OP
OP
MadForIt
Refugee
I'd be scared kids would become depressed/suicidal after listening to them so that why i would ban grunge altogether in my house
Nirvana - Were They Really That Special?
- Thread starter MadForIt
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
I'd be scared kids would become depressed/suicidal after listening to them so that why i would ban grunge altogether in my house
U2lunatic
Refugee
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2006
- Messages
- 1,315
I listen to Nirvana from time to time but I don't get it why someone thinks they are special, there were plenty of great grunge bands at that time, I don't hear anything special in their songs. And how someone who wrote song Marijuana could be excellent songwriter...
I like some of their songs but that's all
I like some of their songs but that's all
UberBeaver
Breakdancing Soul Pilgrim
Nirvana had great timing. I like them well enough, but they probably wouldn't make any Top 20 list of mine. They do have a couple of ass kicking songs though, no doubt about that.
beegee
Neon Zebra
That's ridiculous.
MrPryck2U
ONE love, blood, life
YES, Nirvana were special. The sad part was that we only really got a glimpse of how special they were. It would've been great to hear something come after In Utero. But, Kurt killed himself, Nirvana, and, I also believe, grunge music in 1994, so we'll never know.
I was 19 years old at the end of 1991 going into the beginning of 1992, when Nirvana's Smells Like Teen Spirit was all over the place. MTV used to be cool and play videos and Spirit was one of their most popular videos. Plus, at the same time, bands like U2, Guns n' Roses, Metallica, Van Halen, Soundgarden, Ozzy Osbourne, Red Hot Chili Peppers and Pearl Jam all had new music either playing on MTV or on the radio. It was an amazing time to be a music fan.
Maybe to more greatly appreciate Nirvana, you had to have lived that time. Not have read about it or gotten it second hand.
I was 19 years old at the end of 1991 going into the beginning of 1992, when Nirvana's Smells Like Teen Spirit was all over the place. MTV used to be cool and play videos and Spirit was one of their most popular videos. Plus, at the same time, bands like U2, Guns n' Roses, Metallica, Van Halen, Soundgarden, Ozzy Osbourne, Red Hot Chili Peppers and Pearl Jam all had new music either playing on MTV or on the radio. It was an amazing time to be a music fan.
Maybe to more greatly appreciate Nirvana, you had to have lived that time. Not have read about it or gotten it second hand.
No spoken words
Blue Crack Supplier
I lived at that time, and always have and always will continue to deem them vastly overrated.
I liked Soundgarden, Pearl Jam, Alice and Chains a hell of a lot more than I ever liked Nirvana. I don't even know how much credit they really deserve for changing the musical landscape.
I do like a few songs of theirs, though, to be fair.
I liked Soundgarden, Pearl Jam, Alice and Chains a hell of a lot more than I ever liked Nirvana. I don't even know how much credit they really deserve for changing the musical landscape.
I do like a few songs of theirs, though, to be fair.
Salome
you are what you is
I like In Utero, though I hardly ever listen to it
I guess Nirvana's fame has to do with bringing 'underground' into the 'mainstream'
never understood why they managed this and not Sonic Youth and even more Pixies
I also don't understand why this would be some amazing feat anyway when you consider that in the 80s bands like Talking Heads and Talk Talk scored hit singles
I guess Nirvana's fame has to do with bringing 'underground' into the 'mainstream'
never understood why they managed this and not Sonic Youth and even more Pixies
I also don't understand why this would be some amazing feat anyway when you consider that in the 80s bands like Talking Heads and Talk Talk scored hit singles
MrPryck2U
ONE love, blood, life
Well, at least you lived at that time. So you got that going for you.
I definitely liked Pearl Jam and Guns n' Roses way more than Nirvana, but I did view them as something special.
No spoken words
Blue Crack Supplier
I don't know why in a thread like this people have to immediately say "I PREFER ALICE IN CHAINS!" or whatever. Yeah, I like Pearl Jam and Alice and Chains... aswell. Does that automatically mean I like Nirvana less?
Some of us took the time to say that we liked these bands BETTER than Nirvana, which helps me illustrate just how overrated they are to me. I like their own contemporaries, in a genre they supposedly pioneered or at least mastered, better than I ever liked them. Not that hard to understand, unless you are willfully not understanding.
Some of us took the time to say that we liked these bands BETTER than Nirvana, which helps me illustrate just how overrated they are to me. I like their own contemporaries, in a genre they supposedly pioneered or at least mastered, better than I ever liked them. Not that hard to understand, unless you are willfully not understanding.
... so you like a band better than another, and the other band is immediately overrated?
I like U2 more than any other band. Ergo every other band is overrated.
BY YOUR LOGIC.
Didn't you? Oh, he is.
jphelmet
Refugee
big nirvana fan when they first came out. i was 16 when nevermind came out, and was very influential to me at the time. even then, when i loved that album, i still didn't get all the greatest band stuff. i was a huge pixies, and melvins fan, and in that light nirvana was doing nothing unique (kurt used to say that and credit the melvins alot). they just almost stumbled into being the poster child for the change in music. i do like all their albums, and still like them. i never understood the kobain as a poet though. i thought most of their lyrics were mediocre at best.
they were definetly right place, right time thing.
they were definetly right place, right time thing.
intedomine
Rock n' Roll Doggie FOB
I don't mean the music itself, I mean Nirvana opened up the commercial potential for these bands....the ultimate commercial success of these bands is arguably due to how Nirvana's grunge conditioned maintream audiences for post-grunge and no-frills rock.
ShipOfFools
War Child
I agree with you except about the Foo Fighters. They're actually talented.
VintagePunk
Blue Crack Distributor
Back then, I liked Pearl Jam far more than Nirvana. For the past...oh, probably 8 or 10 years, I'd say the reverse is true for me. I think at the time, the hype surrounding the band and their music turned me off, but since then I've been able to let that go, and just enjoy it for what it is.
Those of you who are saying they were the right band in the right era are bang on. I think the reason they were credited with the whole "changing music" thing as opposed to other bands of that era/genre are that they are the ones who succeeded (albeit very reluctantly, if reports are to believed) in bringing that sound to the mainstream more so than other bands of that ilk. Further, I believe the reason the were able to do this is because of their marriage of garage/grunge sounds with poppy hooks and melodies that set them apart from their peers.
joyfulgirl
Blue Crack Addict
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2001
- Messages
- 16,690
That's pretty much how I grew up. Opera, classical, country, religious, rock, pop, soul ... it was all happening at our house. My Dad could go from Chopin to Buck Owens without blinking an eye.
I always liked Nirvana.
I literally can't stomach the Foo Fighters
It's not just that I intensely dislike Dave Grohl, but I find their music a bit... boring really.
U2isthebest
ONE love, blood, life
I love Nirvana. Are there some bands out there in the grunge genre that might be technically "better"? Sure, I would definitely say Pearl Jam fits that category, and to a lesser degree the Smashing Pumpkins. Those would probably be the only 2 bands of that particular era and grunge movement that I really love other than Nirvana. However, there's something about Nirvana, some sort of magic that puts them head and shoulders above the others in their genre, in my book. They had a chemistry and a rawness about them that you either identify with or you don't. This is do in large part, to Kurt Cobain. Sure, a lot of their mystique and legend is due to Kurt's tragically ended life. That's no different than that of Jim Morrison and The Doors, Jimi Hendrix, and Janis Joplin, for example, (even odder when you consider Cobain, Morrison, Hendrix and Joplin all died at 27). We wonder all the greatness that was to come, so we cling even more to what we have. Nirvana, as many others have said in this thread were the ones that brought this underground genre to the mainstream without losing their integrity in the process. They didn't sell out or become record company puppets. That's why I think they may be labeled as "overrated" by some who only look at technical skill. And on a side note, I also think the Foo Fighters are one of the best rock bands around right now, and I'm thrilled that Dave was able to bring his songwriting, singing, and other musical talents to the forefront considering the terrible way Nirvana ended. It was really a risk, and it paid off big time.
No spoken words
Blue Crack Supplier
I think it's safe to say that you're completely missing my point. So, I'll move on because these "discussions" lead nowhere fast.
Yes, Scumbo, Reagan and I will always be linked, due to my incredibly strong ties to the Republican party. If "incredibly strong ties" means "utter disdain for".
Oh, and the Foo Fighters could be the most boring successful band on Earth. Their popularity eludes me.
No spoken words
Blue Crack Supplier
I get sick hearing that Pumpkins and PJ are considered grunge....
I've never really heard the Pumpkins seriously considered a grunge band.
U2isthebest
ONE love, blood, life
Pearl Jam, at least in their early days were definitely grunge. I don't even know if we can say "grunge" really exists as a genre anymore. I can see where some would argue against Smashing Pumpkins being in said genre, but they're still considered a part of it, and I would put them there for the miniscule amount my opinion is worth.
U2isthebest
ONE love, blood, life
That's pretty much how I grew up. Opera, classical, country, religious, rock, pop, soul ... it was all happening at our house. My Dad could go from Chopin to Buck Owens without blinking an eye.
I always liked Nirvana.
I totally agree. My happiest childhood memories all consist of listening to music with my parents whether it be dancing around our living room to Motown like we did when I was little, or singing along to "American Pie", "Make Me Smile" by Chicago, "Pretty Woman", etc. on road trips. Admittedly, my mom and dad don't have the broad taste in music of your parents (or me), they mostly like Motown, and 70s and 80s pop, but all of it still takes me back. I'm going to have music playing all over my future home for my future children, and it's going to be everything I listen to.
phillyfan26
Blue Crack Supplier
- Joined
- May 7, 2006
- Messages
- 30,343
What?
What he's saying is like saying (three progressive rock bands) are better than Pink Floyd, even though Pink Floyd is supposed to be the end all, be all of progressive rock, as a way to illustrate how much he thinks Pink Floyd is overrated.
In the same way, Nirvana were supposed to be the end all, be all of grunge.
I've never really heard the Pumpkins seriously considered a grunge band.
Well, I don't know... I hear that sometimes.
I don't know... PJ in early days, maybe. Smashing Pumpkins is a part of the alternative rock scene that emerged after grunge's sucess. Their sound is infuenced by it, but it's far from being grunge itself. IMO.
Similar threads
