Happy Birthday Kurt, wherever you are. Hopefully you're at peace.

2/20/1967-4/5/1994.

QUOTE]

They didn't freak people out and run them off like Nirvana or the sex pistols did with a more pure form of expressionism, but they wanted enough style of their own and uniqueness of their own so that they could offer something different. They expressed themselves within the pop constraints.[/QUOTE]

just because nirvana wrote a song called "rape me" and had morbid lyrics doesn't mean they freaked anyone out. i mean, i'm sure that's not what you're saying, but i don't think nirvana really freaked people out....their first album got tons of press and people loved them.

the pixies were much more abrasive in the sense of people catching on to them. remember, the pixies didn't start to get recognition until after they started in the states, and then travelled/toured in the UK, and then came back to the states. and they wrote morbid and warped lyrics as well. i mean, kurt cobain's lyrics, while very good, aren't any more crazy than frank black's, and since kurt fully admitted to copying from the pixies, one can only assume that his lyrics were copied as well.

not to mention the fact that the pixies were far more talented players. don't get me wrong, kurt cobain was an incredible songwriter. but he was an average guitarist. i can't think of any skillful riffs he had. he wrote nice melodies on guitar, but that was about it.

Where was I when all of this was going on?

I was 12 when "Smells Like Teen Spirit" came out. I can still remember where I was and what I was doing the first time I heard it. I thought it sounded like nothing I had ever heard before, and I loved it. I was in no way offended by it.
A few months later I went to my first concert; U2 at the ASU activity center, on the first leg of the Zoo TV tour. The opening band was the Pixies. The Pixies literally frightened me. I thought Frank Black was possessed or something. Those who claim that Kurt Cobain was the more dynamic frontman did not see/hear what I witnessed that night.
Nevertheless, I owned 'Nevermind' and loved it. When Kurt died I was pretty bummed. They were probably my favorite band at that time.
After a few months of hearing all of my high school classmates talk about how Kurt was God, etc., I started listening to Nirvana less and less frequently. I had also given some of their lyrics a little more scrutiny, and wasn't as impressed as I had been at the age of 12.
When I was 17, I decided to buy a record by the band that scared me as a child; 'Doolittle'. It's been ten years, and not a week has gone by that I haven't listened to that record.
Every few years I dust off my Nirvana albums, and give 'em a spin. While I can appreciate them, and that fact that Nirvana was a band that helped set me on the path to better music, I can't help but think they sound a little, well...1992. 'Doolittle' sounds like it could come out tomorrow and still blow minds.
So, what I'm saying is, Nirvana was an important band for a lot of people, myself included. However, they don't even begin to compare to the brilliance that was/is the Pixies.

While I have recently discovered Pixies and like a bunch of their songs, Nirvana is king in my books. I would say they were more influential to the mainstream music scene, but for real indie rockers and those out of the mainstream, I could see it go either way. I love Nirvana and as I have written in previous posts, they have had a huge impact on broadening my musical tastes. I'm biased, yes, but I also think Cobain was a better frontman than Black is. I was and still am fascinated by Cobain's life, death and legacy and he adds so much to my enjoyment of Nirvana and how I view the band's influence.

To me it seem that Nirvana is more like a perfect radio hard rock band, with hints of alternative music enough to not be too watery. Maybe I'll change my mind, that will make more music for me to enjoy.

Pixies is more like the most anti radio band ever, with two songs about incest in their 1987 album 'Come on pilgrim', and like wiki states: <<< References to mental instability, violent Biblical imagery, physical injury, and incest feature in many of the band's songs and imagery. >>>
I think that Frank Black has a real musical talent (in a contrapunctal way) and a unique emotional rawness. A potent material. Especially with that hint of very dark humour in the lyrics, and some Shostakovichian grotesque in the music.

audio extract from the 1987 album "come on pilgrim":
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f9/HolidaySong.ogg
cheapest clip ever for the track "velouria":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5YODVLjN5o

<<< Cover songs and commentary from artists and groups such as David Bowie (who later covered the song Cactus from Surfer Rosa in his album, Heathen), Radiohead, U2, Nirvana, critics such as Graham Linehan[7] and many others attest to the appreciation of the band by musicians and critics alike.[73] Bob Mould (from Hüsker Dü, who the Pixies cited as an influence) said he "was a huge Pixies fan" and Thom Yorke (of Radiohead), after being informed of the Pixies reunion plans to play before them at the Coachella Festival, exclaimed:

No! That's just not right! The Pixies opening for us is like the Beatles opening for us. I won't allow it. There's no way we can follow the Pixies! >>>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixies_%28band%29

For they have the most emosonically involved frontman ever, the rarest and most darkly beautiful harmonies and song structures, I prefer the Pixies. On the other hand to me Nirvana sounds like the dimes a dozen overproduced radio hard rock band, with certainly a little more talent and darkness and self loathing than most other mainstream bands... but by the time it came there's nothing in their music that hadn't already been done in a more musically satisfying way.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Cluster,

Ok people Nirvana was influnced by The Pixies. So why compare the student to the teacher. I love the Pixies to death, but Nirvana is amazing ok Kurt Cobain sell out BLAH BLAH BLAH, they made great music so ok. I love both bands its a student teacher thing. So love both bands, and its also very rude to say who would pick Nirvana over The Pixies. They're both great.

quote:

I always felt — and this comes from a big fan — Spoon took a few pages outta the Beatles' playbook. The Pixies influence never occurred to me.

I believe Eric was most likely referring to Spoon's Telephono. The first 7 or 8 tracks are really abrasive and aggressive, ala Pixies.

quote:

Originally posted by Dark Lord of the Sith:

quote:

Originally posted by ericg75:
I think which group had more influence is a fair debate, but it's hard to say Nirvana was more original, when self-admittedly they ripped off the Pixies. To me, that right there makes the case that they weren't all that original.

Also, when exactly did you hear those Pixies records? Because if you hear them just recently, then I don't think you could appreciate what they brought to the table. I didn't hear the Pixies records when they came out, I heard them much, much later... however, I went back in music and traveled forward and when I arrived at them, I was amazed.

Of course this is opinion, but I think when you heard their records and HOW you heard their records makes a huge difference.
I don't know. I listen to the Pixies and I hear a great band, with some serious talent, but nothing that original. I listen to Nirvana and I hear a band that sounds like no one else except for those who have tried to copy them.

But that's just me.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: RadiantSilvergun,

Feel pretty meh about both bands. Pixies did some interesting stuff on "Surfer Rosa" and I have a soft spot of sorts for "In Utero" so I guess it is a tie. Nirvana was definitely more influential though, sure the Pixies are kind of like the Velvet Underground of 1980s/90s art punk and inspired a lot of modern underground music, but Nirvana are like The Beatles of alternative (which is an all encompassing non-genre) and their influence is felt almost everywhere in popular music today (and there are underground imitators as well).

Can I vote for Talking Heads though? They were way more innovative than either band and they wore ridiculous clothing.

Which band is more influential has been debated a fair bit from a quick glance at the thread, so I won't go into that, I'll just say I suppose both bands will go down as similarly very important and influential, as things are fairly intertwined.

As to which band I think is better: I think Black is a much better songwriter than Cobain (much), I like Kim Deal's bass playing much better than the Nirvana guys, and the Joey Santiago guitar totally stomps anything in camp Nirvana. To sum up, Pixies were one of the best bands ever, Nirvana were slightly above average. They had some good songs though, spose I can't deny that.

talking heads>pixies>nirvana. i like all 3 a lot though. for me, it comes down to the fact that doolittle beats nevermind, and surfer rosa beats in utero.

I'm going to go against the grain and pick Nirvana, because they were much more important to me in my formidable years, and Kurt's raw emotion on In Utero is one of the most cathartic music experiences i've ever had. Seriously, name a bad song (or even a semi-dud... okay "Tourettes" notwithstanding - though i enjoy that tune quite a bit) and i will call you a lying sack of doorknobs.

In retrospect, it's kind of intereting to think of which band is more influential. People will say that (bar none) Nirvana is more influential because they were a gateway for so many into the underground, but a large part of the indie-rock scene is directly influenced by the Pixies.

Lastly, can anyone name a band that sounds like Nirvana without sounding like a cheap imitation? Give me one example, and i will switch to the Pixies.

P.S. If it's who has the better songs, I'm going with the Pixies for sure, but Nirvana made better albums in my opinion, and that's what really matters to me.

about the spoon influence, listen to dismember off telephono, it is almost exactly like debaser by pixies.

quote:

Originally posted by just indie:
about the spoon influence, listen to dismember off telephono, it is almost exactly like debaser by pixies.

Oui oui. The lady vocals in Dismember scream Kim Deal. Great song nonetheless.

I will go for pixies on all three counts. For starters Kurt Cobain was open about how influential the pixies were on him, and secongly Nirvana in my opinion never came close to the quality of Doolittle.

I'm also going to go against the grain and go for Nirvana. It may have to do with "Smells Like Teen Spirit" blowing me away when I was 17 (at just the right time - wheras I got into the Pixies after they broke up), but if you listen to Nevermind and In Utero, almost every song is brilliant. The Pixies had some great songs but they weren't as consistent.
Although the Pixies influenced Nirvana, I would say that Nirvana were more influential primarily because they were 10 times more huge. They changed the course of mainstream music.
The question, 'Which band had the better frontman?' leads me to why I primarily like Nirvana more than the Pixies. The main difference between Nirvana and The Pixies is that Kurt Cobain's singing had a very personal, emotionally authentic expression to it. When you hear Kurt sing (shout, or scream) you can hear it come straight from his heart (or should that be from 'the pit of his burning, nauseous, stomach'). Frank Black sure does know how to scream and holler, and it has a certain intensity to it but I don't get the sense that he is singing particularly about his own intensity - it's less personal. Nothing wrong with that, but it just means that I feel a closer emotional connection to the music of Nirvana.

They're nothing alike. It's like comparing your parents. But I'll bite anyway and point out that Nirvana was a bigger legend-maker, for what it's worth, while Pixies are probably the more lastingly fruitful band to actually do the work of listening to. And not just because their discography is bigger. That shouldn't threaten anybody.

neither!!