Kurt Cobain or Layne Staley?
 

Yeah

Layne easy.

Layne Stanley. But to be honest I don't really care about either.

Layne.

It is a shame that he never overcame his demons, as he was a pretty good vocalist, and AiC were a bad ass band. And AiC just ain't the same without him.

Cobain....Wait, we're voting on who did the world a bigger favor, right?

Layne.

Also sucks for Layne he had to go and die on Kurt Cobain Death Day.

Zen is gonna explode when he reads this.

kurt. kurt for fucks sake.

i will expand upon this later and proceed to call you all fucking idiots, but for now i have to run.

Definately Cobain. Not an AIC fan

Kurt Cobain in his biggest release EVER. This release is so HUGE that it has shocked fans and media WORLDWIDE. Get ready because Kurt Cobain presents to you his greatest release EVER...

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/62/18...e3eb99.jpg?v=0

THE TRIGGER!

I don't like either one.

For an encore, you can explain why Diddy is better than Tupac.

You asshole.

...That's clearly a 9mm.

Cobain

tupac is gash too but that's a whole different topic.

actually, probably shouldn't say too since i do actually like AIC. but still.

Diddy invented the remix.

actually i don't mind a few tupac things either come to mention it. BUT ANYWAY

Staley by miles IMO

why

I see it two ways...one, he'll always be in Kurts shadow.

And two, Layne blatantly wanted to be Kurt Cobain. From the way he started to dress and act after Kurt made the scene huge, to the mannerisms and even the look, justw atch some of the videos from AIC, and you'll see it...Layne was deeply in awe of the man. And understandably so. The cool thing is that layne did have talent...

But to be compared with Cobain? He doesnt trump Cobain in any category you can think of. Few can.

You kidding? Dozens can. Songwriting, record sales, showmanship, lasting effect...I know it's your "gimmick" and all, but man, it's fucking lame to even pretend...

dozens :D

songwriting is debatable, different strokes etc. plus smarter songwriting doesn't mean better.

record sales... for a career which effectively spanned 3-4 years, he didn't do too badly.

showmanship, it wasn't spandex with the mic held high but there were plenty of less conventional things that happened during his brief career. plus the more conventional instrument smashing etc.

lasting effect is another rubbish one. nirvana have had plenty of lasting effect. just the bands who are influenced by them are all utterly shit and missed the point entirely. the popular ones at least.

anyway, i'm probably going to write a whole essay on this in a couple of days because as good as AIC were, nirvana were a whole other beast, and it was pretty much kurt cobains band. AIC was staley/cantrell.

Layne Staley

Layne Staley >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kurt Cobain

Also drug overdoses are way cooler than suicide

:lol:

Man, were you always so full of shit? RUBBISH RUBBISH RUBBISH!

well thats my argument debunked.

Anyway:

Songwriting: Since the argument of whether or not others can hold a candle to Cobain is subjective in the first place, it's fairly moronic to play the "subjective" card with in.

record sales: I mean, this one isn't even subjective. The same year Nevermind was released, five or six other bands had the same level of success alone. Then you look a year earlier or a year later, and you can tally up enough bands that it's not even remotely funny. I mean, for a guy who had a career spanning four years, he didn't do that bad. The problem with that is that he didn't really outshine a lot of his contemporaries, and if you compare his sales while live to other "brief candle" artists, it ain't much better. That's not to say they sold poorly, Mein Hump, but that they didn't really eclipse others to the point at which "few can" trump Cobain in the category.

Showmanship: Yeah, not even close.

Lasting impact: I'm not saying they had zero impact, again, I'm saying that many others had more, In other words, still addressing that whole "few can compare" thing. I's fun to try and change the argument, and pretend that I'm trying to say Cobain never sold a record, had no impact whatsoever, and had no showmanship whatsoever, but that's rather disingenuous, init?

Showmanship in what sense? Define it:

Well, here ya go...

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Q4hCKVZL8Ys&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Q4hCKVZL8Ys&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

to show up and mock headbangers ball:


<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/jYN-dhS_xYI&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/jYN-dhS_xYI&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

Nirvana in concert talking shit about G'n'R:

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/WMjJBJW2_Go&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/WMjJBJW2_Go&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

Their showmanship, and there is tons of it all over readily available for viewing..is simply different..it's to trash their instruments...to mock their corwds..mock other bands..poke fun at the business while having fun, to be destructive and chaotic, and to be raw and primal, man.

Whatever you want to say, you can never deny their charisma and Kurt as a frontman was always charismatic. That itself is a definition of showmansip.

5 or 6 other bands having the same success in the same year is no big deal. especially for the type of music nirvana played. I can totally understand why a bland cookie cutter alternative like pearl jam would outsell nirvana at the time. wang chung outsold the ramones too, no biggy, people are idiots. and if we are comparing sales as a basis of how good a band is, then cobain beats staley anyway.

i don't really get why you're looking for traditional showmanship in a grunge band by the way. being a showman in the traditional way would be to miss the point, the point being the music i suppose.

i'd be curious to hear which bands you regard of having more lasting effect from 1990 onward too. no shit the beatles/sabbath/abba/zeppelin etc have all had a huge lasting effect but i don't think any of their contemporaries come close in that regard either.

and if you want to list subjective reasons why AIC are better than nirvana songwriting-wise i'd be glad to play along.

Everyone must think showmanship means dressing up in tight pants and flashy clothes, doing the famed windmill on your guitar...

I guess that's showmanship.

and pyros out of time with the beat :D fucking hell i hate those.

Cobain is said to have had a snuff video of Budd Dwyer's suicide that he used to watch periodically.

COOL!

blood coming out of his nose like a waterfall in that one. madness.

Yeah, I wish I had never watched the video. Like, it was probably more horrifying than 2 Girls 1 Cup.

So...Early Nickelback and Linkin Park outsold a comparable time period comprised of Nirvana's entire active career. We're not even talking legends here.

True, but shit always sold well. Take a look at how bubblegum they are. That's why pop sells like Timberlake and Spears. It always has.

It was damn fucking time legit, credible, talented bands and artists made a huge dent in the charts, and that's exactly what occured. Nirvana doing so and taking out the King of Pop was fresh, because it was rare when there was a time when real music, that wasnt utter shit was actually making people en masse listen up and realize there's better stuff out there.

Like Nirvana! :lol:

Sorry, but that kinda was lying there. Couldn't resist.

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/d_UQWjx3HRo&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/d_UQWjx3HRo&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

3 power chords, no showmanship, not a single and not a song that will be remembered cause of that. still rocks harder than anything else i've heard and makes me want to bounce off the walls with the energy it puts out. that's why nirvana will always win for me.

lol yeah, that's the kind of song you play on some local tv teacup program such as that.:lol:

They're fucking awesome. And that song does kick ass.:y:

that's british national tv, you uncultured swine.

Territorial Pissings is being played in front of a crowd such as that, totally unexpectedly because Lithium was the tune that was supposed to be played.

I may be uncultured, but tell me that isnt awesome.

LOL.

I missed your drama Queening. That kind of rabid hyperbole is a lost art.

how is that drama queening? nirvana aren't the only band to make me want to bounce off walls but i don't think any other band does it that consistantly.

i've missed your misguided stubbornness too, sweetheart. :kiss:

ps. the subjective songwriting discussion is still open if you care too. i'd be interested to hear your reasons why AIC are better. all i've heard from you is why nirvana are worse, and those weren't really reasons either and i know you know that too.

Brother KK wont necessarily like AIC, but he'll prefer anything over Nirvana. That fucker :rant:



:naughty:

Not anything, but quite a bit...;)

Actually I have a feeling KK enjoys Nirvana. He just enjoys riling up their fans that much more. Larger fanbases are always a prime target of such attacks.

kurt all the way

I try to make a habit of not saying things I don't believe.

While I might exaggerate sometimes my disinterest in Nirvana, most of what I've said is completely true.

In your own mind of course. It is factual to yourself. You have to make that distinction.

Jerry Cantrell.

I just said "I believe to be true." And in some cases, it's fact, thank you, very much. However, trying to point out a distinction that is not only moot but has already been established is fucking stupid. It's another pointless piece of shit someone throws out when they don't have any real sort of counterpoint, Zenny.

the only things you have said in this thread that were at all relevent was that other bands have outsold nirvana and kurt cobain wasn't a showman.

:y: