Separate names with a comma.
Wanting to join the rest of our members? Feel free to sign up today.
Discussion in 'Non-Metal' started by Satanstoenail, Mar 19, 2007.
Out of these three giants of yawn.
Nickleback closely followed by Foo Fighters
They all suck so bad i can't decide :zombie:
Live used to be decent (like a decade or more ago), but the other two are atrocious. Nickleback is the most egregiously banal rock band I know of.
I think they all have some good songs but still they have alot of mediocre songs. I'd say the foo fighters
NICKELBACK FOR THE LOVE OF GOD.
someone tear out his vocal cords.
Definately Nickelback, though Foo Fighters are pretty bad too.
Just... the most boring shit ever. Every song is the same and follows the same formula: Ambient random build up, soft vocals, then kicks into "harder" vocals and speeds up, a chorus gets played over and over for lack of anything better, and then there's a break down and silence.... meant to be profound... and then it kickstarts back into the chorus.
In agreement about Live, by the way.
Yeah I thought it'd be a close one. I went for Nickelback, closely followed by Live. At least Foo Fighters had some decent songs on their debut. But goddamn they've become as bland and stale as Bruce Springsteen since then.
Kings of bland
Live used to have some good songs, and the Foo Fighters debut was decent I agree
I FUCKING SECOND THAT, pooorrrlllyyy written songs, not to mention Bono thinks his music is holy, making him the biggest noob ever.
I got the follow from Maddox's site:
This quote epitomizes U2's pious, holier-than-thou attitude:
"I don't know why, but we always had this belief that there was something sacred about our music, that it was almost holy."
-Bono, pompous asshole and lead singer of U2
they can't even fucking count either, uno, dos, tres, catorce(14)!!??
I was never crazy about U2. I don't really have a problem with some of their older stuff (and I really enjoyed To/Die/For's cover of New Year's Day). I agree that they have been bland for quite a long time though.
Nickelback for the win
Have to disagree here... U2 have made some great tracks.
My brother did put the new Live album on in the car, and I forced him to turn it off after a few tracks. Apparently, they've become like a Christian type band, with absolutely terrible songs. Really, Nickleback or Foo Fighters are much better than present day Live.
Personally, I think the Foo Fighters are alright. Dave Grohl seems like a spot-on guy, too. Feel free to flame.
Nickelback are dreadful.
Hehe, I never stop in here, but crap I can name a ton, 3 Doors Down anybody? One good song, then shit. Then how 'bout all those bands with the same sound e.g. Killers, Franz Ferdinand, Modest Mouse, The Bravery, holy crap talk about tapping from the same vein...
Modest Mouse doesn't belong anywhere near that list dude. Modest Mouse is NOTHING like The Killers, Franz Ferdinand, The Bravery, etc. The Moon & Antarctica is one of the best rock albums of the 00s. It's a masterpiece. Listen to Life Like Weeds. That song is sublime. Their newer stuff isn't as good, but their older stuff is almost all awesome.
As for the poll, Nickelback is clearly the worst. Live had some really good songs and Foo Fighters are just bland. Nickelback is actively horrid. I'd have put the poll as Nickelback, Hinder, and 3 Doors Down. God so horrible...