The music is incredibly simple and dull.
Is there something profound that I'm missing?
Or do I just not get it, man?
The music is incredibly simple and dull.
Is there something profound that I'm missing?
Or do I just not get it, man?
niryawna wrote:
The music is incredibly simple and dull.
Is there something profound that I'm missing?
Or do I just not get it, man?
I agree with you if you just look at the music, but you have to look at it in context. The 80s before Nirvana was filled with synthesizers and except for a few bands (Van Halen, Mötley Crüe, etc.), use of driving LOUD electric guitars was mostly absent. Human League, Prince (Purple Rain Prince), Tears for Fears, Simply Red dominated the radio stations.
Nirvana brought a new type of rebellion to young people who wanted their own thing. Rock and roll wasn't for everyone and neither was pop music. Grunge struck a "chord" with many people.
So, while I'm no fan of Nirvana (though I am a fan of Dave Grohl), I recognize them for the trailblazers they were.
Flagpole wrote:
niryawna wrote:The music is incredibly simple and dull.
Is there something profound that I'm missing?
Or do I just not get it, man?
I agree with you if you just look at the music, but you have to look at it in context. The 80s before Nirvana was filled with synthesizers and except for a few bands (Van Halen, Mley Cre, etc.), use of driving LOUD electric guitars was mostly absent. Human League, Prince (Purple Rain Prince), Tears for Fears, Simply Red dominated the radio stations.
Nirvana brought a new type of rebellion to young people who wanted their own thing. Rock and roll wasn't for everyone and neither was pop music. Grunge struck a "chord" with many people.
So, while I'm no fan of Nirvana (though I am a fan of Dave Grohl), I recognize them for the trailblazers they were.
What do you have against Miley Cyrus' earlier work?
There were dozens of bands in Mpls doing what Nirvana tried to copy years before Nirvana. Nirvana is the 2nd most overrated band in history, only slightly behind Led Zepplin.
BaloneyandPhooey wrote:
There were dozens of bands in Mpls doing what Nirvana tried to copy years before Nirvana. Nirvana is the 2nd most overrated band in history, only slightly behind Led Zepplin.
The one that takes is the one that gets the credit.
Led Zeppelin was great though.
Timing
Their stuff came out at just the right time.
Nothing genius about them.
I'm not sure what makes them stand out above Alice In Chains.
Similar genre.
Both have dead lead singers.
Nirvana's music wasn't any better.
Alice In Chain's stuff hit the radio a little after Nirvana's Nevermind even though Man in the Box was made before Nevermind.
And that's what puts Nirvana over Alice in Chains as being credited for changing music.
Flagpole wrote:
The 80s before Nirvana was filled with synthesizers and except for a few bands (Van Halen, Mley Cr, etc.), use of driving LOUD electric guitars was mostly absent. Human League, Prince (Purple Rain Prince), Tears for Fears, Simply Red dominated the radio stations.
your remembrance of the 80s is very different to mine.
one of the major soundracks of the 80s was the rock musics( heavy metal, hard rock, aor, hair-band metal, the later guns n roses type hard rock).
the children's shows had rock inflected licks. in the first terminator film iirc had metal licks in it.
my neighbour would bang out the iron maiden. iron maiden and other heavy metal bands were huge, even without air or tv play here in the uk. they were well known and internationally too.
the rock scenes were massive and pervasive in the 80s.
the last major band of the 80s rock era was g n r. they were beyond massive. they were megastars
in 1992 in the uk, we were having a 2nd summer of love, i was a raver. my friends while liking rave, were hard rockers and metallers.
---
i remember in 1992, watching the first uk showing of nirvana's 'smells like teen spirit' music video on topofthepops (a uk mtv). to me, it just sounded like downbeat metal chorus with quiet verses, i was disappointed, it sounded drab (tho i did like the quiet verse 'innovation'). the chorus didnt sound like the high octane, yeehaa, upbeat swagger of other rock/ metal i was used to, and prefered
but nirvana were one of the leaders of a new wave of blues-free, riff-free, solo-free strumming guitar music. virtually overnight in 92, everyone starts wearing flannel shirts lol. there are others who can comment in more detail on the odd swiftness of this musical switch in 92.
and as the 90s progressed it wasnt just guitar music that lost the bluesy elements, but also electronic dance musics[after 1992, bluesy elements like the jazz piano riffs, bluesy/soul style singing start to disappear :( ], and hiphop/ urban (which outside of g-funk sampling. was just a slow unriffed bass, and was as regular as victorian marching music)
---
personally i prefer bluesy influences in my music, and prefer riffs and solos(ah, the lost art of the fcking solo), to strum strum yawnworthy strum music.
finally, i dont consider grunge or alot of the alt rock stuff to be rock, it has no blues in it.
for me, for guitar music to be rock, it has to have bluesy elements, that reflect its origin.
In an era where music was at its absolute rock bottom they came along and dug the bottom a little deeper.
niryawna wrote:
The music is incredibly simple and dull.
Is there something profound that I'm missing?
Or do I just not get it, man?
Hey man their message is really deep and all, it's a bummer that you don't get it.
Nothing about them is good.
Nirvana
Sammy Davis Jr
Bruce Springstein
Tom Brady
The most over rated entertainment sports personalities of all time.
jameseq wrote:
Flagpole wrote:The 80s before Nirvana was filled with synthesizers and except for a few bands (Van Halen, Mley Cr, etc.), use of driving LOUD electric guitars was mostly absent. Human League, Prince (Purple Rain Prince), Tears for Fears, Simply Red dominated the radio stations.
your remembrance of the 80s is very different to mine.
one of the major soundracks of the 80s was the rock musics( heavy metal, hard rock, aor, hair-band metal, the later guns n roses type hard rock).
the children's shows had rock inflected licks. in the first terminator film iirc had metal licks in it.
my neighbour would bang out the iron maiden. iron maiden and other heavy metal bands were huge, even without air or tv play here in the uk. they were well known and internationally too.
the rock scenes were massive and pervasive in the 80s.
the last major band of the 80s rock era was g n r. they were beyond massive. they were megastars
in 1992 in the uk, we were having a 2nd summer of love, i was a raver. my friends while liking rave, were hard rockers and metallers.
---
i remember in 1992, watching the first uk showing of nirvana's 'smells like teen spirit' music video on topofthepops (a uk mtv). to me, it just sounded like downbeat metal chorus with quiet verses, i was disappointed, it sounded drab (tho i did like the quiet verse 'innovation'). the chorus didnt sound like the high octane, yeehaa, upbeat swagger of other rock/ metal i was used to, and prefered
but nirvana were one of the leaders of a new wave of blues-free, riff-free, solo-free strumming guitar music. virtually overnight in 92, everyone starts wearing flannel shirts lol. there are others who can comment in more detail on the odd swiftness of this musical switch in 92.
and as the 90s progressed it wasnt just guitar music that lost the bluesy elements, but also electronic dance musics[after 1992, bluesy elements like the jazz piano riffs, bluesy/soul style singing start to disappear :( ], and hiphop/ urban (which outside of g-funk sampling. was just a slow unriffed bass, and was as regular as victorian marching music)
---
personally i prefer bluesy influences in my music, and prefer riffs and solos(ah, the lost art of the fcking solo), to strum strum yawnworthy strum music.
finally, i dont consider grunge or alot of the alt rock stuff to be rock, it has no blues in it.
for me, for guitar music to be rock, it has to have bluesy elements, that reflect its origin.
The "heavy" rock groups of the 80s were a bunch of guys looking like transvestites with fluffy hair and spandex tights.
nothing, nirvana sux.
Styx, Journey, REO, Rush, Night Ranger >>>>>>>>>>>>>Nirvana
please people know what REAL music sounds like.
Nirvana was a good band.
I don't think people realize how silly and stupid hair metal had gotten by the early 1990's. They made music that was much darker, grittier (grungier?) and intense than anything else. The first time I saw the video for Smells Like Teen Spirit I imagined that all the hair bands were watching at the same time and thinking "we just lost our jobs." And they pretty much did.
Typical runner or sockpuppet wrote:
Nirvana was a good band.
They still are a good band.
Maverik wrote:
Typical runner or sockpuppet wrote:Nirvana was a good band.
They still are a good band.
Yeah that's what I meant.
Typical runner or sockpuppet wrote:
Maverik wrote:They still are a good band.
Yeah that's what I meant.
*under his breath*
I thought so
Apparently Flagpole is not familiar with the Pixies. There was an entire Punk movement long before Seattle's Sub Pop scene came along. Frank Black, the Ramones, Sonic Youth, Black Flag, and a host of others had been pushing back against Drama Rock for over a decade before the Seattle scene emerged.
Typical runner or sockpuppet wrote:
Nirvana was a good band.
I don't think people realize how silly and stupid hair metal had gotten by the early 1990's. They made music that was much darker, grittier (grungier?) and intense than anything else. The first time I saw the video for Smells Like Teen Spirit I imagined that all the hair bands were watching at the same time and thinking "we just lost our jobs." And they pretty much did.
You didn't imagine that. It happened and was reported on a documentary. Then you took the line and told everyone here that you "imagined" it. In fact, it was one of the members of Poison who called up Brett Michaels, told him to turn on MTV and watch. After the song was over, Brett's response was "_____ we just lost our jobs".
Interesting! You're probably right because that's how our memories fill in gaps and whatnot, but I swear I've been using that line since summer of 1991. I even recall saying that during my college orientation (I graduated in 1991). But like you point out, if someone else famous used it, then I probably took it without realizing it.
No you got it dead on. For some reason some of the hopeless clung to that crap. Lousy musicians and sophomoric lyrics combined with heroine-chic sold like wildfire during that time - blame Seattle I guess.
God they really sucked.