- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Kurt Cobain
Posted on 1/3/14 at 4:05 pm to Draconian Sanctions
Posted on 1/3/14 at 4:05 pm to Draconian Sanctions
Nirvana was definitely more alternative than Pearl Jam or Alice in Chains. Both of those bands play an arena rock style while Nirvana is clearly more of a true punk/alternative rock band. The production quality of Nevermind is the exception versus the norm as far as their style goes. I honestly prefer the Bleach/In Utero stuff more as it seems more honest and raw.
I think AIC and PJ consist of better musicians than Nirvana on the whole. However, it's hard to argue that anyone got more personal with the listener than Kurt during those years. I think that's what separates them from the rest.
Are they in the realm that they are today if he doesn't die in '94? Probably not. Most dead pop musicians get elevated to a pedestal because their deaths raise questions that have no true answers, therefore they kind of live forever. This ultimately creates the notion that they're "better" than others because we still discuss them and their merits long after they are gone.
I think AIC and PJ consist of better musicians than Nirvana on the whole. However, it's hard to argue that anyone got more personal with the listener than Kurt during those years. I think that's what separates them from the rest.
Are they in the realm that they are today if he doesn't die in '94? Probably not. Most dead pop musicians get elevated to a pedestal because their deaths raise questions that have no true answers, therefore they kind of live forever. This ultimately creates the notion that they're "better" than others because we still discuss them and their merits long after they are gone.
1
Posted on 1/3/14 at 4:15 pm to Cdawg
quote:^This guy gets it^.
they're all on about equal footing even though one is punk, one is metal, one is rock and one is rock/metal.
Nirvana, Pearl Jam, Soundgarden, Alice in Chains, The Screaming Trees...all of those bands pretty much exploded on the national scene at the same time. Yes, I know they were playing the Seattle area way before MTV got ahold of them.
All great bands. But to rank Nirvana over the others as if there's a clearcut difference is ridiculous, imho. They all had major label debuts at just about the same time. That's what was so phenomenal about that time period. It was all starting to hit when I was a junior in high school (perfect timing). It wasn't just going to Gap and buying a flannel shirt and growing your bangs out like Kurt. The whole time period of music was great to experience!
And then there were the bands from the west coast (NIN, Jane's Addiction, Primus, a little later on STP, RATM, and Tool, etc.)
Posted on 1/3/14 at 4:31 pm to RealityTiger
quote:
they're all on about equal footing even though one is punk, one is metal, one is rock and one is rock/metal.
^This guy gets it^.
I would disagree, but I dont really like many of the other bands...
I will agree that they all did very well and have huge followings... And to a band, all, I'm sure, hate the label grunge since it cooped a geographical area into one sound, instead of the music itself... which is a shame
There was a ground swell for most of those bands, except PJ... anyone who followed "Alt rock" had heard of Nirvana and Soundgarden... As good as Bleach was, I would have never guessed in a million years that their next album would have turned popular music on its ear...
In modern times, that would probably equate to me thinking the next Diarrhea Planet record is going to change popular music
Posted on 1/3/14 at 4:33 pm to RealityTiger
quote:
And then there were the bands from the west coast (NIN, Jane's Addiction, Primus, a little later on STP, RATM, and Tool, etc.)
I could argue Jane's Addiction was grunge before there was grunge when you compare them to the rest of the Hollywood scene at the time.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 4:38 pm to Kafka
quote:
Drake>Phish>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Beatles
Right BobbyKev?
Posted on 1/3/14 at 4:41 pm to Cdawg
quote:
I could argue Jane's Addiction was grunge before there was grunge when you compare them to the rest of the Hollywood scene at the time.
you'd be wrong. Part of the appeal of grunge was that it specifically WASN'T from LA or NYC. The idea bands could come from Seattle and be successful without having to move to LA was insane. Hell, even Soundgarden signed with SST and moved to LA, right before the scene broke.
Jane's Addiction appealed to a different kind of music fan than the ones into Nirvana in 1990. But by 1991, sure... both were solidly in the mainstream.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 5:09 pm to Draconian Sanctions
This has nothing to do with me no liking Nirvana.
When I think of great guitar players I think of those that had a unique and influential sound, but were also good from a technical standpoint.
Hendrix
SRV
Gilmour
BB King
Buddy Guy
Duane Allman
Did Kurt possess a skill set any where close to these guys? Do you think he deserves to be mentioned with these guys AS A GUITARIST?
Kurt was more influential with his style and lyrics than his playing. They were about an attitude, and showing that angst. They were part of the grunge era, and a new style of music, so I get that they were influential. That's what got people into them. However, there is no piece of guitar work by Cobain that would be difficult to learn for anyone of an average skill set on guitar.
When I think of great guitar players I think of those that had a unique and influential sound, but were also good from a technical standpoint.
Hendrix
SRV
Gilmour
BB King
Buddy Guy
Duane Allman
Did Kurt possess a skill set any where close to these guys? Do you think he deserves to be mentioned with these guys AS A GUITARIST?
Kurt was more influential with his style and lyrics than his playing. They were about an attitude, and showing that angst. They were part of the grunge era, and a new style of music, so I get that they were influential. That's what got people into them. However, there is no piece of guitar work by Cobain that would be difficult to learn for anyone of an average skill set on guitar.
This post was edited on 1/3/14 at 5:19 pm
Posted on 1/3/14 at 5:18 pm to Baloo
quote:
you'd be wrong.
No I wouldn't be if you listen to the music and not the region they were from. B/c in the back drop of hair and glamour, these heroin junkies were about the gutter. They weren't mainstream and definitely not the typical metal of LA.
quote:
Part of the appeal of grunge was that it
specifically WASN'T from LA or NYC.
Didn't Nirvana moved to LA to record Nevermind? But again, I can see where you're coming from by saying grunge is a regional thing but Jane's sound was definitely a precursor to stuff from Seattle. But I know your disdain of Jane's will keep you from admitting that.
quote:
Jane's Addiction appealed to a different kind of music fan than the ones into Nirvana in 1990.
Not really.
This post was edited on 1/3/14 at 5:25 pm
Posted on 1/3/14 at 5:20 pm to CocoLoco
I am sure you already know this, but guitar playing goes way beyond technical skill. If technical skill mattered that much then Joe Satarini and Yagnee Malmsteen and all that speed metal shite would be universally praised.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 5:23 pm to CocoLoco
quote:
However, there is no piece of guitar work by Cobain that would be difficult to learn for anyone of an average skill set on guitar.
and yet you have Gilmour on your list.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 5:30 pm to Cdawg
quote:
They weren't mainstream and definitely not the typical metal of LA.
They were pretty mainstream. They were on MTV pretty routinely. They had a lot in common with Guns n Roses, a fellow LA band that was destroying hair metal from within the Sunset Strip. I do agree they were the bleeding edge of destroying that awful, awful scene, but they cam at from more of a metal place than a punk one. Nirvana came from the punk side.
Nirvana already had Bleach, recorded in Seattle, and the early Nevermind session were in Wisconsin. It wasn't until Butch Vig came in to slick them up for the mainstream that they went to LA. That's also when charges of sellout started. The whole point of indie is that it is recorded outside the music industry. Hence, Kill all Rock Stars.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 5:30 pm to HeadyBrosevelt
I understand that, which is why I am including having an influential sound to go along with technical style. I can't look at any of Cobain's guitar work and be blown away by it. It doesn't mean I don't respect him. I just can't put him in a category with a guy like Hendrix, and it pisses me off that anyone tries to.
I'll also say that I am not impressed with someone that can run down some scales super fast if it has no feel to it. Technical skills isn't everything, I agree with that.
I'll also say that I am not impressed with someone that can run down some scales super fast if it has no feel to it. Technical skills isn't everything, I agree with that.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 5:36 pm to Cdawg
quote:
and yet you have Gilmour on your list.
LOL
Posted on 1/3/14 at 5:39 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
ust because it's not as poppy doesn't mean it's not as good. Some of you clowns need to expand your mind.
This 'clown' has much more varied taste in music than you do, I promise ya.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 5:45 pm to lpgreat1
However, it's hard to argue that anyone got more personal with the listener than Kurt during those years.
That's not hard to argue. In fact, it's incredibly easy.
You don't get much more 'personal' than this.
[link=(www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBB2OS4IoTs?)]Don't Follow[/link]
And that's just one quick example where Staley got as or more personal than Cobain, starting with lots of the stuff on Facelift.
That's not hard to argue. In fact, it's incredibly easy.
You don't get much more 'personal' than this.
[link=(www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBB2OS4IoTs?)]Don't Follow[/link]
And that's just one quick example where Staley got as or more personal than Cobain, starting with lots of the stuff on Facelift.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 5:48 pm to Baloo
quote:Not until that god awful Been Caught Stealing. THAT was the downfall. But that was late 1990. By then AIC and Soundgarden were gaining steam.
They were pretty mainstream. They were on MTV pretty routinely
quote:
They had a lot in common with Guns n Roses
other than destroying hair metal from within and being from LA, not really. That was two different audiences. Jane's had some west coast punk influences. Where GNR was straight up hard rock.
quote:
The whole point of indie is that it is recorded outside the music industry
Jane's first release was on Triple X records who also released Social D's first album.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 6:01 pm to Cdawg
quote:
B/c in the back drop of hair and glamour, these heroin junkies were about the gutter. They weren't mainstream and definitely not the typical metal of LA.
You're thinking of Guns 'n Roses.
Jane's were bohemians who brought drag queens to their shows. They weren't 'gutter'.
Nor were they grunge, although they were influential. They're a quintessential LA band all the way
quote:
Didn't Nirvana moved to LA to record Nevermind?
I think that had to do more with what their label wanted or chose to book. They'd already arranged and recorded most of the album once in Wisconsin with Vig, but only 'Polly' from those sessions made the final album. They hadn't signed with DGC yet at that point. DGC is who booked Sound City, possibly at Vig's behest, which is where they rearranged and recorded the final tracks.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 6:03 pm to Sayre
quote:
Vig
That guy really gooped up Nevermind... would have loved to hear an Albini version...
Posted on 1/3/14 at 6:05 pm to Cdawg
quote:
and yet you have Gilmour on your list.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 6:07 pm to Baloo
quote:
They had a lot in common with Guns n Roses,
quote:
but they cam at from more of a metal place than a punk one.
The guyes in Jane's don't think so, at least not to nearly the degree musically you suggest. As a matter of fact they themselves say pretty much the exact opposite.
Page 5 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News