Puddle Of Mudd

[theotherguy]

I'll be seeing these guys in concert on March 7th. They aren't my favorite band, but I like them quite a bit. I remember they were accused of sounding too much like Nirvana, but I've always liked their drop D postgrunge grooves.

Blurry
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGmrL2h8lrE

Drift and Die
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHvusHdPW0g

Control
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vJuMfjiw5Y

Away from Me
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bZPphcohPU

She effing Hates Me
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fe0Za0-4srY

Famous
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEGI6WAy21s

 

[Cavalry]

So screaming random words into a microphone followed by a series of drumming is considered music?

 

[Ennui]

I used to like them a bit back when their first album came out. Blurry is kind of a cool song because of all the harmonics but the band itself isn't all that great. Still if you like them then grats on going to the concert

 

[Muffin Man]

I like 'em, but I rarely listen to 'em. I think it's mostly nostalgia, to tell you the truth. They're lumped in that group of simple, alternative bands that I'd listen to around my freshman year of high school. Ah, memories.

 

[Yorick]

The acoustic version of Blurry is one of my favorite songs. But I hate pretty much everything else they've ever done.

 

[Shamrock]

I hope you die at that concert.

Puddle of Mudd is horrible.

 

[xombine]

Disgustingly bad band.

 

[99.vikram]

Blurry was good and She hates me gave me a few lols.

 

[Shift]

Yeh Blurry was pretty decent and the music vid to She Hate Me had its lol'ing moments, rest is just dire though.

 

[Cormeh]

I quite liked the album Come Clean. Some O.K tracks.

 

[Phobie]

Facepalm.

 

[Dekstar]

I listen to them every now and again, but there are better bands out there.

 

[soulslicer]

Not too bad, although they do sound like the typical post-grunge band with a few songs I really love. Liked Blurry and Control alot.

 

[DreamThrall]

Are they opening for Nickelback?

Actually, they could probably play simultaneously alongside eachother and I bet nobody would be able to tell the difference.

 

[theotherguy]

Are they opening for Nickelback?

Actually, they could probably play simultaneously alongside eachother and I bet nobody would be able to tell the difference.

I disagree. Nickelback has a much different sound...namely a terrible singer.

I don't know why people dislike Puddle of Mudd.

 

[Sedako]

 

[soulslicer]

Not to be technical but..Alternative Music by ballz. It's the theory of evolution of Grunge Rock, to Post-Grunge. And come on, post-grunge is not all that bad. Come on, "fix" me, i dare you, I double dare you..

 

[Sedako]

Placing Nirvana all the way at the top? If it weren't for all the other bands being worse, I'd say that you're giving them too much credit.

Me? I didn't draw it, I just thought it was pertinent to the discussion.

 

[theotherguy]

pff

Bush>Nirvana>Puddle of Mudd>Nickelback

EDIT: and if we're talking grunge and post-grunge

Pearl Jam>>Soundgarden>Stone Temple Pilots>Bush>Nirvana>>>>Alice in Chains>>Puddle of Mudd>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Nickelback

 

[Yorick]

pff

Bush>Nirvana>Puddle of Mudd>Nickelback

Good music > Bush + Nirvana + Puddle of Mudd + Nickelback.

 

[theotherguy]

Good music > Bush + Nirvana + Puddle of Mudd + Nickelback.

"good music" being?

 

[leib10]

Meh. Their musicianship leaves something to be desired.

 

[bam23]

Blurry isn't bad. Bah for the rest.

 

[99.vikram]

Good music > Bush + Nirvana + Puddle of Mudd + Nickelback.

Internet = ∑ Worthless Opinions

 

[Krynn72]

Is anyone else amazed at how accurately the statement "Only high school kids listen to them" applies to bands like Puddle of Mudd, Nirvana, Linkin Park etc is?

I dont get why, but 99% of people who like these bands like them in high school and then when they get out they're like "wtf why was i listening to this shit?"

 

[MJ12]

Is anyone else amazed at how accurately the statement "Only high school kids listen to them" applies to bands like Puddle of Mudd, Nirvana, Linkin Park etc is?

I dont get why, but 99% of people who like these bands like them in high school and then when they get out they're like "wtf why was i listening to this shit?"

^This is true.
Not to sound like I am trying to be "better" than anyone else, but I left these types of bands behind after my preteen-very early teen years and in my High School years discovered some really good music.

But I mean, sometimes I'll find a cd of mine that I used to have from that time period and I'll be like "Uh.... Disturbed?..... Linkin Park.... I LIKED LIMP BIZKIT?!?"

 

[Glirk Dient]

Wow...a lot of hatred here. I still listen to a lot of bands I listened to in high school. I actually try to be open minded about music and once I started playing guitar I learned to appreciate it a lot more. I listen to all kinds of music, from hip hop to metal to emo so you people saying that bands are only for kids in high school sounds dumb. I actually like linkin park a lot. I think they are an amazingly talented group and they deserve a lot of respect for creating a unique sound and actually making it work. There really is nothing out there that sounds like them. I know you might all hate them because they are popular but a lot of these bands are actually pretty good. OK so puddle of mudd gets old quick and nickelback just sounds annoying, but they aren't the worst thing out there. Oh and disturbed isn't that bad, I like some of their stuff.

You people really need to listen to something other that NIN, muse and radiohead.

 

[Stigmata]

The problem with Nickelback and Puddle of Mudd and pretty much most artists is that all their songs end up sounding the same. They all follow similar structures, with similar chord patterns, similar drum patterns and similar solos, with similar subjects and similar lyrics and similar vocals. Sure, the bands can write good songs, but what good is it when they're just writing the same four or five songs over and over? It's tiring and it's completely unoriginal.

Radiohead, Muse, and NIN are bands that go out of their way to make each song complex and unique. Sure, a couple of their songs are more similar than they should be (i.e. NIN's "The Hand That Feeds" and "Survivalism"), but those are the rare exceptions rather than the rule. And not to be pretentious or elitist, but now that I've listened to so much relatively complex and unique music, I find it frustrating and nearly impossible to go back to bands like Nickelback. I've heard all their music before in fifteen other bands and it's just not interesting to listen to anymore.

 

[Absinthe]

Linkin Park are technically adequate, which I guess makes them entertaining enough for some people. I think they're the same derivative teenybop crap that the industry churns out for Pop audiences, just with a more "hardcore" flavor.

Also, I echo Stig.

 

[Letters]

The lead guy in Puddle of Mudd is from Kansas City so they're pretty popular when they perform here... never seen them myself, though. I have their latest album "Famous" on my iTunes/iPod but I don't really listen to it. :O

 

[theotherguy]

The problem with Nickelback and Puddle of Mudd and pretty much most artists is that all their songs end up sounding the same. They all follow similar structures, with similar chord patterns, similar drum patterns and similar solos, with similar subjects and similar lyrics and similar vocals. Sure, the bands can write good songs, but what good is it when they're just writing the same four or five songs over and over? It's tiring and it's completely unoriginal.

Radiohead, Muse, and NIN are bands that go out of their way to make each song complex and unique. Sure, a couple of their songs are more similar than they should be (i.e. NIN's "The Hand That Feeds" and "Survivalism"), but those are the rare exceptions rather than the rule. And not to be pretentious or elitist, but now that I've listened to so much relatively complex and unique music, I find it frustrating and nearly impossible to go back to bands like Nickelback. I've heard all their music before in fifteen other bands and it's just not interesting to listen to anymore.

I agree mostly, but I still listen to the ocassional puddle of mudd song, because (though most of their music sounds the same) a few of their songs really were very good, catchy songs.

I disagree totally about Muse. I find Muse incredibly annoying. I agree with Radiohead, which is a very good band. NIN only has 3-4 good songs, the rest is electronic shit that sounds pretty much the same. Trent's vocals always, always, always follow a major pentatonic scale, and almost all of his verses follow the patter (5-4-major3). This is a nice progression, but it would be good if he livened it up a bit. Also, I completely hate the entire "noise electronica" garbage that Year Zero was. I'm sorry, but glitchy, distorted, ugly noise solos are not something that I will listen to without being forced.

 

[theotherguy]

Well, after seeing them live, I have to say: this is one of the few bands that is better live than recorded.

Reasons: Lacking all of the fancy mixing techniques, and lacking 3-4 guitarists to pull off all of the stuff in recording, they had to rely on simpler, cleaner, grungier music. It did wonders for their sound. They also avoided any kinds of stage antics, and kept the banter to a minimum. They all wore simple T-shirts and jeans and seemed like they were there just to play music.

They actually reminded me very much of Nirvana live: simple, straightforward, to the point. They even played a couple of Nirvana covers (Breed and Lithium) which were indistinguishable from the originals.