- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
3
Posted on 9/26/21 at 10:23 am to mikelbr
This is the truth. You’re right. They’re all super talented and just going along with the times. If paul, John, George, and ringo were starting in the 90’s they’d be one of the greatest grunge bands as well. What a wonderful era of music.
Posted on 9/26/21 at 10:23 am to UndercoverBryologist
quote:
In addition, the timeline is that Soundgarden got signed to A&M in 1989.
So did AiC, to Columbia. Soundgardens management did pass along demo tapes to an A&R guy at Columbia, so there is that connection.
This is how a “scene” works, though. I’ll argue till death that these bands were not cookie cutter and shouldn’t really even be all put into the same genre.
Posted on 9/26/21 at 10:24 am to USMEagles
quote:
The Alice In Chains apologists showed up quick
They don’t need apologists
Posted on 9/26/21 at 10:26 am to GeauxOCDP
quote:
I can tell you from experience that signing with a label, you give up pretty much all rights to what you wear on stage, your sound, if they choose, and legally, your music itself. They control your "musical persona". You can usually negotiate a few different aspects of a deal, but those 3 are pretty much set in stone. They aren't going to take the risk if you aren't willing to be a puppet. May have been different in the early 90's though idk.
Uh, Prince signed a record deal at 17 that allowed him to write, produce, and play all of the instruments on all of his albums...and he was coming out on stage in a speedo and a trench coat at the time.
If you have enough talent, you get the deal that you deserve.
Posted on 9/26/21 at 10:28 am to bgtiger
quote:
This is how a “scene” works, though. I’ll argue till death that these bands were not cookie cutter and shouldn’t really even be all put into the same genre.
Grunge is a stupid label anyway. I always just refer to them as "the bands from Seattle".
Posted on 9/26/21 at 10:30 am to USMEagles
quote:
The Alice In Chains apologists
They need no apologist.
Posted on 9/26/21 at 10:36 am to bgtiger
quote:
Your timelines must be way off. Facelift was released in 1990. Nevermind, and the media blitz of “Grunge” didn’t take off until 1991/1992.
Facelift is not a hair metal album.
I think Facelift is at least arguably the first grunge album. It’s certainly more accurately categorized with what came after than what came before, musically.
Posted on 9/26/21 at 10:40 am to USMEagles
quote:
Alice In Chains apologists
What does that even mean in this context?
Or is that just the first thing that sounded clever that popped into your brain?
Posted on 9/26/21 at 10:44 am to James11111
This theory is insane. Who would be the Lou Perlman of Grunge? He doesn’t exist.
Posted on 9/26/21 at 10:46 am to Hetfield
quote:
This theory is insane. Who would be the Lou Perlman of Grunge? He doesn’t exist.
Actually, there are two potential candidates:
Bruce Pavitt and Jonathan Poneman, the owners of Sub Pop.
They did a lot of astro-turfing to build the buzz surrounding the "Seattle sound."
Edit: They got a nice financial kickback for getting Sub Pop bands to sign to major labels:
quote:
When Nirvana moved to Geffen Records, Sub Pop received royalties from sales of Bleach that kept the label going for years afterwards.[14] A stipulation was also implemented where selected future Nirvana studio LPs were required to carry the Sub Pop logo alongside Geffen's. After the mainstream success of Nirvana, many successful grunge bands had left Sub Pop for major record labels. Soon afterwards, a joint venture was formed with Warner Bros. Records (which had distributed Geffen since that label was founded in 1980; after 10 years under Warner, Geffen was sold to MCA Music Entertainment Group), thereby ending Sub Pop's status as an entirely independent label.
This post was edited on 9/26/21 at 10:48 am
Posted on 9/26/21 at 10:48 am to UndercoverBryologist
quote:
I forget who it was, but one band admitted they never wore flannel until Nirvana hit big and all of a sudden, they were told to make their image more “Seattle.”
This 100% happened.
Posted on 9/26/21 at 10:49 am to UndercoverBryologist
quote:
forget who it was, but one band admitted they never wore flannel until Nirvana hit big and all of a sudden, they were told to make their image more “Seattle.”
There are more stories out there like that.
Still a pretty big jump between boy bands throwing on a flannel shirt to fit in. Every band on the radio is going to have some commoditization.
Posted on 9/26/21 at 10:50 am to UndercoverBryologist
quote:
quote:
This theory is insane. Who would be the Lou Perlman of Grunge? He doesn’t exist.
Actually, there are two potential candidates:
Bruce Pavitt and Jonathan Poneman, the owners of Sub Pop.
They did a lot of astro-turfing to build the buzz surrounding the "Seattle sound."
There’s really no music “scene” that was purely organic. Some were certainly more so than others, however.
Posted on 9/26/21 at 10:50 am to NoSaint
quote:
Still a pretty big jump between boy bands throwing on a flannel shirt to fit in. Every band on the radio is going to have some commoditization.
Hence, my original response all the way back on Page 1.
"It's not entirely inaccurate."
Posted on 9/26/21 at 10:54 am to James11111
Neil Young invented grunge, the Pixies perfected it, Nirvana commercialized it.
Posted on 9/26/21 at 10:54 am to Pechon
quote:
However he and the rest of Pearl Jam repeat the same banal left wing talking points but you'd expect that from Pearl Jam. You only hear more about their political stances now because everything has to be political and now we have social media to showcase it. The complete oppisite of what the vast majority of the Ricketts family supports and it's not like it's a secret either. The Cubs chairman, Tom Ricketts has a brother who is the governor of Nebraska as a Republican. That would be Pete Ricketts.
But like any rich fair weather fan would do, he mooched his way with the Ricketts family so he could be at Wrigley and be a face for the franchise when they were good. Oh they donate to causes that are the antithesis to what we preach to our fans....uh..yeah... ignore that.
I bet you’re a joy at parties
Posted on 9/26/21 at 11:00 am to James11111
I think pretty much all mainstream media is about cultivating a brand. There's nothing necessarily wrong with that. There's still some good entertainment that can come out of it.
Good bands are pretty timeless, and it's not so much because of their raw talent as their manager's skill at promotion and keeping them together.
Good bands are pretty timeless, and it's not so much because of their raw talent as their manager's skill at promotion and keeping them together.
Posted on 9/26/21 at 11:02 am to James11111
quote:
New conspiracy theory. Was grunge put together the same as boy bands in the 90's?
If so, then where are all the creepy managers that always came out of the woodwork back then to take credit for the boy-band abominations?
This post was edited on 9/26/21 at 11:03 am
Posted on 9/26/21 at 11:10 am to UndercoverBryologist
quote:
Sub Pop
That’s a lot to gnaw on. It’s something for sure just a matter of how much versus just one link in the chain so to speak.
Page 4 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News