Metal Showdown (Round 6) - Alice In Chains vs Nirvana
 

http://www.musicbanter.com/rock-meta...s-n-roses.html

Last round, Guns N' Roses, who I initially thought to be a more formidable opponent than some of the past entries, got bitch-slapped by AiC 15-4, who now have three victories under their belt so far.

Now, I think it's time to bring out a direct competitor from the same genre and time period that they were popular, and while Pearl Jam, Soundgarden, and Stone Temple Pilots would all qualify, the biggest is undoubtedly Nirvana, who is the only one of those four that could take AiC down at this point.


Easily the most popular and influential of the Grunge era who is still widely known today, even among Top 40 purists. They had a brief but extremely dominant reign in the early 90's that completely changed mainstream rock.

Like AiC, they lost their vocalist after only three studio albums, so it's impossible to know where they'd be today if they had kept somewhat clean and powered on for 20+ more years. But their influence can still be felt, and they have some damn good material for such a small catalog.

Let's see if they can take down the three victory strong AiC.


AiC return for their fourth round against their toughest opponent. Whereas GNR got easily blown away by the Grunge vote, pitting another giant against them within the same genre should split the vote more evenly and competitively. Only time will tell.


I'm still going with AiC on this one. I like Nirvana and respect their talent, but there's something about AiC that completely resonates with me on a deep level that I've never felt with Nirvana. So Layne and the gang get my vote again.

Smells like Alice in Chains for me.

Alice, hands down for me. I never really dug much Nirvana did other than a song or two whereas there are a ton of songs in the AiC's catalog I love.

AiC are more varied in sound, arguably better musicians all around, and generally awesome and a great blend of metal and mainstream alternative.

But I'm a Nirvana fanboy through and through and they capture the spirit of this style of music a lot better imo, reckless.

Nirvana cause I still listen to their unplugged album all the time.

For me it's pretty close. I always liked Alice in Chains but I loved Nirvana growing up. My honest opinion however is that Pearl Jam is better then both. Nirvana is a close second when it comes to grunge music though.

Dude, purely based on the username, if you stay around here long, you are going to be ripped into hard by this forum.

Just warning you.

AiC for two reasons. A: They're better. B: Nirvana isn't metal.

Nirvana came about from trying to play stuff like Celtic Frost but nor being good enough. You're not wrong I just think that's cool. Metal impacted them heavily.

Well, grunge in general was a shout against the glam metal bands. In fact, when glam was done, grunge started getting popular.

Whether or not that's the case, I just like to think it was all about playing dissonant noise rock and destroying the idea of talent

And yet "Alice N Chains" was originally the name of Layne Stayley's glam metal band before he joined the band that would become Alice in Chains.

I thought that was just pre-AiC

Gotta go with Nirvana, AiC is good, but they don't have an In Utero.

I can't help but imagine how the next Nirvana would sound. They really had something magical and intended to go further

For sure, I always thought Kurt's death was a shame he was about to do something completely different and probably wonderful.

One of the saddest behind Ian Curtis. That was next level sad

Given that AIC was the band that got me into rock/metal in general, I am kind of biased towards them. Still, I find AIC's music to be more relatable, and I connect with their music on a deep level. They've gotten me through many a tough time, and Layne's words make me feel like I'm not alone (there's a Staind song about that ;)).

Nirvana is also an incredible band though. Kurt is one of my favorite lyricists of all time. That man was creative. But in my mind, they can't compete with AIC.

I like both but AiC just won

Agreed.

If you haven't already, watch the Montage of Heck.

Kurt Cobain had so much more to offer in music, probably didn't even realise that he was a genius.

Buzz Osbourne called 90% of that documentary total bull****. Just stupid stuff Kurt came up with on a whim. Not a bad documentary of course, but still misleading.

That's a weird way to phrase it. It was actually a very rapid turnover and felt a lot more like grunge booted glam metal off the charts at the time.

I suppose so. Still many of the best glam albums came out before 91.

Except for Hey Stoopid. Great album.

Expected a somewhat close poll, but we need to get out the Alice In Chains vote.

I'm going to compare using Dirt because it's AIC's seminal album, and In Utero because it's my favorite Nirvana album, and therefore the only real competitor against AIC.

Dirt vs In Utero by tracklisting:

1) "Them Bones" < "Serve the Servants"
2) "Dam That River" > "Scentless Apprentice"
3) "Rain When I Die" < "Heart-Shaped Box." "RWID" is better live, though.
4) "Down In A Hole" < "Rape Me." Holy **** this is close. "DIAH" is better-written musically, but "Rape Me" isn't as much of a downer vibe-wise/rocking-wise, ironically.
5) "Sickman" < "Frances Farmer Will Have Her Revenge On Seattle"
6) "Rooster" > "Dumb"
7) "Junkhead" = "Very Ape." It's a tie.
8) "Dirt" > "Milk It"
9) "God Smack" < "Pennyroyal Tea"
10) "Iron Man" < "Radio Friendly Unit Shifter." Nirvana's filler song beats AIC's ****ty filler song.
11) "Hate to Feel" > "Tourette's
12) "Angry Chair" < "All Apologies"

At this point, it's 4 in favor of AIC, 7 for Nirvana, and 1 no decision. But Dirt has a 13th song that In Utero does not, and it beats everything in Nirvana's catalogue, handily.

#13 - "Would?"

• I like both bands, I respect both bands, but the musicianship in AIC is superior.
• Jerry wrote better songs than Cobain, music-wise (not popularly).
• Nirvana's work hasn't aged very well when you really break things down.
• While Layne was not a great lyricist, Kurdt was overrated as a lyricist. Kurdt even said himself that some of his lyrics were strung-together nonsense.
• Given that, "Serve the Servants" is Kurdt's finest display, lyrically.
• While both experienced similar troubles, there's something more human and genuine about Staley's work, and that will never change for me.

Take "Would?" and add some Jar of Flies, and it's game over for Nirvana.

*The above only counts the Layne years for AIC.

Kurdt? Also, Nirvana still wins. :)

Yes, I interlaced that as a bit of trivia. See infold from Incesticide. Kurdt is the blonde one.

Dubious.

Oh, okay, now I get the Kobain reference.

If this kick in the nads is to insinuate that "Dumb" is the better song, then I have some bad news. "Dumb," while I do think it's album-worthy, is very close to being a B-side due to it's monotone nature (the cello saves it). "Rooster," on the other hand, is an A-list tune. Don't know why people hate on it more than a lot of AIC's other songs.

Again, I like both songs, but "Rooster" is the king of this coop.

Dirt = 99. In Utero = 85. The highest rating Nirvana has for me is 90, and their bootlegs aren't very good. AiC has some awesome concerts.

Don't get me wrong. For making albums, Nirvana's good. In fact, I'd say their discography is better than AiC's because Dirt's the only official studio album I legit like. But their lead singles and Dirt are way better than anything Nirvana has to offer. I've heard all of Nirvana's official releases and around 10 bootlegs, and I like AiC's lyrics and vocals more. So, AiC.

I think Nirvana should have done more. I like Foo Fighters as much as the next guy, but I also think Cobain should never have died. Not a role model to me at all, but neither of the two vocalists really deserved death IMO.

"Dumb" is just a great, laidback, catchy, little pop tune. Its simplicity makes it chill.

"Rooster" is dull ****. The verses are a snoozefest, the chorus is barely any better, and that thing that Layne Staley does sometimes, where he does his best to impersonate Axl Rose, is in full effect and it's annoying as **** cause I want to punch Axl Rose in the face every time he opens his mouth for any reason.

I never got a laid-back impression from "Dumb," even when I was a young lad. It's more downbeat than anything, and I like it better when it's called "All Apologies." And when was the last time you heard "Dumb" on the radio? Not that I think radio airplay is the only barometer with which to measure a band, but this is a battle of the bands.

The bad thing about "Rooster" is the long, boring lead-up before the chorus. Not one of my AIC favs, but like I said, I put it as A-list over "Dumb."

I still consider this 6-CD bootleg set to be thee set to own. It's better than their official boxed-set release and includes what would later be the live recording at Reading Festival.:


---

So there's all of that. Now who do I have to bribe around here -- who hasn't yet voted -- to give AIC the nod?

The ones I've heard: Stiff Drinks, Out of the Blue, Nervermind Sessions, Bleach Out Break Out, Banned for Life, and the first four releases of the Outcesticide series were all OK. Banned for Life was the best. Outcesticide II sucked.

"Would" is a solid contender for weakest AiC track

I guess all your posts can't be winners.

Nirvana released LPs that I can sit through and enjoy. Alice in Chains didn't.

Nirvana's the clear winner for me.

alright

It is somewhat questionable that AIC is "metal," as they're a grungey/metal hybrid. AIC can be put in either camp. But I refer to point B above. And I am a grunge guy more than a metal guy, too.

Also, I am not a purist or one to get caught up on tight genre labels, per say, but there isn't one Nirvana song that I would consider to be metal, so I can't see them besting the more metally AIC. Based on the poll results, I will chuck it up to the notion that my eyes are deceiving me.

~ Layne fanboy