ChexOrWrex
Ya gotta wanna
- Joined
- May 19, 2013
- Messages
- 27,605
- Points
- 883
Kurt Cobain who?Many others have sacrificed themselves in the name of unrecognized, unsubstantiated causes. Nobody remembers them and yet, they are gone
Kurt Cobain who?Many others have sacrificed themselves in the name of unrecognized, unsubstantiated causes. Nobody remembers them and yet, they are gone
Grunge was short-lived for obvious reasons. Nirvana sucked.Kurt Cobain who?
Being a metal head I'm no fan of grunge but Nirvana definitely hit a nerve with the masses and inspired thousands of young musicians. Cant call that "sucking".Grunge was short-lived for obvious reasons. Nirvana sucked.
In 20 years, people will have to Google, "Kurt Cobain". They are not The Rolling Stones, they are not Led Zeppelin. They will also have to Google those that they inspired. The bands that are 40-50 years old are still the most influential, currently in rock & roll.Being a metal head I'm no fan of grunge but Nirvana definitely hit a nerve with the masses and inspired thousands of young musicians. Cant call that "sucking".
They will google Kurt Cobain because they will have heard Nirvana on the radio and probably rocked out to it. Cant really compare Nirvana to LZ - the band that basically started modern rock n roll. The Rolling Stones are horribly over rated. The only one worth mentioning is Richards. If you want to compare bands you'd have to compare Nirvana with Alice In Chains. Of course Nirvana was just noise. They were loud, noticeable, and most of all unique. That is why they are loved and cannot be duplicated.In 20 years, people will have to Google, "Kurt Cobain". They are not The Rolling Stones, they are not Led Zeppelin. They will also have to Google those that they inspired. The bands that are 40-50 years old are still the most influential, currently in rock & roll.
Nirvana was just noise, IMO.
The Rolling Stones are horribly over rated.
Easily debatable.The Rolling Stones are the best musical act in history
Easily debatable.
Michael Jackson
Elvis Presley
Metallica
AC/DC
KISS
Modanna
Elton John
Pink Floyd
Like their respective genre's or not - these acts can sell out stadiums, arenas, and festivals in the minutes.
Well to offer a debate, The Stones have sold out every world concert venue for probably longer than you've been alive. Somebody's still buying their stuff.They will google Kurt Cobain because they will have heard Nirvana on the radio and probably rocked out to it. Cant really compare Nirvana to LZ - the band that basically started modern rock n roll. The Rolling Stones are horribly over rated. The only one worth mentioning is Richards. If you want to compare bands you'd have to compare Nirvana with Alice In Chains. Of course Nirvana was just noise. They were loud, noticeable, and most of all unique. That is why they are loved and cannot be duplicated.
Or Austin Dillion to Dale Earnhardt. Just doesnt make sense
Post the extensive Nirvana #1 hit list.
Or, if you prefer, radio play count number.
You hit the nail right on the head there. Most of my musical taste comes from growing up when I did. I went to high school until 1987, and I grew up playing guitar in what many now consider hair metal bands. My favorite bands were always Iron Maiden and Rush a lot of others that I liked to varying degrees as well. I also had 8, mostly music loving, older siblings so I was exposed to just about everything you can imagine and I loved a lot of it from John Denver and the Carpenters to Nazareth and the Electric Prunes.I think Nirvana is a little overrated, but I will listen if Smells Like Teen Spirit is on the radio. It's a decent song. The rest of Nirvana I don't care for. I think the people who love Nirvana were at the angsty teen flannel-wearing time of their life when Nirvana hit and that's why they're so beloved. It's like my Van Halen example, so much of your opinions of musicians is based on who YOU were when you first heard them. That's why it's important to look at their historical context outside of how you feel about them.
That's a good point as well. Guys like Poison and a lot of the cheesier crappy stuff that it turned into made it much easier to kill and it was bound to die soon enough anyway. But, the grunge guys seemed to speed up the process exponentially.Nirvana's biggest contribution to music was that they pretty much singlehandedly eliminated hair bands. They had a different sound and a different look, and all of a sudden a bunch of dudes with long perms and makeup singing power ballads didn't seem so cool anymore.
...and now the Grunge phase is pretty much over. There really isn't any good new rock and roll anymore, IMO.Nirvana's biggest contribution to music was that they pretty much singlehandedly eliminated hair bands. They had a different sound and a different look, and all of a sudden a bunch of dudes with long perms and makeup singing power ballads didn't seem so cool anymore.
...and now the Grunge phase is pretty much over. There really isn't any good new rock and roll anymore, IMO.
Who?As I've said before, the local rock station here (96.3 WROV) very rarely plays modern rock music.
The top "Rock" artist in 2013 was Lorde. That says it all. I can't listen to her music without wanting to throw my radio through a window that is closed.
Who?
In 20 years, people will have to Google, "Kurt Cobain". They are not The Rolling Stones, they are not Led Zeppelin. They will also have to Google those that they inspired. The bands that are 40-50 years old are still the most influential, currently in rock & roll.
Nirvana was just noise, IMO.
This is where rock music and country music for that matter are at. Grammy for best rock album in 2013: Led Zeppelin. ACM Award for Best Album: George Strait.
Kacey who?Actually, Kacey Musgraves won album of the year. Strait won Entertainer Of The Year. To be fair, with this being his final tour, there was no way he was losing that award.
I disagree for obvious reasons. In 20 years they won't even be playing Nirvana on the radio and The Rolling Stones will be in the middle of World Tour 2034.I loathe Nirvana, but this post is laughable. In 20 years, Cobain will be just as remembered as Jagger, Morrison, etc. No, I'm not saying he belongs in the same category as them, but he's certainly not going to be forgotten about.
I disagree for obvious reasons. In 20 years they won't even be playing Nirvana on the radio and The Rolling Stones will be in the middle of World Tour 2034.
...and now the Grunge phase is pretty much over. There really isn't any good new rock and roll anymore, IMO.
I can't remember the last time I heard a Nirvana song on the radio. I heard the Stones this morning.
Like Andy said, they only had one hit song.
Yeah, it's really no comparison.Hmmm, that's weird, considering I hear them on a daily basis, unfortunately. Even so, you're comparing a band with 24 albums and a 50 year career to a band with 6 albums and a 7 year career. Obviously you are going to hear one more often than the other.
In truth, they really only did 3 albums. Live albums, compilations, boxed sets don't really count.Hmmm, that's weird, considering I hear them on a daily basis, unfortunately. Even so, you're comparing a band with 24 albums and a 50 year career to a band with 6 albums and a 7 year career. Obviously you are going to hear one more often than the other.