It's been nearly 24 years..........

Abu Dhabi Red and White said:
This was your statement - I don't really think nirvana were world changing ( musically or culturally).


But I'm not arguing really. Just chatting.
Click to expand...
I'm allowed to alter my opinion as new facts ( to me) come to light. It's what is known as taking on board new information.:).

They weren't musically changing for me but I will listen to others and reassess ( maybe).
 


peachbum said:
I'm allowed to alter my opinion as new facts ( to me) come to light. It's what is known as taking on board new information.:).

They weren't musically changing for me but I will listen to others and reassess ( maybe).
Click to expand...

Yeah I will go along with the posit that Nirvana along with the other grnge bands were at the nucleus of a fairly abrupt switch in music (as opposed to what might result from natural attrition and evolution).

I came to America in 1988 which was when I saw MTV for the first time. My abiding memory of having it on in the background almost constantly back then was the heavy rotation of ‘hair bands’ - Poison, Motley Crue, Guns n Roses, Warrant, Van Halen, Ratt, Def Leppard, Bon Jovi, Winger, interspersed occasionally with a few brit-based non metal things like Billy Idol, Duran Duran, Dire Straits, Rod, The Cult, Tears for Fears.

I wasn’t a huge fan of the hair metal stuff but at least the videos were escapist, glamorous, colourful and fun. As soon as grunge happened all those artists were rarely seen on MTV and we were subjected to their dimly lit videos and maudlin lyrics about death, isolation, child abuse and bullying. “Jeremy spoke in class today.” If that’s your bag then fine but it’s too bad IMO that a lot of talent was just swept aside, seen as ‘style over substance’ as a result of grunge. Grunge made it OK for bands to be on stage looking like they just got off work at the building site. Look at the clip of Cobain at Unplugged in a holy cardigan from the jumble box. If I’m paying $100 to see a band (plus several more $$ INconvenience charges) I’d like to see a SHOW. I’d prefer to see Tommy Lee’s drum kit upside down over the audience*, not a trio of dullards looking at their shoes and droning on about the miseries of life.

In the same way that the Pistols may be given credit for ignoring the bloated stadium bollocks of Genesis and Styx, and inspiring a thousand bands to start up in their garages, you could say that grunge had the same effect in relation to glam/hair metal, but the baby didn’t have to be thrown out with the bath water and seeing anything glamourous in music / videos / gigs has been a rare thing since 1990 thanks to them.

Also I don’t get their moaning about their lot in life, the same way I don’t get millionaire rappers always seeming so pissed off at life (Jay Z, Eminem). Nirvana were famously photographed on the cover of Rolling Stone wearing ‘Corporate Rock Sucks’ t shirts. How does that square with starting out on cottage industry local SubPop label then signing on to Geffen Records, arguably THE most corporate of all corporate rock labels? No one forced you to do that. You could have stayed on SubPop and continued playing venues like a half empty Riverside but I bet you were happy with the wealth and fame that came along with having the backing of a ‘corporate rock’ label.


* disclaimer - this is an example. I’m not a fan of Motley Crue and have never seen them live.
 
Tex said:
Yeah I will go along with the posit that Nirvana along with the other grnge bands were at the nucleus of a fairly abrupt switch in music (as opposed to what might result from natural attrition and evolution).

I came to America in 1988 which was when I saw MTV for the first time. My abiding memory of having it on in the background almost constantly back then was the heavy rotation of ‘hair bands’ - Poison, Motley Crue, Guns n Roses, Warrant, Van Halen, Ratt, Def Leppard, Bon Jovi, Winger, interspersed occasionally with a few brit-based non metal things like Billy Idol, Duran Duran, Dire Straits, Rod, The Cult, Tears for Fears.

I wasn’t a huge fan of the hair metal stuff but at least the videos were escapist, glamorous, colourful and fun. As soon as grunge happened all those artists were rarely seen on MTV and we were subjected to their dimly lit videos and maudlin lyrics about death, isolation, child abuse and bullying. “Jeremy spoke in class today.” If that’s your bag then fine but it’s too bad IMO that a lot of talent was just swept aside, seen as ‘style over substance’ as a result of grunge. Grunge made it OK for bands to be on stage looking like they just got off work at the building site. Look at the clip of Cobain at Unplugged in a holy cardigan from the jumble box. If I’m paying $100 to see a band (plus several more $$ INconvenience charges) I’d like to see a SHOW. I’d prefer to see Tommy Lee’s drum kit upside down over the audience*, not a trio of dullards looking at their shoes and droning on about the miseries of life.

In the same way that the Pistols may be given credit for ignoring the bloated stadium bollocks of Genesis and Styx, and inspiring a thousand bands to start up in their garages, you could say that grunge had the same effect in relation to glam/hair metal, but the baby didn’t have to be thrown out with the bath water and seeing anything glamourous in music / videos / gigs has been a rare thing since 1990 thanks to them.

Also I don’t get their moaning about their lot in life, the same way I don’t get millionaire rappers always seeming so pissed off at life (Jay Z, Eminem). Nirvana were famously photographed on the cover of Rolling Stone wearing ‘Corporate Rock Sucks’ t shirts. How does that square with starting out on cottage industry local SubPop label then signing on to Geffen Records, arguably THE most corporate of all corporate rock labels? No one forced you to do that. You could have stayed on SubPop and continued playing venues like a half empty Riverside but I bet you were happy with the wealth and fame that came along with having the backing of a ‘corporate rock’ label.


* disclaimer - this is an example. I’m not a fan of Motley Crue and have never seen them live.
Click to expand...
No offence but it was MTV Unplugged, he could have sat there in the nude and it wouldn't have detracted from what was coming out of his mouth.....a hole in his cardigan was the last thing the crowd were looking at tbf. Kurt was a simple bloke, he didn't do "Razamataz" and the likes.
As for why they went with Geffen, who knows - they'd been probably "just about getting by" by being "gigging musicians" so perhaps they thought it might be nice just to try and make enough money to be comfortable in life (I honestly don't think Kurt expected Nirvana to get as big as they did - and when they did, he probably got scared and freaked out).

StiflerPG said:
I was due to see Nirvana in Manchester a month or so after he killed himself. Got the ticket refunded in Volume in the town and had to give it back. Wish I kept it.
Click to expand...
I would have kept it tbh.
 
StiflerPG said:
I was due to see Nirvana in Manchester a month or so after he killed himself. Got the ticket refunded in Volume in the town and had to give it back. Wish I kept it.
Click to expand...

“Volume - the chain of record stores that ISN’T owned by a grinning twat!”

(Advert in Viz shortly after it was bought out by Virgin!)
 
look out piano said:
Not entirely sure why you're laughing fella, didn't you post a flyer of a gig of theirs you went to? :neutral:.
Click to expand...

I was 13 when that gig was on. The point I made in the post was that once they became big, absolutely everyone seemed to be at that now infamous gig. While I respect someone's opinion of a band, I genuinely don't get the instant love for them once they became famous. Each to their own, though, & I'm not saying for one second that you're not a real fan.
 
I loved Nirvana but was more of a Pearl Jam fan to be honest - Vedder's voice still blows me away now. Depressingly I had a playlist on the other day and it was like a roll call of dead rock stars going through the contents of it.

I'd take a grunge revival over those stupid sharpie marker eyebrows, duckface pouts and bad facial contouring we've got going on these days.
 
Gremlin said:
I loved Nirvana but was more of a Pearl Jam fan to be honest - Vedder's voice still blows me away now. Depressingly I had a playlist on the other day and it was like a roll call of dead rock stars going through the contents of it.

I'd take a grunge revival over those stupid sharpie marker eyebrows, duckface pouts and bad facial contouring we've got going on these days.
Click to expand...
Right on brother, here's hoping for a grunge revival :p.
 
I was a huge fan of Nirvana. They got me into making music, as their style was very basic but catchy.
I don't listen to them all that much these days, and am more likely to listen to Ten, by Pearl Jam. As I've aged, I tend towards the complexity of PJ rather than the accessibility of Nirvana.

As I can't post media yet, check out Kids React to Nirvana, on Youtube.
 
doobas said:
I was a huge fan of Nirvana. They got me into making music, as their style was very basic but catchy.
I don't listen to them all that much these days, and am more likely to listen to Ten, by Pearl Jam. As I've aged, I tend towards the complexity of PJ rather than the accessibility of Nirvana.

As I can't post media yet, check out Kids React to Nirvana, on Youtube.
Click to expand...
I'll help you out fella xx Seems the kids quite enjoyed it !!!!!!!!!!
 
Last edited:
I loved Nirvana but I'm not sure they changed the music world in a positive way. Taking great independent music and turning it into an MTV product to be consumed by the masses certainly made the record companies a lot of money, but it strangled the golden goose. You very rarely see bands and artists develop any these days. The pressure to simply rehash their previous hits is absolutely overwhelming, and those who don't toe the line are cast aside.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Back
Top