Thinking about Nirvana

[KingofOldSchool]

Originally Posted by Kane Knight He killed Tupac to start the countdown to his return.

2-Pac was Cobain

[Zen v.W.o.]

Originally Posted by Penner zen vwo you are ridiculous. Kurt Cobain is basically a household name. Why? Because he killed himself. That's it.

Most retarded post of all time and ever. So he wasnt a household name before that right? Christ you simple minded douche.

Lennon wasnt household until he got shot!!!!!!! about equals what you just said.

The music and what he created and shit was quality and well worth the praise it got before he died and continued to get after. Nothing changed.

Fuckin Penner, you must be 15.

[Zen v.W.o.]

btw KK, nice to see you dismiss everything someone says by calling them fanboys. It's an easy copout, and a rather sly way of making your case look stronger, when in reality it's tiresome and pretty much makes those debating with you want to completely cease from doing so, since it's rather pointless to go on...Your views are not alterable, nor can you see anything from another mindset.

I could label koos a PJ fanboy and rip on everything about them, and he could come back at me with something worthwhile....yet the term fanboy totally KO's the argument!!

BTW I love PJ, so no worries, they wont be shredded.

Yeah Nirvana borrowed some influence from the Pixies..big deal. That's the way the industry works. Yet Nirvana added something those other bands didnt..melody on top of distortion, which was not perfected by other bands until Nirvana. Say what you will, but that was a rather enjoyable dichotomy.
So borrowing from The Melvins, Pixies, etc is pretty much factual, yet does nothing at all to take away from what Nirvana did. They didnt leech, they never ripped off a sound and completely claimed it as something they came up with, if anything it was certain people in the media who dumped that upon them, and they managed to come up with a sound that clicked with millions of people, in a rather profound way. Impact. Something totally undeniable. And for once a band that made it big was where they were because they deserved to be there.

btw, Vedder loves Cobain and would spit on you koos for such asinine opinions. lolz.

[KingofOldSchool]

Originally Posted by Zen v.W.o. I could label koos a PJ fanboy and rip on everything about them, and he could come back at me with something worthwhile....yet the term fanboy totally KO's the argument!!

1. Where did I bring Pearl Jam into this??? Please point me to a part of any of my posts in this topic where I mention them.

2. Yes, Pearl Jam is my favorite band, but I don't proclaim them to be the greatest band of all time. Hell they aren't even in my Top 10.

btw, Vedder loves Cobain and would spit on you koos for such asinine opinions. lolz.

I could care less. I don't follow every single littles gospel like supposed "fanboys" do. If he appreciated Cobain, that's his perogative.

[Kane Knight]

Originally Posted by Zen v.W.o. btw KK, nice to see you dismiss everything someone says by calling them fanboys.

Not everybody, but nice to see you're such a drama queen.

It's an easy copout, and a rather sly way of making your case look stronger, when in reality it's tiresome and pretty much makes those debating with you want to completely cease from doing so, since it's rather pointless to go on...Your views are not alterable, nor can you see anything from another mindset.

That's bullshit, but it's an easy copout for someone who has done nothing but offered empty platitudes.

I could label koos a PJ fanboy and rip on everything about them, and he could come back at me with something worthwhile....yet the term fanboy totally KO's the argument!!

Too bad that wasn't the sum total of my argument, or you might have something other than a bitter little bitchfest.

Yeah Nirvana borrowed some influence from the Pixies..big deal. That's the way the industry works. Yet Nirvana added something those other bands didnt..melody on top of distortion, which was not perfected by other bands until Nirvana. Say what you will, but that was a rather enjoyable dichotomy.

Borrowing? Yeah. Ripped off. Again, still dodging what I said.

So borrowing from The Melvins, Pixies, etc is pretty much factual, yet does nothing at all to take away from what Nirvana did.

Plagiarise?

They didnt leech, they never ripped off a sound and completely claimed it as something they came up with, if anything it was certain people in the media who dumped that upon them, and they managed to come up with a sound that clicked with millions of people, in a rather profound way. Impact. Something totally undeniable. And for once a band that made it big was where they were because they deserved to be there.

No, just because some whiny fuck blew his head off.

Most retarded post of all time and ever. So he wasnt a household name before that right? Christ you simple minded douche. Lennon wasnt household until he got shot!!!!!!! about equals what you just said.

Cobain was a household name in the same way many flavors of the months are before they wash out.

Lennon had been a household name for a significantly longer period of time, wethering even Yoko Ono. Yes, it's the exact same thing, provided Linkin Park is also on this list.

The music and what he created and shit was quality and well worth the praise it got before he died and continued to get after. Nothing changed.

Wow. Total ignorance. To pretend that he did not gain a following simply for dying is to totally ignore REALITY.

[Kane Knight]

Originally Posted by KingofOldSchool 1. Where did I bring Pearl Jam into this??? Please point me to a part of any of my posts in this topic where I mention them. 2. Yes, Pearl Jam is my favorite band, but I don't proclaim them to be the greatest band of all time. Hell they aren't even in my Top 10. I could care less. I don't follow every single littles gospel like supposed "fanboys" do. If he appreciated Cobain, that's his perogative.

You should go around proclaiming that every band draws influence from Pearl Jam. Because dammit, just because Zen looks foolish for comparing your love of a band with his obssessive insistence that they are undeniably influential in every possible genre doesn't mean we can't make it fit.

I mean sure, you aren't professing the brilliance of Vedder.

You're not pretending they're a legendary über influence.

And, you're not saying Pearl Jam is revered by the new generation...

...Otherwise, Zen's completely on the ball. Calling you a fanboy would be EXACTLY the same. Because you're unreasonably making broad assertions that cannot be true...

...Wait, you're not. Shit, this is nothing alike.

[Zen v.W.o.]

KK, look at me, I'm not even listening to a word you're saying.

Just accept Nirvana's greatness and undeniable influence and impact upon the music industry, and try to move on.

[Zen v.W.o.]

[QUOTE=Kane Knight]Not everybody, but nice to see you're such a drama queen.



That's bullshit, but it's an easy copout for someone who has done nothing but offered empty platitudes.



Too bad that wasn't the sum total of my argument, or you might have something other than a bitter little bitchfest.



Borrowing? Yeah. Ripped off. Again, still dodging what I said.



Plagiarise?



No, just because some whiny fuck blew his head off.




Cobain was a household name in the same way many flavors of the months are before they wash out.

Lennon had been a household name for a significantly longer period of time, wethering even Yoko Ono. Yes, it's the exact same thing, provided Linkin Park is also on this list.



Wow. Total ignorance. To pretend that he did not gain a following simply for dying is to totally ignore REALITY.[/QUOTE]

See that last part? Yeah he gained a wider audience after he died. That's fucking par for the course. How that affects what he did musically though is beyond me. He just got more of those intrigued by death types. Big deal.
When Lennon got shot, he got some bandwagon fans jump on his caboose too. When presly wound up dead, same deal. When Dean died he became this fucking icon. Monroe died and she became a legend for whatever reason, despite a serious lack of talent. Cobain wasnt on the Monroe side of things, he died a talented individual and artist.
You say he's overrated. I say that one who acquires more fans and fame due to death doesnt become overrated unless whatever he did in life was not so significant. To try and doubt his significance during his lifetime is to underrate him, and greatly.

[94 SVT Cobra]

Ive always felt this way about Nirvana if Kurt didnt kill himself, Nirvana would just be another band that was "Great back then but not so great now" in a lot of pepoles minds.

BUT, i will FOREVER feel that when pepole say "Kurt Cobain was the voice of an entire generation" i dont think you could ever debate or ignore that. I remember as a kid i had baby sitters in the early-mid90s and a GOOD amount of them just loved nirvana. I even knew wtf teen spirit was at the age of 6-7 and while i appreciated it more as i got older, i couldnt help but feeling like kurt really did speak for that generation with lyrics.

To be blunt about it, i still think kurt cobain was one of the best song writers ever, beacuse his shit was modern enough that you understood it, but deep enough that you felt it.

[Penner]

Originally Posted by Zen v.W.o. Most retarded post of all time and ever. So he wasnt a household name before that right? Christ you simple minded douche. Lennon wasnt household until he got shot!!!!!!! about equals what you just said. The music and what he created and shit was quality and well worth the praise it got before he died and continued to get after. Nothing changed. Fuckin Penner, you must be 15.

lol.

Wow. You "showed" me.

You obviously have no music knowledge at all.

Do you even know what a "household name" means?

I know Nirvana was well praised or whatever, of course, I liked them back then and I still listen to them now.

Not just grunge fans knew who he was, but EVERYONE did and everyone still does. And that is thanks to the suicide.

btw I'm 19.

[Penner]

You're argument is "I'm not listening just accept it"?

Nice.

And you're calling me 15.

[Kane Knight]

Originally Posted by Zen v.W.o. KK, look at me, I'm not even listening to a word you're saying. Just accept Nirvana's greatness and undeniable influence and impact upon the music industry, and try to move on.

And you wonder why you're called a fanboy when KoOS is not.

Originally Posted by Zen v.W.o. See that last part? Yeah he gained a wider audience after he died. That's fucking par for the course. How that affects what he did musically though is beyond me. He just got more of those intrigued by death types. Big deal.

Except, you know, it's contrary to what you said. That's a big deal. But again, nice dodge.

When Lennon got shot, he got some bandwagon fans jump on his caboose too. When presly wound up dead, same deal. When Dean died he became this fucking icon. Monroe died and she became a legend for whatever reason, despite a serious lack of talent. Cobain wasnt on the Monroe side of things, he died a talented individual and artist.

Veeeeery goooood.

You say he's overrated. I say that one who acquires more fans and fame due to death doesnt become overrated unless whatever he did in life was not so significant. To try and doubt his significance during his lifetime is to underrate him, and greatly.

That's bullshit. You're trying to equate accomplishment with popularity, the two of which are not the same or even related.

Their rep is for brilliance and originality, both are undeserved no matter how popular they are. Just because more and more fans scream it after he blew his brains out doesn't make it true. His work and Nirvana's in general is uninspired and unoriginal. That cannot change because people like them. Therefore, their rep is undeserved and they are overrated. Overrated simply means they do not live up to that reputation in reality, not that they are completely insignificant. Again, the overreaction is why you get called a fanboy, not the fact that you like them.

[Zen v.W.o.]

KK, my problem is that you severely underrate what they did do. In fact, you blatantly try to erase most of it, which I find a bit baffling.

Of course I'm a fan, I love their music man. I can tell you they arent the most influential band ever or the best band ever technically speaking, but they simply are one of the most influential bands of all time and they quite obviously did do alot to change and alter the way music was working for the time. And to this day, the results of what they did do back then are still seen.

That is all.

[El Vaquero de Infierno]

I think KK is a secret member of, The Church of Kurt Cobain.

Personally, I like Nirvana. I don't think they were the greatest thing since sliced bread. Most people who do are either teenyboppers or those who have refused to grow-up.

I think they represented the fashion of the time for teenagers, as in music, and possible attitudes and actual fashion. But i they will always be a product of their time, and nothing more.

[Kane Knight]

Originally Posted by Zen v.W.o. KK, my problem is that you severely underrate what they did do. In fact, you blatantly try to erase most of it, which I find a bit baffling.

I don't underrate them; you have blindly fellated them. Sorry. anything's going to seem underrated compared to the blind worship you have levied.

[Vastardikai]

^

I'd like to say this as I was thinking about it today.

I'll admit, I had heard of Nirvana before I heard of the Melvins. When I heard the Melvins, though, I was more impressed. If Nirvana was still around, I think they would have released their equivalent of the Melvins' "Honky" or "Stag" in an attempt to alienate the poser fanbase.

I'd also say that I like the Swans more than the Pixies, but that's just me.

I won't deny that Cobain changed mainstream rock. They are overrated, IMO. at the same time, I find Pearl Jam boring, but again that's just me.

Side note, the Fallout Boy and Panic! at the Disco Fans probably never heard the only GOOD band in that genre: At the Drive-In. First time I heard them, which was I think late 2000, I wondered to myself if that was what it was like to hear Nirvana for the first time.

[El Vaquero de Infierno]

Wasn't "In Utero" their attempt to "alienate the poser fanbase"?

[FakeLaser]

Yeah, and everyone loved it.

[KingofOldSchool]

Originally Posted by FakeRazor Yeah, and everyone loved it.

Everyone?

[FakeLaser]

Everyone.

[KingofOldSchool]

Originally Posted by FakeRazor Everyone.

No.

[Just John]

Nirvana never pushed any buttons for me, Soundgarden, AIC and DEFINATLEY Pearl Jam is just fucking incredible. But Nirvana never gave that to me. I'd put mudhoney and screaming trees in front of them as far as opinion goes.

[El Vaquero de Infierno]

Bah, with the exception of "Jeremy" and "Even Flow," I've always seen Pearl Jam as a poor man's Soundgarden. Don't know why, I just do.

AIC definitly bitch-slap Nirvana into oblivion, though. Tastiness personified.

[Skippord]

AIC is the best grunge band ever

[BCWWF]

Nirvana's influence doesn't have to come from "brilliance and originality." You don't have to be brilliant or original to have an impact on the music world. There are plenty of bands today that have been influenced by Nirvana, you are all just looking at it in a closed box.

The fact is that Nivana lead the way in a major transition. The big bands in the 1980s were the likes of Poison, White Snake, Def Leppard, Mötley Crüe, Van Halen etc. The grunge movement changed the style of music people listened to and thus changed the type of music people start playing in their garage.

Of course there were other grunge bands, notably Pearl Jam and Soundgarden, but they were never as popular. Regardless if they borrowed from other bands, Nirvana was the leader in a musical revolution.

Of course Kurt Cobain gained popularity after he died. Fuck, people even started listening to Aaliyah after she died. That isn't even relevant though. The fact that people in 1991 started buying Nevermind instead of Dr. Feelgood changed how music has evolved. Whether or not Kane Knight deems it "quality" is completely objective. A band doesn't have to sound exactly like Nirvana to be impacted by them.

Nirvana's influence occurred with the release of Nevermind, not Cobain's death.

[Kane Knight]

They weren't leading edge, they were along for the ride. Which is ironic; You, after all, being the one looking at i from a closed box and all.

[KingofOldSchool]

Originally Posted by BCWWF Of course there were other grunge bands, notably Pearl Jam and Soundgarden, but they were never as popular. Regardless if they borrowed from other bands, Nirvana was the leader in a musical revolution.

Sorry there but up until Cobain's death, Pearl Jam and Nirvana were neck and neck.

After Cobain's death Nirvana ironically pulled away from everyone else according to the media.

But after 16 years or so, who is still touring and drawing massive crowds all over the World?

Yeah Pearl Jam is.

No other band in the "grunge (I FUCKING HATE that term)" scene has lasted as long as Pearl Jam has.

Nirvana - Lead singer offed himself because he knew his status would be cemented.

Soundgarden - Broke up

Alice in Chains (although they weren't really grunge) - Lead singer OD'ed

Pearl Jam - Still around and still one of the top grossing touring bands in the World.

[Skippord]

Now Alice In Chains has a crappy singer

[Kane Knight]

Originally Posted by KingofOldSchool Sorry there but up until Cobain's death, Pearl Jam and Nirvana were neck and neck. After Cobain's death Nirvana ironically pulled away from everyone else according to the media.

Yeah, it's funny. Their sales were similar, and so were their popularity levels. The day after Cobain died, Nirvana were suddenly iconic. I find it funny that people try to say otherwise, but whatever.

In terms of mathematics, record sales, Nirvana nad Pearl Jam were actually neck in neck. With like one more studio record and a live record, around the end of the year of Cobain's death they were up by two awards for sales. That's two gold awards, too. You know, for having more records out. Ten and Nevermind, the analogous records, drew about the same sales (Though Ten would eventually pull ahead for almost a full decade).

Pearl Jam is still doing better, but then again, they are still touring. And putting out new records (instead of rehashing former glory).

To be fair, smells like teen spirit as a single sold better than any PJ single.

None of that speaks to superior popularity or iconic status.

Oh, and I was more of an AIC fan, but I won't pretend that they were the iconic forerunner, either.

[BCWWF]

That's because Pearl Jam's music has gotten worse with every album, the same thing that would have happened to Nirvana if they stayed around. That still has nothing to do with the point. Pearl Jam, like Nirvana, made their impact on music in 1991, not 1994 and not 2007. The music scene would not be the same right now had those bands not gained massive popularity. That is when their impact took place.

[Kane Knight]

Originally Posted by BCWWF That's because Pearl Jam's music has gotten worse with every album, the same thing that would have happened to Nirvana if they stayed around. That still has nothing to do with the point. Pearl Jam, like Nirvana, made their impact on music in 1991, not 1994 and not 2007. The music scene would not be the same right now had those bands not gained massive popularity. That is when their impact took place.

So, I'm not sure who you're addressing here, but I'm wondering what's because Pearl Jam's releasing worse records. You know, because KooS said they were still drawing well in terms of tours, so I doubt that's a logical response. And I can't think of anything I just said that this would be alogical response to. Maybe I'm wrong.

Then again, this post doesn't seem logical. Nevermind got most of its certs post Cobain. Not in 1991. Not in 2007. We're talking 1994. 1995. And so on. This would seem to be contrary to the notion that their impact was 1991.