Nirvana Vs Foo Fighters

You can like them both but who's better?

By Richard Luck, 4 November 2011

To some the answer is obvious - of course Nirvana were a better band than Foo Fighters; they were one of the greatest acts of all time, for heaven's sake. But then there are other people, huge numbers of them in fact who'd say, 'Get stuffed! Nirvana only made three proper albums - you can't call that a career. Foo Fighters, though, they've recorded seven LPs *and* picked up half-a-dozen Grammys. Dave Grohl's got it going on!' They still say stuff like that, right, the young people?

Rather than everyone getting their ripped jeans and long greasy hair in a twist, why not leave it to Blokely to decide once and for all whether Messrs Cobain, Grohl and Novoselic are superior to Messrs Grohl, Mendel, Shiflett, Hawkins, Smear and the guy who only plays with them when they're on tour. Remember, all - the result is binding, so shake hands, sit down and await the jury's verdict.

First things first, then, which act's more significant? Again, this might seem like a no-brainer to a lot of music fans. After all, it's not many bands that can be said to have both launched and fully embodied a movement. Which isn't to suggest that the grunge scene didn't produce other truly awesome acts (Stone Temple Pilots, Pearl Jam, Soundgarden to name just three), but it's hard to deny that the guys making the loudest noise were the ones fronted by the skinny bloke with a mop of blond hair and a girlfriend who looked like a hooker.

But while Nirvana might have upset the applecart, Foo Fighters are significant for markedly different reasons. After Kurt Cobain took his life, no one would have blamed Dave Grohl if he'd decided to have nothing more to do with music. Instead of doing the easy, understandable thing, the drummer-turned-gifted-multi-instrumentalist chose to stick with music, recording the eponymous Foo Fighters album entirely on his tod. Of course, Grohl would go on to find a band proper. However, that gesture - continuing when you have every reason to quit - speaks volumes for both the man and the group.

As for other yardsticks, well, if longevity's an issue then the Fighters of Foo win hands down. Likewise, Grohl's outfit has been far more consistent both on record and on stage. Not that Nirvana's unpredictability wasn't one of the things that made seeing them live so thrilling. Still, you can't accuse the Foos of having ever dropped the ball - they've yet to release a bad album (or at least they've yet to release anything as uneven as Bleach) and their concerts are tight and enjoyable in ways that are only possible when a band's lived with itself a long while.

Since we tend to be happier when our heroes share a similar world view to our own, Foo Fighters also deserve credit for championing various left-wing causes and for cameoing on The West Wing. That said, the group has also supported Alive & Well, a pressure group that controversially questions the link between HiV and AIDS. Still, you have to applaud them for trying to use their fame for positive purposes, which is more than could be said for Nirvana who'd probably have only supported an issue if it meant heroin was more readily available and at a lower price.

There is, however, an ultimate test for every recording artists. Remember that scene in Walk The Line, where the then John Cash (Joaquin Phoenix) auditions for producer Sam Phillips (Dallas Roberts) only to be told, "If you was hit by a truck and you was lying out there in that gutter dying, and you had time to sing *one* song. Huh? One song that people would remember before you're dirt. One song that would let God know how you felt about your time here on Earth. One song that would sum you up. You tellin' me that's the song you'd sing? That same Jimmy Davis tune we hear on the radio all day, about your peace within, and how it's real, and how you're gonna shout it?" Well, if Foo Fighters had to choose such a song, they've no end of cracking tunes to choose from. This Is A Call, Monkey Wrench, Everlong, The One, Times Like These, Best Of You - the songbook's long and it's full of superb numbers.

For Nirvana, the choice would be somewhat easier. The song in question is Smells Like Teen Spirit. And the fact they can call on such a song - a number that was *the* song of the 1990s (at least until Live Forever came along three years later), the song that, as Rolling Stone put it, "reminded America that her children were unhappy" - should explain why we've concluded that Nirvana are a better band than Foo Fighters.

So, there you have it then - Nirvana win by a shortish head. But let's have a round of applause for the plucky losers, Foo Fighters. Oh, and if you don't agree, then write your own bloody article!