I think Nirvana is definitely the band that defines the "grunge" era. I am a huge fan of both bands and soundgarden and ALice in chains and many other bands from that era. I dont think they are the best band from that era in a technically musical sense. But they are the band that always gets credit for taking that scene to an international level in like every documentary about the 90s. Even in the PJ20 documentary they speak about that.And they did reach a broader audience than any of the other grunge bands. Pearl Jam Ten was an awesome album but after that its really been select songs from different albums ( to me). And as some one said they did tend to have a more classic rock/grungish sound in the beginning but went down a more Neil young/classic rock route in the end. Which is fine for them.

pearl jam is way better nirvana sucks

Nirvana sucks
Pearl Jam sucks
Soundgarden is amazing on the other hand, so is Alice In Chains.

Both PJ and Nirvana suck so bad compared to Soundgarden and Alice in Chains

pearl jam is the opposite of alice in chains: when they rocked it was great, but the ballads just dont have anything to them. Nirvana consistently hit the pinnacle more often than pearl jam. Now, how could you mention nirvana influences and leave out the pixies? Kurt admitted he tried to copy "gouge away" when he write SLTS. And the kid shot himself in the jeremy video spattering the blood on the classmates. Vernon reid was right as well: soundgarden is the real champ of the grunge scene. Just ask pearl jam's drummer who was in soundgarden.

You people are idiots....Pearl Jam wins hands down..just listen to the talent the music takes to make...a trained chimp could play nirvana songs. Pearl Jam are real musicians and are very good at what they do...oh and they are still rocking out to this day.

@Tom from Long Island. Im sorry that you have met the fairly uncommon stooge that thinks Pearl Jam is flawless. I have a handful of friends, PJ zealots all, mid 30's, that are fair critiques of PJ. Riot was mostly a joke. Binaural has 3 great songs and 10 crappy ones. We disagree entirely on the self-titled album. I just wanted to help you suffer through those clowns if you are luckily lucky enough meet a reasonable Pearl Jam fan.

Pearl Jam all the way.

As a big PJ fan and lover of Eddies voice, I loathe his interviews and fancy for talking politics at concerts, nonetheless, their shows are other worldly.

Nirvana benefits from not having existed long enough to write a handful boring albums.

Not only does Pearl Jam cover songs, they often improve them vastly.

Fine enough but how soon we forget "Sadgasm", fronted by the true giant of grunge Homer Simpson.

@rushmore you've got to watch the original uncut version,of the video,it does indeed have the graphic image at the end. google it,it's there. i doubt you will find it on youtube. john, is not wrong.....

I love that whole bit about Pearl Jam having this strong belief system. "That band is so different!" All I have to say is Eddie Vedder married a model. That's not a rock 'n' roll cliche.

I love Pearl Jam but they sounded like classic rock then and they sound like classic rock now. And the further along they got in their careers the more they sounded like Neil Young. They didn't define a new sound like Nirvana did.

And who is that Phil guy? I actually thought the whole thing was a joke, that Phil was being contrary just to get noticed. There is no debate, their is no argument. Longevity doesn't count. There a lot of sh-t bands out there that have lasted. What the hell does that even mean? That Show the King of Queens lasted a long time, doesn't mean it was f-ing genius.

The more I listen to this station the more these "arguments" make no sense. NPR seems to have a hard time getting good guests to comment on these bands.

John, You said that the Jeremy video showed dead kids at their desks. Uh, no. How could you get that wrong? And you run a music show?

This is like pitting Pink Floyd against Led Zeppelin. A futile effort. Both are extraordinary. Decades later, and they still put 99.9% of modern rock to shame. The talent from both bands was just immense.

It's tough to compare these albums. It might be a little safer to compare "best album in a band's repertoir." Because Ten is not Pearl Jam's best record ever.

Ten is incredible, but Vs is even better. Yield is a close second or third.

Nevermind was obviously the benchmark for Nirvana as a band. Smells Like Teen Spirit might be only the fifth best-crafted song on the record. Lithium, In Bloom, Polly, Come as You Are, Drain You seem to me superior to the album opener.

If there are "duds" on Nevermind or Ten, the lows on Ten are lower than those on Nevermind, I must say.

All that being said, don't ever make the mistake of pretending like you have to choose between the two. They are two very different ensembles.

how silly is it, that on NPR you can't say pissings,as in "territorial pissings". i mean, it is 2011 isn't it?

Pearl Jam no doubt. Their music lyrically really represented the zeitgeist during my teenage years because it spoke about things that I had gone through. That aside as a guitar player I loved the very intricate guitarwork and excellent interplay between two guitars.Like the two guitar attack in "Evenflow" and "Once" to me was outstanding and to have "Black" and "Oceans " on the same album was great because you had different types of songs. Granted, in the grand scheme of things Nevermind was a very important album, but to me as far as my life is concernedTen resonated in a way that Nevermind just did not.

PJ hands-down. I love both bands and have all albums by both bands, listened to since they were released. (Well, Nirvana I started with Nevermind but went back and bought Bleach)
I cant say what Nirvana would be if they kept rocking -- if they would be what Pearl Jam is today. Maybe, maybe not.
I know that Nirvana is romanticized by most because of Kurt killing himself...but if you look at what and how Pearl Jam has done what they have done over this time period I think that they have not faded away - they keep on rocking.
Body of work is no comparison, Nirvana made a major mark and might have been more indicative of the time period but PJ has a better mark & legacy in my opinion.
Nirvana was great. PJ still is!

Nirvana wins out. Their UnPlugged was a phenom. PJ's was good, but I think Eddie actually invented Planking in that show.

I loved PJ when Ten dropped. Saw them 3x's back then. Great shows - than after Versus they stagnated and when I saw them again a few years ago I couldn't tell the difference between songs. Nothing stood out, but the Ten and Versus tracks.

Also real PJ fans are like Deadheads now...they think anything the band does is the best ever.

But when you talk to the Kids, they know Nirvana over PJ hands down. Because Nirvana's music is truly trans-generational. PJ is just a good rock band that is trapped in a sound and niche.

Another listener mentioned this and I will repeat. To leave out Alice in Chains and Soundgarden is to miss the total "Grunge" sound and how it rocked so many of us. I was 30 at the time, and it was like - finally ROCK has some balls again. It didnt have to be appear perfect, it just was.

typo* 1994!

First off, I wanna say I was born at the tail end of 1980, and I've been having this debate with friends and acquaintances since the spring of 1992!

Secondly, it's a fun debate, but one that falls apart when you realize there was no such thing as "grunge." The term was a media invention. Nirvana was a post-punk band with pop aspirations. Pearl Jam was a classicist hard rock band with punk roots and vaguely prog inclinations. Take any of the leading "grunge" bands of 1991-93: In retrospect, their sonic alliances to each other are pretty superficial.

Third, it's still a fun debate after all, so what the hell. Nirvana's merits lie in the fact that Kurt Cobain was such a singular songwriter. That clip of "Lithium" you played earlier really drove it home for me -- Who else would write a chord progression like that? Who else would write a melody like that? Yeah, I went back in my teens and 20s and sifted through a ton of pre-Nirvana punk and hardcore, so I know where Nirvana gets that sound, but that sound then had to pass though Cobain's weird, unique imagination. And that's why even Nirvana's filler is kind of fascinating. Pearl Jam, on the other hand, while better musicians, have made a career out of making albums that habitually signify a whole bunch of cool, interesting influences that never really gel into something that's distinctly *them* (with the possible exception of the Vs. album). I do have much respect for PJ, but the thought of those guys all DJing somewhere some night kind of appeals to me more than the thought of going to see them play a show.

Great segment. Thanks for reading my comment. Somebody get Phil Freeman an icecream cone or something -- he's cranky old guy for somebody who's not yet 40! ("Nevermind has one good song and the rest is filler" -- What??!!???!!)

I know Nirvana and Kurt almost certainly take the popular vote in this argument, but to put it so briefly, I am firmly behind the band that has the guy who bore a big K (the letter, made out of electrical tape) on his chest on Saturday Night Live in 1997, after he learned the other one had died. More heart. More sensitivity and power there. By far and from the beginning. Happy 20, Pearl Jam!

What's up with all of Phil Freeman's drive-by shots at Foo Fighters?

I love both but am more partial to pearl jam. Nirvana's music is easy to play while Pearl Jam is not so much... I also think there is more complexity to Eddie's voice. Kurt just screams in key and has some cool simple songs with nice hooks. Pj wins by a large margin in every category except perhaps influence wise. Pearl Jam is a genre within itself and is so hard to duplicate. Again, I like Kurt and all but his style is easier to borrow from. Eddie and the guys are like magic when they perform.

I remember hearing Pearl Jam for the first time on the radio and waiting desperately to hear the DJ say what band it was. Eddie Vedder's voice was intoxicating. I immediately ran out to Tower Records and bought the CD. When I came home and told my mom what had happened she said, "that's exactly how I felt the first time I heard Elvis."

"the former MRS. KURT COBAIN"??

really John??

doesn't the video for "jeremy" end with jeremy shooting himself and covering his classmates in his blood? not him shooting his classmates.

If we're going to talk about influence, let's not forget that Pearl Jam and Eddie Vedder's vocal stylings spawned such soundalikes as Creed, Nickelback, and numerous other mediocre 90s and 00s alt-rock bands - not a good thing. Nirvana gave way to suburban acceptance of punk, and the resulting bands (including Green Day) were certainly better.

Nirvana gets my vote for 2 reasons.....the success of Dave Grohl and his many projects after Kurt's untimely death makes me believe that the band would have the longevity and be able to change their sound with the times, and the fact that my high school students listen to Nirvana with the same enthusiasm that i did at the time.

A side note, an article was published yesterday putting Mudhoney vs. Pearl Jam up against each other. In the article, Eddie Vedder says “And when it comes to grunge or even just Seattle, I think there was one band that made the definitive music of the time. It wasn’t us or Nirvana but Mudhoney. Nirvana delivered it to the world but Mudhoney were the band of that time and sound.”

This is a fantastic conversation. John, you have the coolest job in the world.

Both albums and bands are excellent. But I keep thinking of the Ian Tilton photograph of Kurt Cobain broken down backstage. I think that says it all.

I completely agree with the assertion that Pearl Jam was the frat boys' favored band. It's only that their watered down boring arena rock formula anthems have infinitely more mass market appeal. Nirvana is like the older sibling, who goes out and gets in trouble for doing bad stuff, gets grounded and forced to remove the ear-piercings. Pearl Jam is like the younger sibling who gets away with everything, can't get enough attention through the 13 ear-piercings, and can't ever succeed at rebellion, because the trail had already been blazed.

The first time I heard "Smells Like Teen Spirit," it stopped me in my tracks. I remember thinking I had never heard anything like it before, and all I said to my brother that day was, "Have you heard *that song*?" He knew exactly what I was talking about. It was definitely a game-changer.

Then I heard "Ten" for the first time and I thought, "Wow, this is a perfect record." I have listened to that album beginning to end countless times. The way Pearl Jam crafts their songs, the way they have reinvented themselves over 20 years, the way they modernized classic rock, the way they do everything on their own terms - Pearl Jam wins this battle.

These discussions are sometimes interesting, but in the end it comes to opinion. If I don't like a song you won't be able to convince me that I should.

What I've always found impressive about Nirvana is that they were genuinely huge and could still appeal to music snobs.

Pearl Jam is psuedo-intellectual man-tampon frat rock.

Nirvana is the foundation for most modern pop punk.

Pearl Jam was and is a solid band, they were very very good but not great musicians - to say the band can survive Vedder is silly. "Alive" and "Black" still raises the hair on my arm but "Nevermind" ushered in a new musical paradigm and changed the cultural zeitgeist .

I was never much of a Pearl Jam fan, but Eddie Vedder did two beautiful, beautiful songs with Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan for the "Dead Man Walking" soundtrack ("The Face of Love" and "The Long Road.") Well worth checking out.

The hardest part of this is the fact that this is the 20 year anniversary of the release of these albums. Ouch.
For the record, Nirvana wins hands down.

If the question is which band better represents the "Alternative Era" then it has to be Nirvana, who opened up their fan's minds to go back and listen to influences like Husker Du. Pearl Jam are an increadibly talented arena rock band, but have no connection to what used to be called college rock and later became alternative and then indie.

Phils comments and arguements are pretty trite. Furthermore, regarding "the kurt show," they really seemed to lock into their true potential and power after dropping chad and picking up Dave grohl

The more I hear this discussion, the more I want to listen to Soundgarden. (Vernon Reid came on just as I was writing this!!!)

Also I'm glad I didn't/don't live in Seattle. "Grunge" always struck me as a very retro 60s/70s sound with more distortion. "Turning it up to eleven" isn't revolutionary, it's Spinal Tap.

As Steve Martin / Laurie Anderson said:

"Talking about music is like dancing about architecture."

TomC
Detroit, Michigan, USA

This is ridiculous that you are even entertaining this comparison. Pearl Jam was filler and inspired a million insipid frat party bands imitating Vedder's vocal style. Nirvana brought a punk rawness that had never existed in mainstream. Pearl Jam was classic rock re-marketed as if it was something new. I disagree with your panelist in that the songs on Nevermind were NOT filler, in fact, they were mostly stronger than SLTS. Your panelist himself says he was too old to enjoy Nirvana, so he is automatically disqualifying himself. If anything, you should be comparing Nirvana to Beatles, Rolling Stones, Led Zeppelin, and other bands that had cultural significance and lasting critical acclaim.

Pearl Jam is to alternative rock as Green Day is to punk rock; a watered down, more mass-market version of an edgier genre. That's not a good thing or a bad thing, it's just how it is.

That said, as much as I like Nirvana, I find the notion that they 'changed" music to be over-stated; plenty of bands on Subpop in the late 80's/early 90's sounded like Nirvana.

if it were not for Cobain's personal life and wife's antics, they may not have ever broken through to the mainstream.

Drain You is one of the greatest pop songs of all time. Underappreciated, perhaps because of the coda in the middle that made it anathema to radio play, which I always liked to think was very intentional on Kurt's part.

I was in olympia in the late 80's- it's nirvana hands down- not even a contest. And you certainly didn't have to be a pre-pubescent baby punk to appreciate nirvana- they weren't bubble gum. What a ridiculous assertion.

But John -

Beatles/Stones is about mind/gut. Beatles hit you in the mind - clever and intricate, Stones hit you in the gut - raw emotion. In that comparison, Nirvana are the Stones and Pearl Jam are the Beatles.

I grew up in Seattle, and graduated from high school in 1991. The sudden cultural relevance thrust upon the city of heavy industry and middling sports teams was a huge and unexpected change. KCMU, SubPop, and the local bar bands that they promoted seemed like a good local music scene, but certainly anything but commercially viable within the main stream. In my opinion, Nirvana's almost naively hard rock was the more unique sound at the time precisely because they lacked the more commercial polish that Pearl Jam had right at the start. Westport Washington vs, San Diego, CA.

Nirvana was more like punk rock Pearl Jam was more rock. In the end who cares. If you think it ROCKS then it ROCKS. I'm all about Pearl Jam.

In March of 1993 my professor of my music business class asked us to project what would become of Pearl Jam and Nirvana in 20 years. I accurate said Kurt will have been long dead and Pearl Jam would still be selling our arenas. This was not choosing which I liked better just what my projections of their futures.

I will also say that had Nirvana continued - and Kurt lived, I don't know if we'd put them on the pedestal they enjoy now.

I never understood the comparison. Eddie Vedder was/ is a pretentious wanna-be who attempted among other things to re-invent himself by claiming 2 b a loner in HS when in fact he was a popular BMOC.
Eddie's stupid non-acceptance nonperformance at the Grammys only demonstrated it further!

Kurt Cobain was simply inspired.

"Nevermind", as influential as it was, is only a half-great album. It runs out of ideas about half way through. There are only so many times one can listen to the same chords and same rhythms. Nevermind serves more as a hint at what was to come.

WHAT! No one cares about the other guys in Pearl Jam.

Dave. Grohl.

??

Is this guy joking?

I agree Ten is kind of a bummer. It was funny, at the time I was trying to convince a friend's band to play "Alive" and they refused b/c nobody would know who the heck they were. ;) Nirvana blows Pearl Jam away in the sense they were original and powerful and tapped into a void we didn't know existed until grunge and riot girrls hit. Kurt was a type of genius that comes around rarely, 20 years later we forget how young we all were back then. Punk is not about being a great musician, but Kurt had great talent for coming up with really catchy riffs that make you want to jam! Teen Spirit is a good song, but how about Breed or every other song on that album, they are all so powerful. I think Nirvana changed everything, Pearl Jam did not.

WFMU archive search:

Pearl Jam - 218 hits

Nirvana - 500 hits

No one could replace Eddie Vedder in Pearl Jam. No one. Part of the fun of listening to Pearl Jam was trying to figure out what the hell Eddie Vedder was saying! He was so Grunge that he didn't even enunciate the words on the album!

The Kurt Cobain show? Are you kidding me? Hearing Dave Gohl's drums was a big moment for a lot of people. Think about how Grohl's drums are always upfront in the mix on Nevermind?

WHAT! No one cares about the other guys in Pearl Jam.

Dave. Grohl.

??

Is this guy joking?

I loved both back in the day when I owned them on cassette--when I converted to CDs, I only bought "Nevermind." "Ten" still reminds me of a time and place I can never go back to.
...and I still love Soundgarden

PJ had a nice career,

Nirvana rewrote the book.

The influence of Nirvana is unquestionably greater and still resonates every time Dave Grohl beats a drum.

Still have to give an unyielding amount of respect to Pearl Jam. They continue to impress.

I was in college in Seattle in the early nineties and spent much of my time seeing bands from Nirvana to Mudhoney to Soundgarden and the Melvins. I was at the last Nirvana show at the OK Hotel before Nevermind came out, and I remember when they played Smells like Teen Spirit the first time to close out the show. Everyone was blown away. Really. Looking around like, "What did we just hear?". I harassed Kurt Cobain after the show to give me a free t-shirt because I was broke and as I told him, "He was going to be HUGE!" I had no idea how huge.

So far as I know, Pearl Jam only played one show in Seattle before the record came out. They weren't part of the scene (yeah, mother love bone, I suppose). They certainly weren't "grunge". Overproduced, and really more of a neo-hippie AOR sort of thing.

No one there ever thought of grunge as a genre. Bands really drew from different sources and had pretty different styles. The unifying force was beer and a DIY spirit.

Pearl Jam were nice guys– I waited on a few of them at a restaurant pretty regularly. Great customers. Their music however really broke no new or interesting ground.

Nirvana, however, KICKED OUT THE JAMS!

No question for me: NIRVANA.

Never owned a Pearl Jam album and always hated Eddie Vedder's vocals. Didn't find the band charismatic at all.

pearl jam's Ten is an amazing album. but Nevermind and Nirvana as a whole were much more cutting edge. In it's short time, Nirvana was a much more influential band than pearl jam. one has to ask, "what would nirvana's impact on music have been, had kurdt cobain not died?"

Nirvana changed my life. That band inspired me to play guitar. And they turned me on to a whole other world of music (indie, punk and whatnot).

As much as I respect them, I never cared for Pearl Jam.

That's like comparing The Beatles to the Dave Clark Five. Nirvana...hands down.

I love 'em both, but in a head-to-head, you gotta give it to Kurt and Nirvana. The iconic & tragic Mighty KC, wrote transcendent rock songs of punk poetry, amazing melodies and power hooks. I've seen PJ twice in concert, and they're great, but I think Ozzy Osbourne said it best(yeah, really!): Nirvana were like the hard rock Beatles.

Ironically, i only bought 'Ten'. I had the Nirvana albums when people passed them around; and is the Kurt Cobain band which i prefer.

It's all about energy. With Pearl Jam (at least for me) the mood gets so... down and Seattle like.

I have moved on (progressed) in music taste
ever since... (i.e. Battles, Omar Rodriguez Lopez, St. Vincent etc.)

x)