okay I normally try and stay away from saying this but are you a fucking idiot? Acid folk? You realize acid folk is like Vashti Bunyan and Linda Perhacs right? Nickelback has no hint of even having heard those artists whatsoever and christian disco? I hope you're just taking the piss because there is so many things wrong with that statement it's ridiculous.

Um... rrright. So like, what does "commerce" mean in your world?

If you form something in a certain way with the aim and intention to make it more marketable to the public, that is called commercialization. Whether you like it or not, any band who make amends to their MUSIC and musical direction simply to sell more is a commercial band.

How does Tool change it's music to be more accesible exactly? You're being very vague and just saying how they target a specific group with their lyrics and music but you don't even define Tool's sound beyond 'modern rock' and just say what group they're supposed to be changing their music for! And I second Ethan's skepticism on the Christian Disco and Acid Folk parts of Nickelback's music.

Further definitions of commercial:

Being a product marketed to the population on a mass scale.

We could make even more. Tool will nicely fit under one of them.

The more pertinent question is this: why is it that you find the idea of being "commercial" so very objectionable? Why does it offend you so much that Tool just might be a commercial band?

I'm STILL not 100% sure, but I don't think he was serious.

I'm shocked that this poll is serious.

Alright, I've tried. I've tried my damned hardest. It was an honest , thorough, painstaking experiment, but as it turns out, finding any redeeming qualities in Nickelback is utterly impossible and I can't keep up trying. I've had those lyrics ("Kim... kissed... nervous... missed... since then... haven't seen her... God knows when") revolving round and round in my mind for days now and they're so abominably bad I think I'm going to be haunted by them for the rest of my music-listening days. Damn you, Nickelback. You self-righteous slugs of musical mediocrity. I give up.

As an ending note, I think we should all let the boys speak for themselves. The following is a very real quote from Mike Kroeger in response to bloggers who criticized Nickelback for the extreme similarity between two of their hits (advance warning: make sure there is plenty of padding on the floor beneath your chair, as a high risk of falling off it has been identified):

No comment.

It seems like noone listens to Nickelback at all, they just hear their hit singles pounded into their head because of the radio and all the music television stations and they use that as ammo to say that all nickelback songs sound the same. my favorite Nickelback song has to be Animals. I love that song so much that whenever I'm playing a racing game I'll turn it on so it gets me pumped enough to make it through and win.

Their older **** that came out in 2001-2002 isn't that bad, but man their new **** is absolutely terrible. Breathe isn't that bad, neither is Never Again or Leader of Men.


Im talking about Nickelback.

So everyone has to and fro'd for you to turn around and say what the majority thought in the first place? Had you ever heard them in the first place or do you just like the wind up? Talk about an excersise in futility....

No, see the question was not surrounding whether Nickelback are any good. I mean, it's commonly held that neither Nickelback nor Tool are particularly decent bands, and I tend to go along with that, but I thought at least it would be possible to argue that Nickelback had qualities that set them a cut above Tool. It turns out that I was wrong. Nickelback are, it seems, undeniably more dire than Tool.

Not particulary good? You compared them to Beethoven.----
I'll start off by giving my nod to Nickelback, who I feel have excelled in the past (if not recent times) in pushing the envelope and watching it bend. Like modern rock overlords, they've created the equivalent of the great symphonies of old - How You Remind Me is in all senses the 21st century's answer to Ludwig van Beethoven's 9th. Drawing from a wide range of influences including (but not by any means limited to) early 70s The Who, AC/DC, The Buzz****s, Sonic Youth, The Stooges and Television, they've taken a hodgepodge of ideas and merged them perfectly into a single distinct cohesive sound that has rocked bedrooms across the world.--

I was merely stating that it's pretty much the modern day expression of said composition. Not that it's good in its own right.

I was wrong anyway - I'd say it's more akin to Beethoven's 7th.

No, you were proclaiming that Nickleback are modern day equivalents to Beethoven and comparison to todays music is futile. Have you ever heard Beethovens 7th?

Eh, I'm big on Beethoven. He's been one of my favourite composers for well over a decade.

Stop changing the subject. You started a thread concerning Tool and Nickleback, obviously knowing nothing about each. Why?

OH, I actually thought this poll was seriuos..... i thought this person had some serius brain damage, or perhaps is just musically ignorant.....there is absolutly not a single thing in the whole entire world i can say good about nickelback.....
nickelback is to good as
Chad Crouger is to good looking:)

Stop changing the subject? I had been DISCUSSING it. You asked me an off-topic question. I answered it.

Now, on to your current question. While it is true that I know little about Nickelback's post-millenium work other than what the rest of y'all know - that is to say, the hits themselves - I had listened to them prior to their becoming successful.

As for Tool, they used to be my favourite band and I once thought of them as the best thing pretty much ever. I have all of their albums and have probably listened to each at least three dozen times including Opiate. I've been to live gigs. It sounds awfully pathetic and a sad thing to say, but since it kinda fits into the discussion context, please "don't dispute my Tool credentials". I now conclude, however, a few years on, that they're really not much better than Nickelback. What the two bands share in common is that they are both the biggest and most commercially important within their given subgenres. I made this clear in the opening thread.

The Tool of today are largely the embodiment of the classical victim of commercial demand. Reasons for this have been stated elsewhere. They're also outrageously overrated from a creative perspective, Maynard being given God-like status for his often mediocre lyrics (and before he obviously must have taken some sort of vocal training programme in the last 6 years, a ghastly voice too), and the remainder for their having come up maximally with about 18 good songs in coming on 20 years.

As for Nickelback I have been descriptive above all. I state with an intent to point out what their fans think of them. But I'll admit that Nickelback, on the basis of some of the very worst of their lyrics, are a cut below Maynard and buddies really.

On the genre question, Nickelback are often classified as post-grunge, though it's not really accurate and the only reason it holds is because of Kroeger's vocal style. They have more to do with late 70s/early 80s pop metal. Hell, when it comes to their mid-tempo balladry they really have more in common with the likes of Aerosmith than any typical band deriving from grunge (that's not to say they weren't influenced at all, though). If Kroeger had a high pitched voice, nobody would assocaite them with post-grunge.

Imo to compare tool to nickleback in any context is laughable...

even in the context of degrees of lameness?