Nirvana because all of both bands would still be alive.

Comparing these two wasn't part of the question, and is also rediculous.

Well I saw Fugazi live once - and I love their punk spirit and ethical approach and that they seem like great guys I'd like to know.. however, I also saw a Nirvana tribute band once - which musically were 100 times better.
It's much 'cooler' to say Fugazi, but in reality you just know it has to be Nirvana.
Just listen to In Utero next to Repeater and see how many times you don't nod your head to Fugazi in comparison.
I remember seeing that Kurt took the piss out of Eddie Vedder because he name-checked Fugazi, and that's where they are good - at being a name-check band.
A bit like Big Black actually. Yeah you like them eh? how come you never listen to em then...

Weird. I never listen to Nirvana nowadays. I last tried playing In Utero a year back, and I tired of it very quickly.

I was listening to Fugazi yesterday and thought how I like them more and more with every listen. Ten years ago, I would've said Nirvana.

wellsyuk wrote:A bit like Big Black actually. Yeah you like them eh? how come you never listen to em then...

I listened to Atomizer on Saturday and it sounded great. I had a lot of fun, and it was not at all nostalgic. Horses for courses etc etc.

i don't own any nirvana and i never get excited when i hear them on a pub/club stereo. fugazi, on the other hand..i own, i saw and they're all alive which helps. you can't save a dead guy.

FUGAZI

fantasmatical thorr wrote:i don't own any nirvana and i never get excited when i hear them on a pub/club stereo. fugazi, on the other hand..i own, i saw and they're all alive which helps. you can't save a dead guy.

FUGAZI

True, yep horses for courses

JR wrote:

Ahaha! This is great!

Fugazi by a country mile without any possible shadow of any doubt what so ever. Even if you just go on album count alone, Nirvana have one goodun, and a couple of fair to middling, but if my copies went missing I wouldn't replace them, Fugazi have many great albums, perhaps a couple not so great but the rest are smashing. Even the not so great ones have a few good tracks on them. The argument is a beast, never mind this 'anything after red med is bad' stuff.

I'll take the bullet.

ah, how can you play such a game with two completely different bands like these?

Fugazi vs Jesus Lizard

or Nirvana vs Mudhoney

now that would be interesting.

couldn't one argue that one had stamp on the other, making the choice moot?

wellsyuk wrote:It's much 'cooler' to say Fugazi, but in reality you just know it has to be Nirvana.
Just listen to In Utero next to Repeater and see how many times you don't nod your head to Fugazi in comparison.
I remember seeing that Kurt took the piss out of Eddie Vedder because he name-checked Fugazi, and that's where they are good - at being a name-check band.
A bit like Big Black actually. Yeah you like them eh? how come you never listen to em then...

I totally agree.Fugazi is the beloved-band of the music press.
I've heard lots of bands claiming that they were fan of Fugazi , therefore getting a "genuine" label , clever yet agressive alternative post-punk etc...( although some of them sounds like the Smiths ).
Maybe Robbie Williams did it too.