1991 20 years on from a hell of a year in Music:

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
I had presumed that everybody noticed it wasn't there and had decided not to mention it because everything that could be said about Nevermind has been said, and because they think it's one of the most overrated records of all time.

It probably is. It's got some really tight tracks, and I really do enjoy it, but in small doses. I appreciate it for what it is, for its cultural impact, for its place in the collective memory of a generation, but when it pops up in the top 10 on greatest albums of all time lists, that's a little ridiculous, imo. I'm still not entirely sure it's Nirvana's best.

I've never listened to Nevermind in its entirety. I've only heard its singles.
 
It is overrated to a degree, but it is a very solid work. There's not really anything there I skip over. The first seven songs, singles or not, are iconic to me. FWIW though, I'm not a huge fan - Nevermind is the only album of theirs I own.


why we need all those cd's , books ,dvds , collecting dust ,
a small laptop replaces everything

I guess I'm the dinosaur who still reads liner notes and obsesses over album art and packaging. I just love having the physical product in my hands. That's the main impetus of buying vinyl for me, not the supposed sound quality difference.
 
I'd say there is a substantial contingent of us in B&C who almost exclusively buy physical formats. I am one of them.
 
why we need all those cd's , books ,dvds , collecting dust ,
a small laptop replaces everything

Because there's something unfulfilling about a 'collection' of things that don't physically exist. CDs seem to be going the way of tapes as an obsolete and inferior technology, but give me a nice record collection or a shelve full of books over the digital versions
 
:lol:

I'll accept some share of the fault for that; they crossed my mind too. If I can mention Ned's Atomic Dustbin, then I suppose I can give the Spin Doctors some love too. :D

I wasn't the biggest fan, but I can't lie, I felt a twinge of excitement when I heard they were touring, playing "Kryptonite" in its entirety. And then when I saw their tour poster in Portland, ME a few days ago. I'd probably go see them if they came to town. That was an underappreciated album, even if "Two Princes" messes with my musical elitism sensibilities. :D


I'd say there is a substantial contingent of us in B&C who almost exclusively buy physical formats. I am one of them.

It's funny, I bought an emusic subscription in 2010 for the purpose of delving into bands that I wasn't willing to pay $15 for. Inevitably, I've enjoyed the bands I've checked out and ended up buying physical copies of a significant percentage, while constantly eyeing used bins for other stuff I intend to buy.
 
Why is there such a thing about thinking Nirvana sucks and that Nevermind has dated terribly and we were so stupid for liking them at the time right now? Still sounds better than anything Pearl Jam have ever released.
 
It's not a "thing," it's the cold, hard motherfucking truth, Bonster.

Nah, but seriously, Kurt even hated the production back in the day. Not surprising that people are picking on Nevermind for sounding dated and crappy now. He would probably agree. Nobody should feel embarrassed for hyping Nirvana, ever, they're a good band, but I don't care that they saved the universe or whatever. A lot of great music and a lot of shitty music was apparently made because of Nirvana, so why crown them for it? Right place, right time, right Boston riff. I live today, and today Nevermind don't sound so good. In Utero still sounds fresh and aggressive to me though (God bless you, Albini), so I listen to that one far more often.

Of course everyone needs to hear Nevermind once because it's fucking history, but I don't think there's much below the surface of Territorial Pissings or Lounge Act, and why anyone would spend their afternoons listening to them is beyond me. Multiple listens haven't changed my mind in that regard. Obviously Lithium and In Bloom rule.
 
Yeah, I get you. However, I heard Come As You Are on the radio not long ago and it sounded absolutely fantastic. I've always liked how deep and murky the whole album sounds.

Wait, I thought it was a Killing Joke riff!
 
Yeah, I get you. However, I heard Come As You Are on the radio not long ago and it sounded absolutely fantastic. I've always liked how deep and murky the whole album sounds.

Wait, I thought it was a Killing Joke riff!

I was referring to Smells Like #1 On Yet Another Irrelevant Rock List, but yeah, they've copped a couple of riffs in their time. Kurt had great taste in music.

Fuck Albini.

And he didn't exactly leave them with a finished product.

In Utero (album) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You're basically arguing that Eno and Lanois don't deserve a production credit because Lillywhite waltzed in and worked on a couple of tracks near the end. In Utero has the Albini sound all over it, not just in tone but in the performances themselves, and it's awesome. Grohl's drum tone is one of my favorites ever.
 
The point is that they had to fix the whole fucking thing because he buried the vocals and bass in the mix. I've known about this since the album came out because people were talking about it. And not surprising, if you know Albini. I hate record company suits too, but he's a jackass.

Albini isn't a "producer". He's a reducer, and an engineer. Does it sound more organic? Sure. More aggressive and less accessible? Yeah, but that seems to have been Kurt's design from the outset. If you can't even mix the instruments together correctly how good are you?

I'm not saying Scott Litt deserves more credit for the album (which is I guess where you're going with the Lillywhite analogy), but the band had to shepherd this one themselves.
 
I'm not sure what you're taking issue with here. Are you suggesting he had some motivation beyond his artistic leanings for burying the bass and vocals? That's just his sound. It's what you get with him. I fully agree that he acted like a child when it came to altering the record, of course. Holding onto the tapes was really shitty of him.

Feel free to expound on your producer vs. reducer comment, if you care enough to. What's your take on Rick Rubin?
 
No, I'm not saying that he had some ulterior motive. I just take issue with your "god bless him" because I think he's overrated and he didn't deliver a finished album that sounded right to the band. "That's just his sound" doesn't excuse anything. The one who should be blessed is Kurt for not wanting to feed the machine again.

Rick Rubin, whatever. I don't want him working with Shuttlecock ever again.
 
I've never listened to Nevermind in its entirety. I've only heard its singles.

You're missing out. Territorial Pissings is probably the best song on it, and the most reminiscent of their first album (my favourite of theirs).

Why is there such a thing about thinking Nirvana sucks and that Nevermind has dated terribly and we were so stupid for liking them at the time right now? Still sounds better than anything Pearl Jam have ever released.

Not to condone this ridiculous "rivalry" between Nirvana and Pearl Jam, but the latter had far, far better produced albums than Nevermind, Ten being a notable exception (sounding very dated indeed, although Brendan O'Brien's recet remix helped things a bit).
 
Why is there such a thing about thinking Nirvana sucks and that Nevermind has dated terribly and we were so stupid for liking them at the time right now?

I don't really think there is such a thing.

Who thinks that? I might just be out of the loop, but I don't really know what you're referencing. Where have you seen or heard the idea that Nirvana and Nevermind aren't respected anymore? I'm genuinely curious. I've never really encountered that, other than a vocal minority on this bullshit U2 message board. And of course I'm sure there are others that feel that way. But where are they?

In my experience, if you were to go out and talk to people that are into rock and roll music, most of those people still like Nevermind and think it's a kickass album. Is it maybe just a hipster thing? Like an if you shout... kinda thing. Because I am if you shout...

I don't know, I guess it depends on what perspective you want to take on the whole thing.

I'd say that most people still like and respect Nevermind. I might be wrong.

Also, how are you? Hope you're doing well.
 
Certainly seen a lot of it online, not just from crazy U2 fans, so I suppose it is a hipster thing to a large extent. I just get the impression they're quite a lot less fashionable than they were even a few years ago, and I'm trying to sound as little like a wanker as possible when I say that. Maybe it's just the effect of growing older myself. Of course, Nirvana are still part of the canon so I still expect them to top bullshit Q and Rolling Stone lists.

Also I am good, I hope you are too.
 
agentorange said:
:lol:

I'll accept some share of the fault for that; they crossed my mind too. If I can mention Ned's Atomic Dustbin, then I suppose I can give the Spin Doctors some love too. :D

I wasn't the biggest fan, but I can't lie, I felt a twinge of excitement when I heard they were touring, playing "Kryptonite" in its entirety. And then when I saw their tour poster in Portland, ME a few days ago. I'd probably go see them if they came to town. That was an underappreciated album, even if "Two Princes" messes with my musical elitism sensibilities. :D

I have zero issue admitting that an 11 year old me rocked out to Two Princes.

For the record, I also had to buy a second Cracked Rear View CD cause I wore the first one out.
 
iron yuppie said:
I'd say there is a substantial contingent of us in B&C who almost exclusively buy physical formats. I am one of them.

iTunes is only for stuff I can only otherwise obtain by long-awaited mail when the Internet-aged part of me that requires instant gratification at 3am wins the fight. Unfortunately, with my local record store situation as dire as it's become in recent years + being a nocturnal third shift beast for several years, this has started to become a frequent occurrence.
 
Headache in a Suitcase said:
I am outraged at the lack of inclusion of spin doctors

If I never hear "two princes"again it will be too soon.
 
If I never hear "two princes"again it will be too soon.

That song still receives frequent radio play. It baffles me.

As for Nirvana, I think that the most unfortunate musical consequence of their demise is the removal of Grohl from the drummer's chair. The guy was an absolute monster on the drums.
 
That's true, but my first reaction upon hearing the first Foo Fighters album (still their best and most diverse) was that Grohl was too talented to simply be playing drums on someone else's songs.

I don't think he fully delivered on that initial promise, but aside from drumming with a reunited Led Zeppelin I'm not sure what else he can do now.
 
1991 was an awesome year in music. People mentioned a lot of good stuff already. I was a freshman in college when Nirvana and PJ blew up the airwaves and MTV. Not sure if this was mentioned, but For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge (F.U.C.K.) by Van Halen was one of my favorite albums of that year. They had a a bunch of hits on that one and I caught them once on that year's tour.



David Lee Roth also released an album in 1991 called A Little Ain't Enough. Saw him that Summer on tour. He sucked. Maybe a little was too much. Lol!
 
Back
Top Bottom