name one band that marries catchy melodies with muscular and powerful music better than nirvana

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

i know nirvana's not en vogue these days, but i've been searching for 12 years and damn if i can find one that can do it better than them.

― kyle mclachlan, Sunday, 24 July 2005 00:40 (twenty years ago)

Mercenary!

― dr. phil (josh langhoff), Sunday, 24 July 2005 00:41 (twenty years ago)

And You Will Know Us By the Trail of Dead!

― dr. phil (josh langhoff), Sunday, 24 July 2005 00:41 (twenty years ago)

sebadoh

― built 4 need, Sunday, 24 July 2005 00:42 (twenty years ago)

bikini kill

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Sunday, 24 July 2005 00:45 (twenty years ago)

Sugar
Killing Joke - Nighttime

― tipustiger, Sunday, 24 July 2005 00:46 (twenty years ago)

oops that was 1 band and 1 album. my bad

― tipustiger, Sunday, 24 July 2005 00:47 (twenty years ago)

The Rolling Stones.

― Rickey Wright (Rrrickey), Sunday, 24 July 2005 00:55 (twenty years ago)

CHEAP TRICK

― m coleman (lovebug starski), Sunday, 24 July 2005 00:58 (twenty years ago)

KISS

― Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Sunday, 24 July 2005 01:02 (twenty years ago)

The Comsat Angels

― Kitten, the body needs it, the body cries out for Ian Riese-Moraine! (Eastern Ma, Sunday, 24 July 2005 01:02 (twenty years ago)

Melt Banana

― fandango (fandango), Sunday, 24 July 2005 01:06 (twenty years ago)

the b-sharps

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Sunday, 24 July 2005 01:12 (twenty years ago)

monster magnet

― built 4 real, Sunday, 24 July 2005 01:13 (twenty years ago)

The Nightblooms!

― Douglas (Douglas), Sunday, 24 July 2005 01:14 (twenty years ago)

I like Nirvana a lot, but when I saw that thread title, all I could think was "Man, is HE asking for it..."

― Forksclovetofu (Forksclovetofu), Sunday, 24 July 2005 01:19 (twenty years ago)

I like Nirvana a lot too, I probably meant "damn near as good" rather than "better (implied) omg Nirvana so lame"

― fandango (fandango), Sunday, 24 July 2005 01:22 (twenty years ago)

New York Dolls

― Frank Kogan (Frank Kogan), Sunday, 24 July 2005 03:13 (twenty years ago)

The Clash

― Frank Kogan (Frank Kogan), Sunday, 24 July 2005 03:13 (twenty years ago)

The Sex Pistols

― Frank Kogan (Frank Kogan), Sunday, 24 July 2005 03:14 (twenty years ago)

Slade

― Frank Kogan (Frank Kogan), Sunday, 24 July 2005 03:14 (twenty years ago)

The Yardbirds

― Frank Kogan (Frank Kogan), Sunday, 24 July 2005 03:15 (twenty years ago)

The Who

― Frank Kogan (Frank Kogan), Sunday, 24 July 2005 03:15 (twenty years ago)

The Animals

(Ok, I'll stop so that I don't get a reputation as a troll; by the way, I like Nirvana, at least some of the time.)

― Frank Kogan (Frank Kogan), Sunday, 24 July 2005 03:16 (twenty years ago)

the early beatles with such songs as "please please me"

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Sunday, 24 July 2005 03:17 (twenty years ago)

Lil Jon & the East Side Boyz

(My promises are worth nothing, obviously.)

― Frank Kogan (Frank Kogan), Sunday, 24 July 2005 03:21 (twenty years ago)

Black Sabbath

― music existed before 1990 (mike h.), Sunday, 24 July 2005 03:25 (twenty years ago)

The Saints

― Seuss, Sunday, 24 July 2005 03:50 (twenty years ago)

guns n roses

― xhuxk, Sunday, 24 July 2005 03:52 (twenty years ago)

the early beatles with such songs as "please please me"

how is this "muscular" at all?

― kyle mclachlan, Sunday, 24 July 2005 04:02 (twenty years ago)

the ramones

― fact checking cuz (fcc), Sunday, 24 July 2005 04:04 (twenty years ago)

the buzzcocks

― fact checking cuz (fcc), Sunday, 24 July 2005 04:04 (twenty years ago)

the vibrators. the adverts. the gizmos. the sweet. brownsville station. nazareth. montgomery gentry. actually, i could name hundreds if you really wanted me too. but nivrana are okay, i guess.

― xhuxk, Sunday, 24 July 2005 04:15 (twenty years ago)

er, white stripes.

― AaronK (AaronK), Sunday, 24 July 2005 04:36 (twenty years ago)

Sham 69.

― moley, Sunday, 24 July 2005 04:38 (twenty years ago)

pixies.

some might argue metallica. some. might.

― AaronK (AaronK), Sunday, 24 July 2005 04:42 (twenty years ago)

Deerhoof, Chavez, Come

― Palpatean Mists, Sunday, 24 July 2005 04:42 (twenty years ago)

The Kinks

― Mike Dixn (Mike Dixon), Sunday, 24 July 2005 04:47 (twenty years ago)

stiff little fingers!

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Sunday, 24 July 2005 04:49 (twenty years ago)

The Dwarves

― Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Sunday, 24 July 2005 04:51 (twenty years ago)

Red Bennies

― Mark with a c, Sunday, 24 July 2005 04:52 (twenty years ago)

magazine

― Dan Selzer (Dan Selzer), Sunday, 24 July 2005 05:35 (twenty years ago)

Alkaline Trio

― Sweat Loaf (Sweat Loaf), Sunday, 24 July 2005 06:36 (twenty years ago)

System Of A Down

― Lee F# (fsharp), Sunday, 24 July 2005 07:45 (twenty years ago)

Creed

― bennink, Sunday, 24 July 2005 07:55 (twenty years ago)

Sorry, I thought I just heard you say "Creed".

― Sweat Loaf (Sweat Loaf), Sunday, 24 July 2005 09:40 (twenty years ago)

I like Nirvana plenty, but BLACK SABBATH!!!!1

― Pashmina (Pashmina), Sunday, 24 July 2005 10:06 (twenty years ago)

i know nirvana's not en vogue these days...

funny, they don't look like the same band:

http://image.allmusic.com/00/amg/pic200/drP400/P465/P46513GKNOK.jpg

http://phish.marko.net/Nirvana/heroin1.jpg

― latebloomer: lazy r people (latebloomer), Sunday, 24 July 2005 10:36 (twenty years ago)

That said, En Vogue certainly married catchy melodies with powerful music better than Nirvana. Come on, which one has more muscle, "Never Gonna Get It" or some shaggy longhair whining about his miserable life?

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Sunday, 24 July 2005 10:42 (twenty years ago)

touché, tuomas!

my old answer: faith no more (angel dust in particular)

my new answer: nine black alps (their debut album really surprised me)

― CharlieNo4 (Charlie), Sunday, 24 July 2005 11:02 (twenty years ago)

Skipping 44 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

i've heard most of the bands listed above, but despite being more "credible" bands, i can't honestly say that they give me that same thrill of listening to nirvana. the difference is that all these bands named above don't have the same vaguely menacing assault, the overt anger and vulnerability, and the pleasingly haphazard sloppiness that nirvana had. most of all, most of these named simply don't have the personality. go back and listen to "I Hate Myself and Want to Die" or "Radio Friendly Unit Shifter," for example. they are raw, powerful song that rock like hell. they don't really demonstrate technical proficiency, but you instinctively want to crank it to the highest volume level because it just rocks, really fucking hard. and nirvana's music almost always sounds spare and minimalist, devoid of unnecessary adornment (arguments can be made about "nevermind", and i would agree that it would benefit from an albini-style makeover, but still it is minimalist in the grand scheme of music productions). true, it's not 'fun' music, but i'm not sure if any band since nirvana has consistently captured my full attention when i listen to them.

i like dinosaur jr., and j mascis is certainly a better guitar player than kurt cobain was, but i just can't see anyone obsessing over Dino Jr. they lack personality big time, and while they have an identifiable sound, you can listen to whole albums without ever remembering a single song, or being affected by anything you hear. i think the same is not really true of nirvana. kurt cobain was a much more talented songwriter, in my opinion, and nirvana really has a way of bringing you into the music.

the kinks?? sure, they're the more canonical of the two, but their hard rock era was so horribly stilted and bad it's painful to listen to. also ray davies' frail, high-pitched voice is not well suited to "muscular" music. their best albums are low-key and contemplative, like "muswell hilbillies" and "vgps." i don't think it's fair to say they beat nirvana at what the original poster was talking about.

glam era david bowie is another example of a guy who sort of rocks, but it's not really in the same way. he doesn't sound threatening, it's not really psychologically scary, it doesn't grab you with its power at all. it's catchy, but it's not demanding or, pardon the idiotic phrase, "in your face."

i don't even know where to start with countering the GBV argument.

maybe no one here thinks nirvana was the second coming (not that I do), or even a great band-- but i have come to believe that nirvana gets dismissed by 'music types' (of which i am myself included) simply because they got famous and therefore are subject to much negative association with their name. if they were a small band that few in the mainstream had heard of, i'd have an incredibly hard time believing that music junkies wouldn't be all over their albums the way half the people here are all over "amazing" albums like MIA. i'm not saying nirvana's for everyone, or that everyone should appreciate them, but the 'credibility factor' in being an indie-music connoisseur often seems to casts a hideous shadow over base-level evaluations of music, and i think nirvana's one of the notable bands over the past couple decades that is being obscured by this. just my two cents.

i encourage those of you who don't know what I'm talking about to check out the two nirvana songs I mentioned above, just to get a taste.

― -vest, Monday, 25 July 2005 16:17 (twenty years ago)

This is one of the last places where people would dismiss a band because they "got famous". Have you considered that the emotional connotations you're describing, this "vaguely menacing assault", is in your head and not the music? And I don't mean that dismissively, I just think that more than most aspects of a band, the emotional charge it carries is conditioned by the listener's experience, values, beliefs, relationship to the circumstances in which they heard the music etc. Cos I get that vague menace much more from other bands listed here than I do from Nirvana. One example: to describe Aladdin Sane as unthreatening or not psychologically scary or "in your face" strikes me as the reaction of somebody who hasn't listened to it much.

― Anti-Pope Consortium (noodle vague), Monday, 25 July 2005 16:35 (twenty years ago)

Well, the Pixies and Redd Kross I think were great answers in terms of being nearly the same as Nirvana but better... No one mentioned the Replacements .. maybe not powerfule enough for ya...

― geyser muffler and a quarter (Dave225), Monday, 25 July 2005 16:37 (twenty years ago)

Boy, the Replacements are the most innocuous band I've ever heard.

― moi, Monday, 25 July 2005 16:42 (twenty years ago)

You must listen to David Soul sometime!

― geyser muffler and a quarter (Dave225), Monday, 25 July 2005 16:46 (twenty years ago)

def. Cheap Trick. first band I thought of when I saw the thread title. Pixies. White Stripes too. The Bob Seger System!

― Shakey Mo Collier, Monday, 25 July 2005 16:50 (twenty years ago)

I'm not even that big a fan of the band, there are isolated songs by the Pixies that are more melodic, more catchy and more satisfyingly muscular than the entirety of Nirvana's slavishly overrated ouevre.

― Alex in NYC (vassifer), Monday, 25 July 2005 16:51 (twenty years ago)

And if they haven't already been cited, I'd also suggest THE STOOGES, goddammit.

― Alex in NYC (vassifer), Monday, 25 July 2005 16:54 (twenty years ago)

eh I dunno, the Stooges aren't very "catchy" or chock-full of pop hooks - their immediate progeny (Ramones, NY Dolls, etc.) seem like better candidates to me...

personally I have a hard time listening to Nirvana nowadays. Not that it's bad, just that there's too many literal associations with the music, its still too "of its time" for me. Like every other song sounds like a suicide note.

― Shakey Mo Collier, Monday, 25 July 2005 16:58 (twenty years ago)

I think the Stooges are pretty damn catchy. C'mon "Loose"? "Search & Destroy"? But, no, not especially poppy I guess.

― Alex in NYC (vassifer), Monday, 25 July 2005 17:01 (twenty years ago)

Blood Brothers

― o. nate (onate), Monday, 25 July 2005 17:01 (twenty years ago)

Teh Runaways!

― rogermexico (rogermexico), Monday, 25 July 2005 17:02 (twenty years ago)

The Flaming Lips circa Clouds Taste Metallic.

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Monday, 25 July 2005 17:08 (twenty years ago)

RULE 2345 OF ILX: DO NOT ARGUE WITH ALEX IN NYC

― Tumililingan (ex machina), Monday, 25 July 2005 18:11 (twenty years ago)

Cardiacs circa Heaven Born and Ever Bright might be of interest.

Catchy melodies, powerful music, "muscular" guitars, angsty lyrics etc, although might be a bit too polished for what you're looking for. But I do find it quite scary in parts. In my parts.

Here, check out Goodbye Grace.

― Philip Alderman (Phil A), Monday, 25 July 2005 18:36 (twenty years ago)

Thin Lizzy

― Chris O., Monday, 25 July 2005 18:40 (twenty years ago)

"Well I could call out when the going gets tough.
The things that we've learnt are no longer enough.
No language, just sound, that's all we need know,
To synchronise love to the beat of the show.

And we could DA-A-ANCE..."

― David A. (Davant), Monday, 25 July 2005 19:37 (twenty years ago)

Cardiacs circa Heaven Born and Ever Bright might be of interest.

I'd hardly call the Cardiac's "catchy". I mean, they're fucking brilliant, but they're dizzying.

― Alex in NYC (vassifer), Monday, 25 July 2005 19:39 (twenty years ago)

"Day is Gone" maybe, though.

― Alex in NYC (vassifer), Monday, 25 July 2005 19:39 (twenty years ago)

wow. I haven't listened to "Goodbye Grace" in years. When the band kicks in at 00:25, it's such a thing of explosive goregeousity.

― Alex in NYC (vassifer), Monday, 25 July 2005 19:42 (twenty years ago)

I'd hardly call the Cardiac's "catchy". I mean, they're fucking brilliant, but they're dizzying.

Oh, I find them very catchy! Maybe it's just me...

― Philip Alderman (Phil A), Monday, 25 July 2005 19:56 (twenty years ago)

http://www.poplife.info/Bilder/221065.jpg
yes!

― Jon Benet Taxidermy (piratestyle), Monday, 25 July 2005 20:12 (twenty years ago)

Big Black
Tool

Nirvana would rank #3 for me.

― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 25 July 2005 20:28 (twenty years ago)

Andrew WK

lock thread.

― deej.., Monday, 25 July 2005 20:29 (twenty years ago)

the cardiacs song is decent, but it seems like a relative of the operatic end of Queen, which hardly makes it muscular!

― mike k, Monday, 25 July 2005 20:56 (twenty years ago)

the stooges weren't very "melodic" in the sense most of us probably have in our heads. but i was never a humongous fan of nirvana's melodies either.

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Monday, 25 July 2005 21:00 (twenty years ago)

PRML SCRM

― Mr. Snrub (Mr. Snrub), Monday, 25 July 2005 21:45 (twenty years ago)

(circa XTRMNTR)

― Mr. Snrub (Mr. Snrub), Monday, 25 July 2005 21:45 (twenty years ago)

I think the Stooges are pretty damn catchy.

Alex! Bingo! Funny, this always intrigued me but I could never articulate it before: a bunch of Stooges' insane workouts are actually built upon dainty little minor-key hooks that sound like they were originally written on acoustic guitar.

― joseph cotten (joseph cotten), Monday, 25 July 2005 21:56 (twenty years ago)

Die Keuzen - s/t
Violent Ramp s/t 7"

― Tumililingan (ex machina), Monday, 25 July 2005 22:05 (twenty years ago)

PRML SCRM

bobby gillespie doesn't have any muscles.

― keith m (keithmcl), Monday, 25 July 2005 22:13 (twenty years ago)

i know nirvana's not en vogue these days, but i've been searching for 12 years and damn if i can find one that can do it better than them.

-- kyle mclachlan (twinpeaksgu...), July 24th, 2005.

Every word of this post is wrong including "and" and "the"

― Hurting (Hurting), Monday, 25 July 2005 23:10 (twenty years ago)

six years pass...

I think the answer to this is Andrew WK.

― Poliopolice, Tuesday, 3 April 2012 01:15 (thirteen years ago)

Skrillex

― #yolo contendere (Whiney G. Weingarten), Tuesday, 3 April 2012 01:15 (thirteen years ago)

grime

― #yolo contendere (Whiney G. Weingarten), Tuesday, 3 April 2012 01:15 (thirteen years ago)

QOTSA

― Blomqvist, Jesper (admrl), Tuesday, 3 April 2012 01:21 (thirteen years ago)

Nirvana is En Vogue these days fyi

― some dude, Tuesday, 3 April 2012 02:05 (thirteen years ago)

"Catchy melodies married to muscular and powerful music" describes a lot of rock'n'roll music, but I do think Nirvana found their own unique blend of this, and it may well be that nobody does quite that better ... just like nobody does my fingerprints as well as I do...

What always struck me about Nirvana was how childlike their melodies were -romper room ditties, really ... and yet how Kurt croaked out these ditties with all the joy of Francis Bacon's Pope Innocent X being slowly eviscerated at the bottom of a well. That duality is to me what marks them apart from many other bands that "marry catchy melodies to muscular/ powerful music". I'm thinking now not just in terms of recorded music, but performance. Maybe if Cobain had been loose-hipped and loose-lipped like Steven Tyler, he would have gotten off on the music (I mean hell, a tune like "Aneurysm" pretty much does it for me). As it was, all the jouissance seems to have been left to Novoselic and his bare feet.

I'm thinking specifically of the first band I was really really into, which was (mid-seventies) Aerosmith.

So it's

― collardio gelatinous, Tuesday, 3 April 2012 04:05 (thirteen years ago)

Green:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNrWZBzP6_I

― Dancing with Mr. T (Tarfumes The Escape Goat), Tuesday, 3 April 2012 04:07 (thirteen years ago)

― collardio gelatinous, Tuesday, 3 April 2012 04:08 (thirteen years ago)

double-post. sorry!

― collardio gelatinous, Tuesday, 3 April 2012 04:08 (thirteen years ago)

nicely deployed fine art reference

― preternatural concepts concerning variances in sound and texture (contenderizer), Tuesday, 3 April 2012 04:36 (thirteen years ago)

sounded catty, but i mean it. it's a good point, too. like cheap trick, beloved of cobain and much discussed today, "marry catchy melodies with muscular and powerful music", but the joy of their melodies is matched by the lyrics, singing and instrumental performance, so they lack the duality (i'd call it tension) you're describing.

― preternatural concepts concerning variances in sound and texture (contenderizer), Tuesday, 3 April 2012 04:38 (thirteen years ago)

thought there was two-dorks/two-rockgods duality/tension to cheap trick?

― Philip Nunez, Tuesday, 3 April 2012 05:15 (thirteen years ago)

a different kind of tension

― preternatural concepts concerning variances in sound and texture (contenderizer), Tuesday, 3 April 2012 05:16 (thirteen years ago)

really think of nirvana more like in-n-out burger. cheap trick like mcdonald's. andrew wk is chuck-e-cheese. buzzcocks is chipotle

― Philip Nunez, Tuesday, 3 April 2012 05:20 (thirteen years ago)

Frank and Chuck having the time of their life upthread.

― clemenza, Tuesday, 3 April 2012 11:38 (thirteen years ago)

ts: http://assets.flavorwire.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/nirvana.jpg Vs http://wallpapers99.com/images/wallpaper/thumb/En%20Vogue_37782.jpg

― Mark G, Tuesday, 3 April 2012 11:43 (thirteen years ago)

I never eat at Chipotle so that seems to be a fitting description

― Poliopolice, Tuesday, 3 April 2012 12:44 (thirteen years ago)

Ha, thanks contenderizer. You're forgiven for having voiced doubts re "Oki Dog".

― collardio gelatinous, Wednesday, 4 April 2012 01:29 (thirteen years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.