Today 5th April..............11 years ago.......Kurt Cobain "left" the planet........

[gvarko]

Your right again...

Obviously you are wrong, since Billie Holiday was a woman, not a man and is was a Jazz/Blues singer from the 40s not the 80s or 90s.

See how much influence Billie had on my life.. I didn't even know who you were talking about..

Your point was??

 

[chadsxe]

11 years ago the man died,

Thank god.....

He = bad

 

[Dracon]

See how much influence Billie had on my life.. I didn't even know who you were talking about..

Your point was??

Actually do you know who Marconie was, since he's had an influence on your life. What about Joseph Henry, or Andre-Marie Ampere, or even Michael Faraday, or Alessandro Volta?

Most people don't even know who these people are or how they have influence their everyday life. Billie Holiday brought black music and Blues to people. I believe she was the very first Black Female Singer to be widely accepted by the general population. This was after Mamie Smith popularity within the black community and which allowed her music talent to be used in musical theater like 'Jailhouse Blues' in 1929.

 

[ibanezrocks]

Everything is relative to it's own time. There were very few good bands right before Nirvana, and there were very few good bands after Nirvana. They stood out, because they were good artists, and they sounded good. I like shredding as much as the next guy, but to think that Nirvana wasn't good is just insane.

 

[Hard2Hear]

I don't know any of you personally therefore I don't know who here besides me has been in meetings with major label execs or A&R peeons. But I will tell you this. They're all still looking for "the next Nirvana". It's said thousands of times a day in the music industry.

Take it, or leave it. I don't care.

H2H

 

[scottboyher]

To say that Nirvana didn't have an impact on music is bullshit.. Be it good or bad they impacted music in a big way.

I was a big 80's rock fan and I still am with certain bands like Skid Row and Motley Crue.

When Grunge came on the scene it was exactly what I was looking for.. Some of my favorite bands of all time came out of that era.. (Alice In Chains and Stone Temple Pilots)

When I look back on 80's rock the lyrics were so cheesy and childish... I don't know if I would say the same about Grunge.

Look what happened at the end of the hair band era.. They flooded the market with crap.. Remember Trixter? Winger? Steelheart?

Even well respected musicians jumped on the bandwagon.. Damn Yankees!

Hair Metal needed to be shot in the head..

Maybe I am just too old...

 

[boomtap]

I think Nirvana is bigger now then they were before he died. Pearl Jam and Soundgarden hogged up alot of thier attention around that time. They were still huge though don't get me wrong the biggest by far, I just think his death sent it skyrocketing. It would be the same if Greenday suddenly spontaneoulsy combusted. Even though they are popular now I think they would go nutz and be called "legends". If they don't die they will taper off, and in 20 years or so you will hear all of the songs they play in Safeway.

 

[Dracon]

When I look back on 80's rock the lyrics were so cheesy and childish... I don't know if I would say the same about Grunge.

Maybe I missed the boat completely but I just could not get into the rage of the Grunge music.

Yes, there were some cheesy childish songs like
"Jessie's Girl"
"Ebony & Ivory"
But there were some cool songs like
"Another Brick on the Wall (Part 2)"
"They Dance Alone (Cueca Solo)"

The 90s brought such deep songs a
"Gonna Make you Sweat"
"The power of Love"
I mean are you going to tell me that "Team Spirit" was not a childish song?

That everyone wanted to emulate Nirvana means they wanted to become popular like Nirvana.
I get that people liked Nirvana, some still do and probably due to the untimely death of Kurt it kept Fans with the desire for more. I mean people are still talking about Jim Morrison as well as Buddy Holly because they died before their time. The Doors and Jim Morrison were probably what inspired Kurt Cobain and the Grunge scene in Seattle and the West Coast.

I bow down to Kurt for being a great musician, perhaps for even inspiring other people to want to be like him or have his fame. However, I believe there are other musicians more worthy of praise for the music we listen on the radio today. However, we all make ripples in the water and perhaps I'm too easily dismissing Kurt & Nirvana.

 

[Hard2Hear]

I bow down to Kurt for being a great musician.

Yes you are missing the boat completely. It's not about being a great musician, which he wasn't and never said he was. Farthest thing from it. Nirvana did the same thing to rock the Ramones did 25 years previous. Changed it, centered it, and evolved it.

H2H

 

[Dracon]

Yes you are missing the boat completely. It's not about being a great musician, which he wasn't and never said he was. Farthest thing from it. Nirvana did the same thing to rock the Ramones did 25 years previous. Changed it, centered it, and evolved it.

H2H

Sure, if you say so.

 

[Rokket]

My whole take on it is that the industry embraced Nirvana because they were different. But Kurt wasn't a great musician. Hell, he wasn't that good. A friend of mine and I sat down with his entire collection and learned every song in less than an hour. This was after he died. I never really liked his music, but I could tolerate it. All I heard was about his great lyrics. To me, they weren't really all that either. Introspective herione induced tripe was my first impression.

I am not trying to get flamed for this, it's just that my first impressions of Nirvana weren't all that great. Yeah, I was a "hair metal" fan, but in the vein of Judas Priest, not Winger or Skid Row... I was then and still am a fan of Black Sabbath, AC/DC, et al.

To me, what Nirvana did for the music scene was to show people that you didn't have to be a good guitarist or great songwriter to make it. He opened the flood gates for the drivel that I have to bear when I turn on the TV (which isn't very often) or listen to the radio (again, not very much).

It seems that the level of musicianship has gone down over the years. I read a study that showed that the average time in years for a guitar player in the 70's was about 18 years before they hit it big. The average in the 80's dropped to about 12 years. In the 90's, it dropped to 5. I blame the industry. Always looking for the next new sound, and trying to mass produce that sound, sacrificing a lot of quality.

When the statement is made that the industry is looking for the next Nirvana, I don't believe they are looking for a Nivana clone, or a band with 3rd rate musicians and angst-ridden song writing.

I believe they are looking for a band who will shake up the industry again...

 

[donkeystyle]

Is it true that Nirvana's first album was made for $600. Or is that an urban legend.

i haven't read the whole thread yet, so i don't know if someone else has answered. it is true though, like 618 and some change

 

[AlfredB]

A friend of mine and I sat down with his entire collection and learned every song in less than an hour.



When the statement is made that the industry is looking for the next Nirvana, I don't believe they are looking for a Nivana clone, or a band with 3rd rate musicians and angst-ridden song writing.

FIRST PART OF YOUR QUOTE
the same applies for: Bob Dylan, Neil Young, Beatles, Rolling Stones .... I actually think it is an ART to make a simple song that hits a nerve ...

just think "AMERICA: Horse with no name" 2 chords - great song ... I wish I could have written it



2ND PART:
I wouldnt call neither Cobain nor Grohl 3rd rate musicians. The number of really good rock-songs written by either of them over the past 15 years is just too high...

Nevermind will always be ranked as one of the top Rock albums, as will ten by PJ, as will Never mind the bollocks or machine head ... all of those passed the "10 year test" ... which 99% of the hair-rock albums dont ...


lets not define a musician by how many notes per sec. he can play ... but by the emotion a person causes in many other persons

thx
alfred

 

[Rokket]

lets not define a musician by how many notes per sec. he can play ... but by the emotion a person causes in many other persons

thx
alfred

I would never do that. I said I was a fan of those who could, but I do consider myself a musician, and I am no shredder. Hell I can't solo much at all. I am not downplaying Nirvana's contribution. I was simply stating my first impressions. I can still put them in the catagory of bands that I can listen to, and appreciate, even if I am not a fan. but I don't go out of my way to buy their music.

And the reason that I could play all of Nirvana's songs in that amount of time was that the chord progressions for 99% of them were exactly the same. The only differences were the melody... To me, that is not true with every other band you named.

 

[donkeystyle]

i need to get something off my chest.

when people say kurt wrote great songs, they don't mean he wrote great lyrics. it always bugs me when people say he wrote great lyrics. people started saying he was a great songwriter, meaning he wrote catchy songs that weren't dumb, people heard that and then starting saying he wrote great lyrics. in reality, his most of his lyrics weren't that great....granted he had some great ones, but most of them were exactly what someone else said about being heroine induced something or other.

that doesn't mean i don't like the band or his lyrics. i just realise he wasn't a great musician or lyric writer. his songs were great pop songs and that's it.

also, to say he didn't have a massive influence on music is moronic.

 

[donkeystyle]

And the reason that I could play all of Nirvana's songs in that amount of time was that the chord progressions for 99% of them were exactly the same. The only differences were the melody.

that's not true at all. i'm not flaming you or anything, but because the all their songs together are more than an hour, what you claim is impossible.

the only people that could do it even close to as fast as you claim to are people that are not only good at reading music, but people that are really good at sight reading. but then i seriously doubt they would actually learn the songs, they would just play through them.

like i said i'm not flaming you. it might sound like i'm pissed off or something. i'm not. for some reason i just felt the need to point out that you were exaggerating. i guess because i'm an ass like that sometimes.

 

[Rokket]

also, to say he didn't have a massive influence on music is moronic.

I am the one who mentioned the heroine induced tripe. It was my first impressions of his music. I cannot and will not argue about his influence in modern music. It can be heard time and time again. His greatness was in his simpleness. The only thing I wonder is if it was change for the better? Sometimes when I listen to the radio, I wonder...

 

[donkeystyle]

oh..........and if you go back through and listen to the nirvana records, at least 50 percent of his songs had solo's in them(that's a guess, but i think it's actually a conservative guess, it's probably more). they weren't shred solo's, but i think that people sometimes forget that he did do solo's when they claim he was responsible for the death of their popularity.

 

[Sanjanjoseph]

gotta friend, actually my bands bassists, loves nirvana...hes freaking ubsessive. hes insane...i like nirvana, they sound good, but all there songs sounded the same...(for the most part)....still some good stuff though!

 

[mshilarious]

To me, that is not true with every other band you named.

It's true of any folk singer, be it Dylan, Mitchell, either Guthrie, Seeger, etc. So?