|
Post by cactusjames on Apr 5, 2007 13:26:22 GMT -5
The world lost Kurt Cobain today 13 years ago. I know not many like him or his music, but if it wasn't for him, Poision would still be putting out music so he did something right.
Quotes about Kurt from other artist:
He had a touch most guitarists would kill for. Chuck Berry
The only person I have any respect for as a songwriter over the last 10 years is Kurt Cobain. He was the perfect cross between Lennon and McCartney...but he was a miserable fuck at the same time. Noel Gallagher (Oasis)
Cobain was a marvellous singer...I heard his unplugged version of that Leadbelly song and it was such a perfect vocal that I was really moved. Allen Ginsberg
I mourn for Kurt. A once beautiful, then pathetic, lost and heroically stupid boy. Pete Townshend (the Who)
He really, really inspired me. He was so great. Wonderful. One of the best, but more than that. Kurt was one of the absolute best of all time for me. Neil Young
There's something wrong with that boy. He frowns for no good reason. William S. Burroughs
He had a wonderful balance of raw, dangerous anger, but also he was this delicate, fun person...He was brilliant, but he played dumb. And you know, Kurt was funny as shit. Dave Grohl (Foo Fighters; ex-Nirvana drummer)
He was a worthless shred of human debris. Rush Limbaugh
I don't know why everyone on earth felt so close to that guy; he was beloved and endearing and inoffensive in some weird way. For all his screaming and all of his darkness, he was just lovable. Anthony Kiedis
That kid had heart. Bob Dylan
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Apr 5, 2007 13:40:54 GMT -5
"I know not many like him or his music" since when? To be quite honest, Kurt Cobain is a musician that deserves a great deal of respect. My issue with Nirvana stems mainly out of resentment. I grew up as a punk rocker...and any time you read or watch any kind of historical account of punk rock it inevitably leads the reader/viewer to believe that punk rock died with the Sex Pistols and somehow Kurt Cobain resurrected it. The real facts are that punk rock and it's total DIY ethic remained alive and well throughout the 80s with all of the UK "Mohawk Mania" bands like Exploited, GBH, Disorder, The Adicts, etc.... and remained raging here in the US with the Southern California scene and bands like Social Distortion, The Adolescents, Agent Orange, Fear, X, D.I., etc... Nirvana may very well have been the first punk band to break into the mainstream...and that's fine if you want to give them credit for making "alternative" music en vogue - that's fine if you want to credit them for making the way for seminal punk bands like Social Distortion getting big label deals as well. But don't for a minute, attempt to convince me that Kurt Cobain single-handedly resurrected punk rock from 6 feet under. It's simply not true.
|
|
|
Post by 9 on Apr 5, 2007 14:04:39 GMT -5
LOL @ "Poison would still be putting out music!"
|
|
|
Post by cactusjames on Apr 5, 2007 14:10:33 GMT -5
Punk rock, no. Rock in general yes. Those 80s hair bands were and still are horrible music and can't be considered rock. If you make a tree diagram of the history of rock and roll, it ends with Nirvana. He sucks for ushering in emo, but that band did more for music in the past 20 years than any other band or musician.
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Apr 5, 2007 14:27:58 GMT -5
A "tree diagram" or rock-n-roll ends with Nirvana? ? Are you attempting to say that there have been no "real" (in your estimation) rock-n-roll bands since Nirvana -or- are you attempting to say that since Nirvana any rock band is so completely derivative of Nirvana that they don't really matter? Either way, I couldn't disagree more. I've already conceded that Nirvana are responsible for getting credible (as opposed to bands like Poison) rock-n-roll, mainly in the form of "alternative music" back into the mainstream. That's fine and all...but there are plenty of good rock bands that pre-date Nirvana, who continued to make great music before and after Kurt Cobain was on the scene, as well as new bands who are credible and deserve a place on your "tree diagram" whether or not the were directly influenced by Nirvana or not. The Red Hot Chili Peppers come to mind - they may owe some of their numbers in terms of record sales to Nirvana, but those guys were making quality records long before Cobain and company met...at a Black Flag gig of all places if the I remember the story correctly.
|
|
|
Post by cactusjames on Apr 5, 2007 15:07:53 GMT -5
I agree. I love the Peppers and as well as Smashing Pumpkins and a few others. I mean in terms of great bands, cause some bands, while very good bands, can't be mentioned in the same breath as The Beatles or the Stones, Zeppelin, Sabbath, The who, Pink Floyd etc. However, I think Nirvana can. To me I hear more and more bands trying to sound like Nirvana and sucking. Not too many bands try and be like the Chili Peppers. I think Nirvana was the last of really inspirational bands. And while alot of people like them, they don't get the credit or respect they deserve, like you said. I think and hope in a few years they will get it, though I doubt Kurt would want it.
|
|
|
Post by sancho231 on Apr 5, 2007 15:22:06 GMT -5
That Kurt Cobain, always shooting his mouth off.
And Fuck Cobain, while i like some of Nirvana's stuff, I feel He is soley Responsable for all these fuking queer ass Emo bands out now
|
|
|
Post by 9 on Apr 5, 2007 15:23:05 GMT -5
"Business is about to pick up!" -- JW
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Apr 5, 2007 15:39:10 GMT -5
I don't wanna come off as one of those poseur snobs who always claim to have liked a band before they were big, because that's not what I am.
Nirvana wasn't even on my radar screen until well after they were popular...coming from listening to bands like The Varukers and Chaotic Dischord, those grunge bands were too "soft" for me.
But, I will say that after the fact I really grew to like the "Bleach" record...a lot.
|
|
|
Post by Jackass on Apr 5, 2007 16:37:43 GMT -5
I was listening to Mud Honey and Soundgarden before I ever heard of Nirvana.
I liked the fact that Kurt always gave props to his influences, and that he gave Pat Smear a job (I remember seeing Pat working at the SST SuperStore in the mid eighties - with Falling James!!). I like a few of their songs, but I was a bigger fan of Soundgarden.
Anyway, I have no opinion about Kurt Cobain. I don't hold suicide against someone, like many do. In fact, I applauded Donnie Moore's suicide and laud him for his decision.
To hurt so bad that the the only way that you believe you can stop it is by taking your life, is something most people just can't understand and shouldn't judge.
That said, FULL ON KEVIN'S MOM!!!
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Apr 5, 2007 16:53:50 GMT -5
Agree about Mudhoney. Compared to Nirvana, they are a far superior band.
Also, I too was happy to see "the little Mexican" (an Eddie Van Halen quote) Pat Smear get some justified mainstream success.
|
|
|
Post by elliejay21 on Apr 6, 2007 21:18:55 GMT -5
I like Nirvana. I saw them in '93 at Stabler Arena, and I am quite glad I got the chance to go to that show.
But seriously James, lay off the cool aid. I like their sound better than Alice in Chains, Soundgarden, Stone Temple Pilots, Peal Jam and the countless other bands of that era and genre, but they did NOTHING revolutionary, innovative or worthy of some seminal place in any "tree diagram."
That whole movement merely served to lump this grunge, new wave, underground punk, and basically all non-top 40 music into a mainstream catagory called "alternative."
|
|
|
Post by cactusjames on Apr 8, 2007 11:43:51 GMT -5
I disagree. Alternative use to mean something, but now when people alternative, to what, the other shit music in the mainstream. I mean, grunge never had a chance as soon as it being worn down a runway at fashion shows, but back before 93, that shit meant something, it was alternative to the shit arena rock, hair band garbage. And it was better.
In 20 years from now, if you can;t say Cobain was as good in the 90's as Dylan and Lennon and others were to their generation you're nuts. There's a reason Nirvana was bigger than the other bands in the early 90's, not caus other bands sucked, but because they were so much better. I look foward to the years from now that band goes in the rock n roll hall of fame. And did you read the quotes, if he's getting that kind of praise from Chuck Berry and Dylan, and others, Ozzy said Nirvana was a perfect mix of heavy metal and the beatles, the guy did something right, and enough to be lumped in with those guys. Not now, but down the road somewher the band will get more credit then being sellouts.
|
|
|
Post by elliejay21 on Apr 8, 2007 14:17:38 GMT -5
In the early '90s you were what, 4? Dude, "arena rock" was not all that, and Nirvana and their genre did not appeal to the hair band crowd as some sort of improved sound. Grunge was an alternative to Marky Mark.
Nirvana was not bigger than all the other bands of the early '90s. They had one hit and then the people who were not into them did not remember they existed until Cobain off'd himself.
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on Apr 8, 2007 14:21:53 GMT -5
The world didn't lose him. He blew his head off. Who cares?
|
|
|
Post by grover on Apr 8, 2007 15:02:19 GMT -5
Nirvana is one of the most overrated bands ever.
I'm going to go the route Cho wanted to avoid. I still remember my bro shaking his head at Nirvana and wondering how the fuck they got as big as they did. Back when they were making junky noise and hanging out with Sonic Youth, who put them to shame in every aspect, no one gave a shit. Mtv saw the end of glam coming near and needed something new. Nirvana fit the bill as punk that was marketable, and dove into the "Seattle scene" head first.
Don't get me wrong, I liked Nirvana, and most of those bands, but the whole "Guns n' Roses and Nirvana helped end glam" is my ballsack. Guns n' Roses IS a glam rock band. Nirvana were ok, but overall they were a second rate Melvins who borrowed Killing Joke riffs.
|
|
|
Post by kingdzbws on Apr 8, 2007 16:31:50 GMT -5
James, your buggin. Cobain and Nirvana neither musically or poetically inspired nearly as many as John Lennon or even Bob Dylan. Nirvana weren't even the BEST of their local scene...they were marketable ata time every band in Seattle was getting signed...they weren't the first or the best of a scene turned POP.
The GlamMetal POP 80's were the same. There were some bands that were decent - not my taste - but decent nonetheless. The majority of the Hair Farmers from the Sunset Strip (Warrent, Winger, Cinderella, and on and on) were just there, wearing the right make up and spandex, at the right time to fit the formula. Every record company wanted one, and they pumped that shite out until the market was so saturated, the scene so bloated that it collapsed on itself. Cobain didn't kill GlamMetal. GlamMetal died from too much make-up and and endless self-indulgent guitar solos.
Seattle's Sound was there to fill a void, and every band on the scene was swept up. The same thing eventually happened to the Seattle POP phenomenon you call Grunge as the Hair Bands. Bloated from too much flannel and whining the whole thing hit the shitter.
Listen to Grover, dude. Go and listen to the first Sonic Youth EP or the Melvins' you can hear exactly where Nirvana found their sound. Listen to the Cali Punks that inspired Cobain
He died...it's sad, but that's that. We mourn our pop heroes when they pass and think of what they might have been, but thats life. Sure people will say nice things, so what?
DZ
|
|
|
Post by grover on Apr 8, 2007 16:52:56 GMT -5
You're damn right Nirvana was not the best of that scene. Soundgarden had a fantastic sound and Alice in Chains were also a great hard rock band. Pearl Jam's early stuff doesn't stand the test of time, but they have some decent stuff as they go along.
I actually think that Nirvana might have produced their best album if Cobain didn't off himself. In Utero had it's rough spots but some songs were quality, and miles better than anything on Nevermind.
The older I got the less I gave a shit, yet, bands I still listen to stuff I discovered before Nirvana like Rush, Maiden, Yes, ect. Hell, the older I got the more appreciative I became of groups like AC/DC and Van Halen, especially with the state of music now.
And who sounds like Nirvana now-a-days? The Vines? LOL!!!!
|
|
|
Post by cactusjames on Apr 8, 2007 21:56:02 GMT -5
"James, your buggin. Cobain and Nirvana neither musically or poetically inspired nearly as many as John Lennon or even Bob Dylan. Nirvana weren't even the BEST of their local scene...they were marketable ata time every band in Seattle was getting signed...they weren't the first or the best of a scene turned POP."
I never said they were better than them, but as far as the generation aspect goes, the band is better than anyone of the 90's and isn't better than they guys from 60's, 70's(not disco)etc. but they hold up. That said, it's a band you either really love or really hate. As far as the 90's go, they were bigger than any musician not singing rap, it's gotta count for something right?
And if you think guys who play now didn't hear nirvana then and didn't wanna pick up a guitr and learn guitar playing four chord riffs, and are popular now you either really hate nirvana or need to tell mewhat you're taking.
|
|
|
Post by grover on Apr 8, 2007 22:12:55 GMT -5
the band is better than anyone of the 90's ....and so on and so forth.....
|
|
|
Post by cactusjames on Apr 9, 2007 10:27:21 GMT -5
Frist off, I won't compare Nirvana to the Beasties cause it's rock and rap. Plus after intergalactic anyone who liked them from the late 80s early 90s hated them after that.
As far as sonic youth and ok computer, very good bands but for me not better than nirvana.
|
|
|
Post by jwmcc on Apr 9, 2007 10:36:11 GMT -5
"Pearl Jam's early stuff doesn't stand the test of time, but they have some decent stuff as they go along."
Apologies for the hi-jack here, but ....what? Jw
|
|
|
Post by grover on Apr 9, 2007 11:03:36 GMT -5
I don't enjoy Ten as much as I used to, but I find myself liking the latter stuff a bit more.
|
|
|
Post by kingdzbws on Apr 9, 2007 11:21:45 GMT -5
Funny, I found the reverse w/ Pearl Jam....the bigger Eddie Vedder's ego got, the worse his songs got. But I can take 'em or leave 'em with no problems.
MORE IMPORTANTLY
"As far as sonic youth ................ not better than nirvana."
WHAT?
I don't know what your smoking, but it's either too strong or too weak. The latter I suspect.
M
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Apr 9, 2007 12:54:26 GMT -5
I certainly don't think that Nirvana, by any means, invented or even revolutionized any genre of music - whether it is punk, or metal.
Grunge is not a musical genre in its own - "Grunge" was nothing but a catchy tag to describe the way Kurt Cobain, his band-mates, and their followers dressed. And even that wasn't new....go take a look at some old photos of Keith Morris and his fans from the Circle Jerks days - you'll see the same torn jeans, converse tennies, and t-shirts/flannel shirts. Look at the way the Ramones dressed...they were grungier than Cobain ever dreamed of being. Fashion style and music genres often get used interchangeably - GOTH, GLAM, etc..
All I am saying is that Nirvana was the band (regardless of whether or not you like their music - personally I'm ambivalent about their music) that paved the way for already existing as well as future "alternative" or punk rock bands to get the mainstream exposure they never had before. Social Distortion certainly wouldn't have been signed to Epic without Nirvana’s popularity. Green Day had already released Dookie on Lookout or some other indie label - their major label simply re-marketed and re-distributed that record. Same thing happened with Bad Religion and their major label debut. If major labels weren't looking for the next Nirvana, those bands would have remained independent. That is why Nirvana is important - I don't think their music, on it's own, was revolutionary by any means...and their influences have already been discussed here, all of which I agree with (although I would rather be strapped down and have "NEVERMIND" pumped through my ears for 24 hours straight than listen to a single note of Fugazi…for reasons other than their music).
|
|
|
Post by grover on Apr 9, 2007 16:02:50 GMT -5
Yeah, I can see how you can be rubbed the wrong way by Fugazi and their "We fucking know everything" horseshit. I hear they are pretty arrogant, but their early stuff is rockin'. As for Vedder and Pearl Jam, I think their 2nd and 3rd albums are decent, and there's a song on the 4th I like. After that I think it's cock, with the exception of a good song here and there.
Nirvana was the perfect alternative to be the next step after glam. Jane's Addiction were too gay and other punk acts were too punk.
|
|
|
Post by kingdzbws on Apr 9, 2007 17:30:35 GMT -5
I think your just in love with Ian MacGaye.
Its funny that you mention Social D. Social D had a big following LONG before Nirvana. Your right, they might have never gone to a major label - I don't know - but then we wouldn't have to listen to Ball and Chain. I always saw them as morphing into a bridge between Cali Punk and Metal. Definately not the Punk band they were in '80.
M
Ok, here's a quick game for you. Have a Drink with or Punch in the mug;
Ian MacKaye Mike Ness Henry Rollins Jello
|
|
|
Post by grover on Apr 9, 2007 17:39:14 GMT -5
Well, can't drink with Ian Mackaye, so I guess it's punch.
I'd drink with Ness and Jello, sure. Especially Jello. Rollins for certain. His stories are a hoot.
|
|
|
Post by elliejay21 on Apr 9, 2007 22:20:35 GMT -5
I was just watching the little facts that flash up on the Cablevision music channels, and Kurt "Mr. Innovation" Cobain ripped off Killing Joke's "Eighties" when he wrote "Come As You Are."
Where else did this brand new sound come from? The Sex Pistols? Talking Heads? U2? Simple Minds? The Psychedelic Furs? The Cure?
Way to be original.
|
|
|
Post by elliejay21 on Apr 9, 2007 22:35:27 GMT -5
Yeah, because it was all about fighting the evils of arena rock and the hair bands, not a natural progression out of underground punk and Brit pop/new wave...
NOW PLAYING....and I totally fogot about The Pixies... like they weren't a direct precursor to "the Seattle sound"... or Love and Rockets or Midnight Oil...
James, if you had been old enough to know what a radio was, back in the day with Malibu Sue on 92.7 WDRE/WLIR out of Garden City, you'd have a clue who influenced Nirvana... and where they got some airtime BEFORE Smells Like Teen Spirit.
|
|