Soundgarden was NOT a grunge band!

God I hate the fact they get lumped into that category. They are from Seattle...that doesn't make them part of that style.

Now, they did influence that style, after all they were around earlier than all the other bands...but in actuality they had more in common with bands like Kyuss and Sleep...detuned, retro, Sabbath-worshipping, stoned as hell...plus they were absolutely INSANE in concert, one of the noisiest bands I've ever seen and that's a compliment!

Just felt like making that fucking clear.

Good point man, it was just a wrong place at the wrong time for them. They were a really good band that gets shit on because of grunge comparisons.

I love Soundgarden and just for the record the term grunge is not the name of a genre or even the name of the 'scene' but you already knew that.

I remember liking some of the 'Louder Than Love' album when I was younger but not enough to buy it and I never got into anything else...I always called 'em grunge but D, you do have some good points and it makes me wanna give 'em another try.

I always called them grunge but there was something that I always liked about them. So I didn't hate 'em.

Well, as Manny pointed out, I don't think Grunge is an actual musical term anyway. But the usual trappings of Grunge (whiny lyrics, ponderous attempts at social import, limited technical musical ability, slurred and barely intelligible vocals, an overall sense of apathy and boredom)...is thankfully absent from most of Soundgarden's material.

The majority of the good material is on the first 3 full length albums and Eps. But there are some fantastic album tracks buried amongst the overplayed singles of Superunknown.

and I think Down On The Upside is underrated, it's main problem being that it's too long. Chop a few tracks off and that's a great record.

Anyway, Soundgarden actually had some depth to their vision and they had the chops to pull of stylistic shifts with ease.

Not listening to them for a decade really helped though, I'm not burnt out on them any longer.

Meh, I don't mind the grunge tag. I like putting stuff into categories (music, people, etc.). Makes it easier to identify and, if necessary, avoid.

I'm just getting reaquainted with Soundgarden. I didn't care much for them when they first came on the scene, then as I was just getting warmed-up to them, radio overkill turned me off.

Right around their re-union, I decided to revisit them and found them to be much more enjoyable. Up to Badmotorfinger anyway. After that, I'm still a little burned out on the "hits".

Love em, the first few albums are my favorites. A really original sound they had.

I agree, NOT a "grunge" band. All the bands that get credited for heading the grunge scene were all very different from each other...Nirvana, Soundgarden, Pearl Jam and Alice In Chains all sound nothing alike...but they're all supposed to be "grunge". Whatever.

IMO, Soundgarden was more stoner metal, Nirvana was punk-influenced noise-pop, Alice In Chains were metal and Pearl Jam were like some sort of classic rock revivalist group...

Great interview on the matter:

http://www.ultimate-guitar.com/news/wtf/soundgarden_refuse_to_be_labeled_as_grunge.html

People have been telling me this for years, and I'm still not sure I buy it. I agree that in a lot of ways they were different from other bands of the time but all of their big radio hits could totally be considered grunge. And after all, I'd say that "detuned, retro, Sabbath-worshipping, stoned as hell" was pretty common among grunge bands.

Plus, if you wore flannel in the 90's it was kind of an instant grunge label. And I'll be damned if I'm going to question it

I can see your point, SG, although with Soundgarden they were a lot more talented than the rest of the Grunge/Alternative minimalist approach bands.

Superunknown to get the Deluxe treatment:

http://www.ultimate-guitar.com/news/upcoming_releases/soundgarden_to_celebrate_20thanniversary_ofsuperunknown_with_an_album_reissue.html