I say Boyz II Men are quite honestly way, way more talented. I am not trolling, I am being completely sincere.
I say Boyz II Men are quite honestly way, way more talented. I am not trolling, I am being completely sincere.
One reason? Kurt Cobain.
/thread
Nirvana knew how to spell their band name correctly.
Kurt Cobain.
The original Hipster.
fasdfasf wrote:
Kurt Cobain.
The original Hipster.
What about Harry Gibson????
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2WJqnK3gAYamazing story wrote:
I say Boyz II Men are quite honestly way, way more talented. I am not trolling, I am being completely sincere.
Being "talented" and "brilliant" are two different things.
Boyz II Men had fantastic voices, but they didn't write most of their successful stuff (Babyface did). Cobain wrote almost everything himself with some help from Dave Grohl and others along the way.
That is part of what makes Nirvana brilliant. Did Boyz II Men have better voices than Cobain? Well, yeah. The creativity to write groundbreaking songs in a genre that was new at the time is what makes them brilliant. Boyz II Men didn't do anything that Motown hadn't been doing for the previous 40 years.
Oh yeah... Dave Grohl has more talent than all 4 of those guys in that boy band put together and he was just the drummer!
I'm with you, OP. I'm listening to End of the Road right now.
I prefer B2M, but Nirvana made better music in whatever you would call their niche than B2M did R&B. They were very talented musicians, they just conveyed messed up thoughts that sane people don't relate to.
I honestly think both are pretty damn talented. Boyz II Men was a bad choice here.
Nirvana/Cobain were musicians, writing music.
B-II-M....that barely qualifies as anything creative. It is entertainment on the same plane as Dancing with the Stars. It would not surprise me if Ryan Seacrest was behind this crap.