Which one is better ?
The Clash all the way. They had a much wider musical range and often used it brilliantly. SLF was good, but not nearly at the same level.
Whichever one you like better!
While I like Stiff Little Fingers (name taken from a cool Vibrators song btw), for me it is The Clash by several miles for the reasons listed above, and they just wrote better songs. YMMV.
Clash. Hands down.
It really is comparing apples to oranges, though. SLF should be compared to bands they inspired, like Green Day.
Yeah, I’d have to go with the Clash here. SLF are great, but I find the Clash a bit more ambitious and varied in terms of sound and songwriting.
No comparison: The Clash. They are one of the best rock bands ever and their album Combat Rock is one of just a handful of truly perfect albums; it’s #2 on my list of best albums of all time.
Hmmm, true the Clash seemed to have a broader style and a global outlook, and SLF concentrated on more local troubles - but that did give them more bite and intensity, IMO.
I love Stiff Little Fingers, but Clash has to win this contest, for all the reasons listed above.
But is this just the love of status and high sales, or true appreciation of the music - the two are mingled thoroughly in our chart obsessed culture after all ?
I have no idea what you mean by that. I have no clue how well the Clash charted vs Sticky Little Fingers except that “Should I Stay or Should I Go” and “Rock the Casbah” both got regular radio play. (And both songs I didn’t particularly like. It wasn’t until I discovered the first three albums that I loved the Clash. Sandanista! and Combat Rock just don’t do it for me.)
So, in terms of what music I just viscerally enjoy the most, the answer is the Clash. The one that is most musically interesting to me also happens to be The Clash, but what is “interesting” musically doesn’t necessarily correlate with what I prefer musically.
The only difference that charting or popularity could conceivably have in this case is that more people have likely heard more Clash songs. If your fave is SLF, that’s cool, but The Clash have a much richer body of work. Which is your favorite OP?
No one has used this as their reason for liking The Clash better. Like Purd Werfect said, if you like SLF better, that’s cool, you’re not wrong.
Certainly people have had more exposure to The Clash, but there’s nothing wrong with good bands becoming popular. Now, you could enter the argument that Stiff Little Fingers were more “punk” than The Clash, but that’s a whole lot of whatever.
The first Clash album has more bite and intensity than Inflammable Materials. Second album’s close, too, though over-produced.
I highly doubt anyone would pick The Clash because they had bigger hits - most fans consider their last proper album to be sub-par (to quote Too Much Joy: “Every great band should be shot/Before they make their Combat Rock”). I think most of us just think they had far better material.
Alternative Ulster is better than anything the Clash ever produced…in my opinion. In the end it’s subjective and a silly thing to argue about.
No it isn’t…
Obviously The Clash.
If you were to measure rockness on a scale of 1-10, SLF would measure the same as the Clash easily.
But using that standard I could say if you rate TVness on a scale of 1-10 then The Nanny rates as highly as Cheers.
But one was great and the other was ho-hum.
Yeah, yeah, yeah…it’s all subjective and whatever you like better…it’s all a matter of personal opinion…
Hey, some people might say Balto is a better movie than Toy Story. But if that’s their opinion then their opinion is wrong.
Subjectively, it’s whichever band you like better. Objectively however, the correct answer is The Clash.
If the question is “which was the better rock band?”, The Clash were the better band, IMHO.