Nirvana's place in the world of music....

[Peck]

Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

Wow, I thought it was common knowledge that Nirvana was a pivotal part of the evolution of rock. If not, why can't anyone name a bigger rock star since Cobain's death? Or did rock die with him?

But doesn't this really go back to help prove my original point? You know the point being that Nirvana did not save rock & roll but was part of a movement that actually pretty much killed the genre in the popular culture.

I'm not sure what qualifies a person as being a rock star for sure though so this may not be the best way to do this.

I mean is Kid Rock a rock star? Or how about the bass player for Fallout Boy, he for some reason seems to be linked to a rock star persona.

[avoidingtheclowns]

Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

Just curious as I don't consider myself even close to a "hard core music fan" (I have some preferences and have learned to appreciate the past more via the Rock Band / Guitar Hero games), but the one group I really consider myself a fan of is, as I've said, Foo Fighters. Within circles that are much more into this than I am, how are they thought of? I guess I mean first just among general music fans, and then also among specifically rock fans. How about Dave Grohl in particular?

I remember having a discussion on here with Los Angeles about Grohl. Can't locate the actual discussion so perhaps it was lost during the shutdown a few years ago. Not to put words in his mouth, but I think I remember him saying something along the lines of Grohl/Foo Fighters being similar to Tom Petty and that made a lot of sense to me.

Grohl isn't trying to change the world or break aesthetic barriers. He's just a guy with a guitar (or drum kit) who lives, breathes and sleeps music. Music is more of a celebration for Grohl; he always seems to be doing something - be it Foo, Queens of the Stone Age, Them Crooked Vultures, Tenacious D or just drumming with Neil Young, Paul McCartney, David Bowie, Jimmy Page and John Paul Jones. The guy never ventures far outside of his comfort zone but that's fine, because he's pretty good at what he does (kinda like Tom Petty... or Tom Hanks for that matter).

I think Grohl inhabits a middle ground for aspiring musical snobs and those who worship at the altar of Clear Channel zombie stations. Is Grohl's contribution to music as confrontational or inventive as Thom Yorke's? Nope. But he sure as **** isn't as hackneyed as Chad Kroeger or a 3 Doors Down record.

[Peck]

Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

I was 24 -25 years old when Nirvana hit. Now here is the question, at what age is a generation? In other words was I to old for that to be considered my generation or would that have been my generation?

[cdash]

Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

Cdash I'm not on a high horse, you said their status was overblown, "halfway joked" about them being one hit wonders. I knew you were wrong and I was already aware of the things I cited, thats why I chose to get involved in this thread. I will agree you did begin to back peddle.

Most casual music fans can name one Nirvana song: Smells like Teen Spirit. It was their only top 10 hit, and while other songs charted, you start getting into hazy definitions of what is and is not a "hit." That's why I was only halfway joking. So I ask, what is really "wrong" there?

[Trader Joe]

Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

I was 24 -25 years old when Nirvana hit. Now here is the question, at what age is a generation? In other words was I to old for that to be considered my generation or would that have been my generation?

In theory, you should have been part of the huge generation and population Constellations claims Nirvana influenced.

[Since86]

Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

Find that quote then. I never stated this nor, hinted. I said from the beginning that they are comparable. FIND THE QUOTE. This thread exists from people bashing these people for their drug addictions and real life habits. I stand by saying that Kurt was the Lennon of the 90's (MUSICALLY).

Obviously you didn't take the time to read what I actually wrote, eventhough you quoted the whole thing.....

EDIT: I was going to quote the post that got all this started, but it looks like it's been lost in the move over.

You have the freedom to amend, or correct (me) whichever, what you said.

Let's hear your stance on Lennon vs. Cobain.

This off-topic thread got started by your statements. So let's hear exactly what they are.

And this thread has nothing to do with drugs or addiction. There isn't one single discussion in this thread about them.

[Trader Joe]

Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

Here's my take on comparing Cobain to other musicians on a personal cultural impact level

Cobain vs. Tupac interesting debate...

Tupac vs. Lennon, not as interesting, but at least they were still both politically concerned.

Cobain vs. Lennon, only interesting in the sense that they both played music and the Beatles and Lennon influenced Cobain greatly.

[Since86]

Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

The guitar analogy is fine. To make a good movie you need a lot more than a camera, and to make good music you need a lot more than a good guitar. Industry standard or not, you still need good acting, a solid script, an artistic eye, good production value, etc to make a good movie. Likewise to make good music, you need to write good music, have decent lyrics, decent production quality...you get the idea.

You can even switch the analogy to his point, the recording studio, because your analogy still rings true.

Just because you have the best recording equipment, the best producers, etc, still doesn't mean you'll make quality music that appeals to a mass audience.

You still have to have the talent, and while equipement might enhance your talent, you still have to have it.

[billbradley]

Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

A couple of you have said "Will we be talking about them years later?" and saying other artist like "Britney" will be talked about more because Nirvana is a "niche band." Cdash believes that in the future, the casual music fan will only know one of Nirvana's songs.

I can use many artists to explain that even if we are not talking about Nirvana years later, even if we talk about Britney more, even if they are a "niche band", and even if they are remembered for one song in the future, they will still be remembered as one of greatest artists / bands of all time. Does the casual fan remember more than one of Otis Redding's song? I have all his albums and I couldn't name many of his songs. Same with Buddy Holly. Stevie Wonder? Songs in the Key of Life is a masterpiece, but it isn't talked about more than Nevermind. Does that take away from Stevie Wonder? How about Coltrane and Dizzy Gillespie, do they lose their iconic level in Jazz history and music because we can't name their songs? No. But the reality is Nirvana would still be a major icon of rock even if all the things some of you have said comes true. And since they represented so much in the short time they were around, I would argue that they will become even more relevant as a blanket band to represent a decade of music.

[billbradley]

Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

Here's my take on comparing Cobain to other musicians on a personal cultural impact level

Cobain vs. Tupac interesting debate...

Interesting because the 90s will be remembered musically for Nirvana leading punk revival through grundge and the war between East Coast and West Coast rap.

Cobain vs. Lennon, only interesting in the sense that they both played music and the Beatles and Lennon influenced Cobain greatly.

And also they both represented an era of music.

[billbradley]

Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

But doesn't this really go back to help prove my original point? You know the point being that Nirvana did not save rock & roll but was part of a movement that actually pretty much killed the genre in the popular culture.

I'm not sure what qualifies a person as being a rock star for sure though so this may not be the best way to do this.

I mean is Kid Rock a rock star? Or how about the bass player for Fallout Boy, he for some reason seems to be linked to a rock star persona.

I was not aware that someone had said Nirvana saved rock or that Nirvana killed rock. I don't believe Nirvana saved rock or killed it. Since we are talking about cultural impact, I would say the term rock star or icon is applicable when the musicians, music historians, writers and critics who perserve this history document it as such.

[Trader Joe]

Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

And also they both represented an era of music.

I just disagree with this...no they didn't IMO. Cobain was here and gone. An entire era? Really? How many bands did Nirvana inspire? Pearl Jam was already there, the movement was already happening...

[Trader Joe]

Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

Oh, also how have we gone through this entire thread without mentioning Green Day. Who like em or not deserve a huge share of the credit when we're talking about 90s rock or the increase of punk/grunge music. And they definitely qualify as rock stars post Cobain.

[billbradley]

Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

I just disagree with this...no they didn't IMO. Cobain was here and gone. An entire era? Really? How many bands did Nirvana inspire? Pearl Jam was already there, the movement was already happening...

If you are an icon equated with giving a subculture mainstream success and called by your peers the voice of a generation, that would be a way you can represent an era.

Oh, also how have we gone through this entire thread without mentioning Green Day. Who like em or not deserve a huge share of the credit when we're talking about 90s rock or the increase of punk/grunge music. And they definitely qualify as rock stars post Cobain.

Great example, I loved Dookie, one of my first post punk CDs. I do not like Green Day, and I think they sold out in a way (I don't like that term) but I understand they are importrant for the history of rock for punk revival. Did they achieve the status of Nirvana and release one of the greatest rock albums of all time? No. Is Billy Joe as recognizable as even Dave Grohl? Perhaps. But even though I don't like Green Day I respect and understand they have managed a place in rock history that may surpassed bands I think are more important (Sonic Youth) by staying relevant through creative rebranding and I think some plays or rockumentaries?

I don't like much of Eminem's work after the first two albums, but without much thought, he is probably the closest thing we've had to a figure like Cobain. From just a rock standpoint, critically Radiohead would have to be the most appreciated and influential band of my generation. However, they aren't wildly popular.

[Peck]

Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

Honest question here & I know this is going to sound absurd but I'll ask anyway.

Why is Nirvana any more relevant to music and history than the Cars?

Neither started the music trend that they came to popularize but both became pioneers & leaders to the style they represented. Grunge in Nirvana's case and New Wave for the Cars.