Are the Foo Fighters really that popular???

[Pepe Silvia]

I liked their first four albums. After that I feel like they disappeared from the mainstream, I didn't hear much of them, and I was equally surprised when I found out how popular they were 10-15 years later. I was also surprised to find that my friends were suddenly big fans. Around that time Sonic Highways came out and I gave it a chance and hated it.

[stevejamsecono]

I've only gotten into them more seriously recently after Taylor passed, but they certainly deserve the honor. Wish they weren't alone up there, but such is the world as rock wanes in the mainstream.

[PapaB]

Being in and out of the country many times, and then living in a state that literally has played the same music on the radio for 40 years, I feel very odd not knowing much of anything of the Foo Fighters .... Nirvana, I recognize, but FF???
It's cool to read these assessments from y'all, whom I trust are fans of good music.
Most of my bands are dying of old age, or fast approaching that.

[eggwheat]

Watched the Glastonbury performance....I know songs off their first three albums, but nothing after that. Are they that popular...?? They seem to have become the de-facto "rock band" of the ages. I love Pat Smear, but

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6FC-f9cXwRI

Funny question??? They are one of the biggest rock bands in the world..

Liked them in the early days stuff like winnebago, podunk, wattershed.. even the pocketwatch album.. saw their first UK gig 95, went to fan club shows..and last time I saw them it got filmed for MTV(2000?)...started to go off them around the 3rd album..thought 4th was atrocious and that was that for me. Seem so long ago now! But for me, the worse they got the more popular they got..so what do I know?

[andy_tchp]

Probably the 'biggest' / most popular band in the world, the only other one I can think that's close to the level would be Coldplay.

It's weird for me, because I lost interest in them about 20 years ago when the music seemed to have lost most of its raw edge, traded in for that boring stadium sound.

Yep, I was a fan for the first couple of albums then they progressively got more and more middle of the road. Dave seems a nice chap and to his credit he's at least producing new music rather than going the full legacy act route.

I have no idea where in the world they would be unknown/out of the mainstream. They're pretty much inescapable, Taylor's death was the lead news story over here in Australia when it happened.

[welshywelsh]

Muse are pretty much at the Foo Fighters level, in terms of the size of shows they play.

Unfortunately as with Foo Fighters, their later output isn't anywhere near the level of their early stuff. Some of it is actually unlistenable.

For me, the band a level below both in terms of popularity, but have never let me down are Biffy Clyro. I know they're not as popular outside of Europe so would highly recommend a listen if anyone is unfamiliar.

[s_mcsleazy]

my understanding is the foo fighters are kinda the band that a lot of younger gen x/older millenials use to try getting their kids into rock music because it's a good gateway into a genre that tends not to have a lot of chart/viral sucsess at this point. but that's something i've ranted about many times and won't do it again.

personally, i put foo fighters into the same bucket as queens of the stone age, interpol, arctic monkeys. what i've been dubbing "festival rock" it's kinda like arena rock but still grounded enough in reality to appear like their not like that so mainly play festivals.

[DeathJag]

Green Day are also way bigger than I ever thought they were. I stopped listening to them after the first couple of Lookout 7"es, but apparently they have influenced a ton of 90s kids.

[panoramic]

Yeah for some reason the foo fighters are a gateway band for today's parents to get their kiddos into indie stuff. My GF's ex does this with her daughter and has used them as a "first cool band" thing. My son doesn't care for them, he's into the cure and the lemonheads, weezer etc.

[cdwillis]

I liked the first three Foo Fighters albums back in the day. I didn't own them, but somehow knew most of the songs. One by One was the last song I remember hearing on the radio that I thought was cool. They're one of those bands that I thought ran out of gas a long time ago and yet they got even more popular. They're kind of like Nickelback, but without the baggage of being uncool to like. Dave seems like a cool guy, but jesus christ am I tired of seeing and hearing about him. I think that it says a lot about bands that get played on the radio that a boring safe band like Foo Fighters are the biggest rock band.

It's cool that they kept on going on without Taylor Hawkins, I guess. Josh Freese is a great drummer, but it would have been a lot cooler to get a lesser known player imo.

[jorri]

my understanding is the foo fighters are kinda the band that a lot of younger gen x/older millenials use to try getting their kids into rock music because it's a good gateway into a genre that tends not to have a lot of chart/viral sucsess at this point. but that's something i've ranted about many times and won't do it again.

personally, i put foo fighters into the same bucket as queens of the stone age, interpol, arctic monkeys. what i've been dubbing "festival rock" it's kinda like arena rock but still grounded enough in reality to appear like their not like that so mainly play festivals.

Interesting seeing Interpol on there since i only really know their first two albums as some sort of darkwave revival thing, but i expect they've had some other hits i am unaware if.
I know of Foo Fighters and QOTSA due to their repeated playing around early 2000s on the pop radio station on the way to school so yeh I'd say they are very popular. They weirdly played my local town of Frome which made all the front pages of surrounding local newspapers. I guess they liked the "hipness" (-ster or -py either fits) of this place which usually holds something like Little Mix tribute acts or whatever.

[s_mcsleazy]

my understanding is the foo fighters are kinda the band that a lot of younger gen x/older millenials use to try getting their kids into rock music because it's a good gateway into a genre that tends not to have a lot of chart/viral sucsess at this point. but that's something i've ranted about many times and won't do it again.

personally, i put foo fighters into the same bucket as queens of the stone age, interpol, arctic monkeys. what i've been dubbing "festival rock" it's kinda like arena rock but still grounded enough in reality to appear like their not like that so mainly play festivals.

Interesting seeing Interpol on there since i only really know their first two albums as some sort of darkwave revival thing, but i expect they've had some other hits i am unaware if.
I know of Foo Fighters and QOTSA due to their repeated playing around early 2000s on the pop radio station on the way to school so yeh I'd say they are very popular. They weirdly played my local town of Frome which made all the front pages of surrounding local newspapers. I guess they liked the "hipness" (-ster or -py either fits) of this place which usually holds something like Little Mix tribute acts or whatever.

interpol have kinda been put in that list because they're weirdly popular with the arty folk that like going to festivals. personally i don't think they've written anything in the last 15 years worth listening to.

[redchapterjubilee]

Dave has often commented that the Foos are “the last band standing” in the popular cross cultural pantheon. They get gigs most bands of their generation don’t. The Lincoln Center stuff, all the awards shows, etc. and that seems to be true.

Dave’s an interesting pop culture figure. He’s like everyone’s cool rock and roll dad or brother or such. His book is interesting but not very deep. He keeps his emotional baggage really close. I learned more about dave from other bios than I did from his own book. The Nirvana train ride and train wreck taught him to be guarded, I suppose.

Musically, I think the Foos had one complete front to back winner of an album (the first one) and every album since has had some amazing singles and an album track here and there but have been largely wallpaper. They are a great singles band. The latest album is no exception. A few really good songs and the rest mostly harmless.

There was a moment about 7 or 8 years ago, I think around the time of the Sound City movie, that the US music press went after him in a rather polite way. The argument was “is it time to stop giving Dave Grohl a free pass?”, meaning that because of Nirvana we aren’t as critical of Dave’s output as we would be of virtually anyone else. That’s not wrong. He certainly does enjoy a Teflon coating that other artists don’t. But he also doesn’t make awful music and as a character I think I can relate to him, being a rock and roll dad myself and I sure did love Nirvana. For anyone of that generation to wind up being “the last rock & roll star to matter”, well, we could do far worse. But I think that movement in the press suggested that dave himself could and should do far better artistically with that power. I don’t know if I agree or disagree.

[eggwheat]

interpol have kinda been put in that list because they're weirdly popular with the arty folk that like going to festivals. personally i don't think they've written anything in the last 15 years worth listening to.

Interpol peaked on album 1 unfortunately. And they know it. Hence why they were doing "turn on the bright lights" album shows only 10 years after its release. That's like The Cure doing "three imaginary boys" tours in 1989 at the time of Disintegration.

[budda12ax7]

I guess to all of the above. Funny, when saturday night live needs to fill their "rock band" quota...it's usually the foo fighters.