phee Posted May 29, 2006 Report Share Posted May 29, 2006 Started from the dead musicians thread... Just wondering what people saw in Nirvana/Kurt Cobain that was worth noting over the zillions of bands before Nirvana that sounded like them, and the onehundredkabillion bands that came after them that have the same sound... am I missing something? It just seems that this band became hugely over-rated due to MTV, and then somehow even more so when he blew his own head off leaving his kid without a father... What's the deal? (I am opinionated...yes) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ Nocker Posted May 29, 2006 Report Share Posted May 29, 2006 Started from the dead musicians thread...Just wondering what people saw in Nirvana/Kurt Cobain that was worth noting over the zillions of bands before Nirvana that sounded like them, and the onehundredkabillion bands that came after them that have the same sound... am I missing something? It just seems that this band became hugely over-rated due to MTV, and then somehow even more so when he blew his own head off leaving his kid without a father... What's the deal? (I am opinionated...yes) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> phee...you are my hero. that is all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phee Posted May 29, 2006 Author Report Share Posted May 29, 2006 phee...you are my hero. that is all. Heh... thanks... you might want to re-evaluate your standards in heroism though :fear Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ Nocker Posted May 29, 2006 Report Share Posted May 29, 2006 Heh... thanks... you might want to re-evaluate your standards in heroism though :fear <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I dunno...you seem pretty darn neat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phee Posted May 29, 2006 Author Report Share Posted May 29, 2006 We have bonded over our "WTF" for Nirvana.... heh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slept with ghost Posted May 29, 2006 Report Share Posted May 29, 2006 heh yeah i agree i could never see what the big deal over nirvana was myself Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Megalicious Posted May 29, 2006 Report Share Posted May 29, 2006 Was Nivana overrated .. yes, but isn't everything that goes mainstream.? All in all I was never impressed with Kurt's guitar skills, he was pretty basic with what he played (just a bit faster) nothing that punk has acomplished already. But I loved his lyrics. I can't say I ever really cared for Nevermind, Im more of a Bleach kind of girl, I just think it was so popular because of Kurt's idea that he was "not selling out" or "giving in to conforming" when he actually was. I think that idea of not selling out was appealing to alot of crazy, angry, young and silly people. But what really pisses me off is they acted like it had never been done ... I mean HELLO!! Have you ever heard of PUNK music ... My rant is now over, that will be all =) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phee Posted May 29, 2006 Author Report Share Posted May 29, 2006 I like Mudhoney and Sonic Youth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paradox Posted May 29, 2006 Report Share Posted May 29, 2006 while they may not have been exceptional. i thought they were decent enough. do i like nirvana? yes. why were they so big? well, they were there when the whole alternative thing hit the mainstream. by the same token i would say that bauhaus, for example, was an exceptional band. in fact, in many respects they are a one-hit wonder. still, they are remembered by many as the epitome of "goth", even today. why is that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ Nocker Posted May 29, 2006 Report Share Posted May 29, 2006 I dunno, kurt cobaine just seemed to whiney for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paradox Posted May 29, 2006 Report Share Posted May 29, 2006 welcome to 90s alternative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackmail Posted May 29, 2006 Report Share Posted May 29, 2006 bleach was pretty good nevermind was decent in utero sucked but yeah, overated by a mile and a half oh and I think Sonic Youth and Mudhoney suck even worse. Sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Megalicious Posted May 29, 2006 Report Share Posted May 29, 2006 nevermind was decent in utero sucked but yeah, overated by a mile and a half <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Really? I thought Utero was more decent than anything Nevermind had to offer. Just curious to why you feel that way because you have good taste. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Head Wreck Posted May 29, 2006 Report Share Posted May 29, 2006 nirvana for me was just something you grew out off by age 16. END OFF! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Head Wreck Posted May 29, 2006 Report Share Posted May 29, 2006 Drunken edit: i belive we had a convo over this while i was staying over yours phee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackmail Posted May 29, 2006 Report Share Posted May 29, 2006 Really? I thought Utero was more decent than anything Nevermind had to offer. Just curious to why you feel that way because you have good taste. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> well we agree on bleach right? negative creep was pretty cool! as for in utero, around the mid 90's I couldn't tell the difference between Soundgarden, Stone Temple Pilots, Alice in Chains and Nirvana stuff off of 'In Utero'. I just thought it was generic alternagrunge. However I respect your opinion. I thought Nevermind had 2 killer songs and the rest was junk (Smells like teen spirit - which I thought was great until the 3 millionth time I heard it, and the song In Bloom). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaneDead Posted May 29, 2006 Report Share Posted May 29, 2006 i like nirvana. i like kurt cobain. i like his lyrics, his voice, the music. no they didn't/don't sound like every other "grunge" band as people who don't like "grunge" music will often say. that is like saying all punk sounds the same... oh wait, it does. never mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TearSandrille Posted May 29, 2006 Report Share Posted May 29, 2006 I don't like Nirvana. I can't say I've never listened to them, because I tend to give bands a large chance before I write them off. Also, a large majority of people like Nirvana so I have been subjected to plenty of it. For me, nothing sets Nirvana's music apart. Also, when it comes to music I am very lyrically oriented and don't find Nirvana lyrics appealing. Just my two cents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fierce Critter Posted May 30, 2006 Report Share Posted May 30, 2006 Taken from the Wikipedia entry on Nirvana (band): The popularity of alternative rock, as well as the sidelining of hair metal, is often credited to Nevermind. In January of 1992, the album reached the top of the Billboard album charts, replacing Michael Jackson's album Dangerous, an act often considered the defining symbol of the rise of alternative music over pop. The above quote is a pretty good example of the language used by many rock critics, historians, magazines, etc. as to why Nirvana was important - at the time. Considering I've got about 10 years on the average DGN'er, that would have put me at 23 years old when "Smells Like Teen Spirit" came out, and the average DGN member at 13 - give or take a few years. There's a difference in how one absorbs what's going on around them between 13 and 23. My experience of the time is still very clear in my memory. In the early 90's, there seemed to be a big uncertainty as to where music was going to go in the coming decade. We'd just come out of the 80's, which was the decade of New Wave synth bands. Some would say the synth was overused in that period. But the general move towards keys gave the bands of the time a familiar feel - even if the bands themselves were pretty disparate in style. When the 90's hit, the synth still had it's place in music, but there was a tangible shift back to the guitar. Yet the most popular guitar bands of the 80's - hair bands - were becoming almost jokes. People didn't take the music really seriously. And rock radio was almost strictly "classic" rock of the 70's and earlier. So what the hell was going to be "the" music of the 90's? Radio seemed so confused. It became really hard to find a station that played anything new consistently. Pop still had it's place on easy listening and top 40 stations. But everything seemed to become really repetitive. And REALLY boring. So I started consulting MTV for what was up and coming. That was when MTV still played a decent amount of videos. And the best way to see what was coming up was to watch 120 Minutes. I taped every episode. And I'd watch the tapes, and hear a song I'd like, and buy the band's album. For the most part, there were more 1-hit wonders than there were in the 80's. For instance: The La's, Material Issue, Beautiful South, Jah Wobble, Hudu Gurus, Pop Will Eat Itself ("Can U Dig It?" is the song I knew them for before hearing "Auslander" at CC), Sloan, Afghan Whigs, Banderas, Betty Boo, Chapterhouse, Nick Heyward, Kitchens of Distinction, Lush, School of Fish - I could go on. These bands were damned good. But you heard 1, maybe 2 - rarely 3 cuts ever played on the radio - and then they disappeared. And nothing seemed to "take". Then Seattle gave us the answer. Grunge hit - and hit big. Suddenly, there was an identifiable genre, with a name people could use to lable what they were listening to. My friends and I used to discuss music. And we used to classify the "Grunge invaders" thus: Nirvana = The Beatles Soundgarden = Led Zepplin Stone Temple Pilots = Van Halen Sonic Youth, Mudhoney, etc. = everybody else That's really how people seemed to view these "new bands with the new sound". It was like people latched onto grunge like some lifeline, "ooh - we're saved! We can once again categorize a sound!" Was Nirvana great? I believe there was true talent there. Before Kurt killed himself, I really, really hoped he'd listen to what they did on Unplugged and realize that's the direction he should go - with or without the band. I thought they were more impressive, more striking when more low-key. But then Kurt killed himself, and now we'll never know. You don't have to like a band/group/singer/performer to respect what they meant to a certain time, genre, whatever. Whether or not you like Nirvana, you can't deny they were the start of something definable. Whether "definable" is good or bad is up for debate. And yes, they were probably used to that end by the record companies and possibly desperate radio stations. Kurt seemed to realize that, and, well, we all know what happened. And someday, maybe I'll perform my acoustic version of "Heart Shaped Box" for you. Used to be pretty damned well received, as I recall, all those years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaneDead Posted May 30, 2006 Report Share Posted May 30, 2006 i loved that post critter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scary Guy Posted May 30, 2006 Report Share Posted May 30, 2006 Nirvana was good music that was catchy and people could relate to. Which if the masses can relate to it, means that it's not that complex/simple to understand. As is most modern popular music. I will say that Courtney either did it or drove him to it, and it was at the time original at the forefront of the "grunge" culture, which before was just called "hard rock" and maybe was in parts of "hair metal" as well. I wore a flannel in middle school, but only because my mom threw my camo jacket away or burried it or something. That jacket was awsome :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homicidalheathen Posted May 30, 2006 Report Share Posted May 30, 2006 I always wondered how they got all the credit for the so called 'grunge' movement when there were a few bands around already doing it when they got their start. And the sound was a repeat of something we had in the 70's anyway.........so..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kellygrrrrrl Posted May 30, 2006 Report Share Posted May 30, 2006 I loved Nirvana. I just did. They were revolutionary in thier own ways. Yes. I have much love for the "nirvana" =) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phee Posted May 30, 2006 Author Report Share Posted May 30, 2006 I loved Nirvana. I just did. They were revolutionary in thier own ways. Yes. I have much love for the "nirvana" =) I forgive you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kellygrrrrrl Posted May 30, 2006 Report Share Posted May 30, 2006 I also liked Soundgarden Candlebox Sonic Youth Mudhoney GreenDay OffSpring Stone Temple Pilots Radio Head Cranberries Porno for Pyros And a lot of other music from that time frame that was Mainstream I think one big factor is age I liked most of these band, as they were my peers. People I could "relate" to....if you call it that.....at the age when I was most impressionable... You tend to embrace the music of your time NOW, most of the mainstream out there is younger than myself. I am thier peer. It's like shut the fuck up whiney little emo kid with 80's hair..... HA! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.