Nirvana

Bleach is a great album especially like 'Love Buzz', which I turns out to be a cover song from band called Screaming Blue, never heard of them, but this song is killer.

I think my fav is Swap Meet

all in all its a killer album, raw and intense in my opinion

Addy wrote:

I think my fav is Swap Meet

all in all its a killer album, raw and intense in my opinion

What the hell is Swap Meet?

The Sunday Swap Meet is a battleground

seriously its either listed as Swap Meet or Swap Meat I cant remember which, but if you havent heard Bleach I highly recommend it i like it better than Nevermind though Nevermind has aweseome Drumming

I still don't know what you're talking about.

EDIT: Nevermind, I figured it out.

OOOOOHHHH. I thought you were referring to an album called Swap Meet.

Yeah, I like that song too. Bleach is a great album.

I dont crank Nirvana all that often anymore I used to be a Nirvana freak but when I do its normally either Unplugged or Bleach or Insectiside which is a good album too

Quote :

or Insectiside which is a good album too

Better watch out, it's dangerous to crank insecticide. I heard kids try to get high that way.

You do know that's not the name of the album, right?

Yeah

Its Incesticide

but Im tired been on overload the past few weeks so brain isnt functioning on the normal cylinders

The Outcesticide is a good bootleg series to get too

Like that band. have all their full releases and some singles and few live boots.
best of the albums is "In Utero".

all of the albums are different, Bleach - raw and grungy, Nevermind - more oriented to MTV, In Utero - I'd like to say - antimtv, its Indie avantgarde album.

you have to know, that before Nirvana noone knows about Grunge style and it wasnt on the wave. and other bands like AIC etc was underground with their strange music.

Some of my friens hate Cobain for what he done with metal stage.
But even they tell that his music is good.
Yes, after Nirvana furor, many of metal bands tried to play such music to get more money, and what we have? they are wrote stupid unlistenable albums and goes off the stage. what that means, these "true metal bands" sold for money, and was pissed off by fans.
whos that problem, their! bands like Juggernaut....

same must be with Pantera... they bring this korny numetal sound

fixedk wrote:

Like that band. have all their full releases and some singles and few live boots.
best of the albums is "In Utero".

all of the albums are different, Bleach - raw and grungy, Nevermind - more oriented to MTV, In Utero - I'd like to say - antimtv, its Indie avantgarde album.

you have to know, that before Nirvana noone knows about Grunge style and it wasnt on the wave. and other bands like AIC etc was underground with their strange music.

Some of my friens hate Cobain for what he done with metal stage.
But even they tell that his music is good.
Yes, after Nirvana furor, many of metal bands tried to play such music to get more money, and what we have? they are wrote stupid unlistenable albums and goes off the stage. what that means, these "true metal bands" sold for money, and was pissed off by fans.
whos that problem, their! bands like Juggernaut....

same must be with Pantera... they bring this korny numetal sound

I will try and not be to offensive to your post, but it's virtually unreadable. I'm trying to figure out exactly what your point is...

Are you stating that Metal in it's truest form is stupid? Considering grunge for the most part was about as simplistic as you can get, you couldn't be more wrong regarding your views on metal. The grunge scene was basically a calling out to every average guitarist across this country of ours. Lyrically grunge might have gained a foothole within the consciousness of the American public, but musically it was very average. When bands such as Nirvana can use distortion to their advantage, all it does is show how many flaws there were in their ability to play cleanly.

If the movement was so great, why did the scene experience the proverbial death rattle within 5 years of its existance?

will try to answer.

actually i meant that some of "true" metal bands jump from "metal" to grunge.
and this is the reason why many metalheads dont like cobain.
but in the end, nirvana get their wave.

as im not american we can see it with different points.
I dont like to listed what about they sing, i listen to the music, and singer.
from this view ll is great i think.
otherway you as american, anyway understand what they sings, and it may cause you dislike them.
same situation for me with russian bands: i understant what stupidity in their lyrics ==> and i try do not listen it again


what about true metal, i havent seen that Slayer or Venom started to play grugy sound, testament (but 94 is a bit panterish), and many more really true metal bands.

'bout 5 years... grunge suit from as minimum 1984 (Husker Du "Zen Arcade").
and otherway, all styles have their best and worst time:
death metal : 1990-1994
grindcore: 1988-1990
punk: 1977-1980, 1994-1997
doom: 1991-1994
black metal: 1992-1996
etc

try to listen Bleach and in Utero - do you think these 2 albums are simple?
i think they are mixed with acoustic simplicity (like "rape me", "pennyroyal tea") with very avantgarde form of music ("milk it, scentless apprentice" etc). the more, i can tell that its technical.
"Nevermind" was polied by "geffen" producers to make it easier for different kind of peaople, but in utero was made noisy and harder.
in the way of The Jesus Lizard ( if you know them), Rapeman (same).
also when this album was recorded geffen wanted it to rerecord because it was ugly for open masses, but cobain decided to issue as the wanted to see this album, thats why i like this album more than other albums.

you know i would be glad if average guitarists would play music so i will listen their music more than 1 time. and i dont care of the superprofessionals who
just masturbate on guitar showing theis masterability, but their music is not listenable.

I will never understand why Nirvana divides metal/hard rock fans. Nirvana IMO was a great band, Kurt Cobain was not a great guitartist in say the tradition of eddie Van Halen, but he was not going for that vibe anyway. He was a great songwriter that struck a cord with a generation.

What the results of the success Nirvana had on the industry and bands that followed, Cobain had no control over this. Nirvana didn't kill metal, metal is still here and more popular than ever. Kurt Cobain was a huge fan of Black Sabbath, Led Zeppelin and KISS.

The debates about Nirvana I have a feeling will never end, but IMO I think the songs are what matter and he happened to be a very gifted songwriter.

manny +1

fixedk wrote:

will try to answer.

actually i meant that some of "true" metal bands jump from "metal" to grunge.
and this is the reason why many metalheads dont like cobain.
but in the end, nirvana get their wave.

as im not american we can see it with different points.
I dont like to listed what about they sing, i listen to the music, and singer.
from this view ll is great i think.
otherway you as american, anyway understand what they sings, and it may cause you dislike them.
same situation for me with russian bands: i understant what stupidity in their lyrics ==> and i try do not listen it again


what about true metal, i havent seen that Slayer or Venom started to play grugy sound, testament (but 94 is a bit panterish), and many more really true metal bands.

'bout 5 years... grunge suit from as minimum 1984 (Husker Du "Zen Arcade").
and otherway, all styles have their best and worst time:
death metal : 1990-1994
grindcore: 1988-1990
punk: 1977-1980, 1994-1997
doom: 1991-1994
black metal: 1992-1996
etc

try to listen Bleach and in Utero - do you think these 2 albums are simple?
i think they are mixed with acoustic simplicity (like "rape me", "pennyroyal tea") with very avantgarde form of music ("milk it, scentless apprentice" etc). the more, i can tell that its technical.
"Nevermind" was polied by "geffen" producers to make it easier for different kind of peaople, but in utero was made noisy and harder.
in the way of The Jesus Lizard ( if you know them), Rapeman (same).
also when this album was recorded geffen wanted it to rerecord because it was ugly for open masses, but cobain decided to issue as the wanted to see this album, thats why i like this album more than other albums.

you know i would be glad if average guitarists would play music so i will listen their music more than 1 time. and i dont care of the superprofessionals who
just masturbate on guitar showing theis masterability, but their music is not listenable.

Sorry, if I ripped on your ability to master the English language, or your writing ability. Considering English is a second language for yourself, I think you're doing a pretty good job.

I don't know if I agree with your reasoning why metalheads don't like Cobain. I think if anything, a typical metalhead in America dislikes the grunge movement for many reasons: These are two reasons IMO that metalheads don't like grunge....

1. Grunge is more refined, simplistic, less technical
2. Grunge lyrically might have spoken more to the individual (for a time), but its lyrical dynamic was wrapped around that of cynicism. Grunge artists seemed to be enveloped within the walls of depression, yet, these bands thrived in a decade which was all about optimism (from a socio/economic standpoint). I think this was why grunge fell upon deaf ears among its most ardent supporters in the U.S after the better part of five years, and was why it had a very short life span. There are only so many times you can try and convince someone how bad things are, when in reality things weren't that bad to begin with.

Wow...I can't say I support your theory on having a lot of average guitarists play their music to the masses. I think we need to weed a lot of those average guitarists out, and kick them to the curb so to speak. I would much rather listen to a technical guitar player any day of the week. That's like stating you would much rather hear Ben Folds on the piano rather than that of Mozart. I can't say that I subscribe to that theory at all.

manny wrote:

I will never understand why Nirvana divides metal/hard rock fans. Nirvana IMO was a great band, Kurt Cobain was not a great guitartist in say the tradition of eddie Van Halen, but he was not going for that vibe anyway. He was a great songwriter that struck a cord with a generation.

What the results of the success Nirvana had on the industry and bands that followed, Cobain had no control over this. Nirvana didn't kill metal, metal is still here and more popular than ever. Kurt Cobain was a huge fan of Black Sabbath, Led Zeppelin and KISS.

The debates about Nirvana I have a feeling will never end, but IMO I think the songs are what matter and he happened to be a very gifted songwriter.

i think metal fans will always debate grunge as it killed off metal as a huge commercial entity

TheGooch wrote:

manny wrote:

I will never understand why Nirvana divides metal/hard rock fans. Nirvana IMO was a great band, Kurt Cobain was not a great guitartist in say the tradition of eddie Van Halen, but he was not going for that vibe anyway. He was a great songwriter that struck a cord with a generation.

What the results of the success Nirvana had on the industry and bands that followed, Cobain had no control over this. Nirvana didn't kill metal, metal is still here and more popular than ever. Kurt Cobain was a huge fan of Black Sabbath, Led Zeppelin and KISS.

The debates about Nirvana I have a feeling will never end, but IMO I think the songs are what matter and he happened to be a very gifted songwriter.

i think metal fans will always debate grunge as it killed off metal as a huge commercial entity

I think in many ways, Heavy Metal was responsible for its own demise. I remember hearing Don Dokken once talk about how their tour manager suggested to the band that they tone down the look, and go more the way of a group like Metallica (street image, etc..) Don thought he was nuts, and said no way. Don thought the band needed to follow the likes of Motley Crue, Poison, etc...

I don't think these bands suffered as much from the music they were writing, as much as it was their look. Trends in fashion are shorter then that of music, so combine the music with some of the horrible fashion statements that the bands were portraying, and this is a recipe for disaster.

Cobain done his work well. They (nirvana) was original in their time.
We can talk that they copied part of Husker Du album, but who knows Husker Du now?
depressive. As i told already, i listen to the music, but now words.
I dont need understand what he (or someone else, even varg from burzum ))) singing. NIrvana songs project feelings.

I dont know much of grunge bands, but most followers are really suck.
Else few great bands in grune: Bush, The Jesus Lizard.

metalinmyveins wrote:

Grunge artists seemed to be enveloped within the walls of depression, yet, these bands thrived in a decade which was all about optimism (from a socio/economic standpoint).....

.......There are only so many times you can try and convince someone how bad things are, when in reality things weren't that bad to begin with.

Are you forgetting the Recession the US had between 1990-91, quite major....what about unemployment rates being about as high as 8% in the early 90's, the worst it's been in the last 25 odd years or the real visible threat of Aids/HIV.

Who suffers through this.....the youth, in particular post adolescents who have to deal with it and teenagers facing an uncertain future.

This was not the carefree, money money money greed is good 80's anymore.

metalinmyveins wrote:

I think this was why grunge fell upon deaf ears among its most ardent supporters in the U.S after the better part of five years, and was why it had a very short life span.

Look at what Punk did 14 years previous, once it had broken or exploded into the mainstream consciousness it was practically over. Same with Grunge in '91. It was never meant to be any lasting style of music (Although......), it was more a swift kick in the head to the complacencies of mainstream rock. Bands breaking up and deaths didn't help things either.

metalinmyveins wrote:

Wow...I can't say I support your theory on having a lot of average guitarists play their music to the masses. I think we need to weed a lot of those average guitarists out, and kick them to the curb so to speak. I would much rather listen to a technical guitar player any day of the week.

Being a technical guitar player has nothing to do with Rock N' Roll, Kurt Cobain will forever be a better Rock N' Roll guitarist than Yngwie or any other technical guitarist.

rattpoison wrote:

metalinmyveins wrote:

Grunge artists seemed to be enveloped within the walls of depression, yet, these bands thrived in a decade which was all about optimism (from a socio/economic standpoint).....

.......There are only so many times you can try and convince someone how bad things are, when in reality things weren't that bad to begin with.

Are you forgetting the Recession the US had between 1990-91, quite major....what about unemployment rates being about as high as 8% in the early 90's, the worst it's been in the last 25 odd years or the real visible threat of Aids/HIV.

Who suffers through this.....the youth, in particular post adolescents who have to deal with it and teenagers facing an uncertain future.

This was not the carefree, money money money greed is good 80's anymore.

metalinmyveins wrote:

I think this was why grunge fell upon deaf ears among its most ardent supporters in the U.S after the better part of five years, and was why it had a very short life span.

Look at what Punk did 14 years previous, once it had broken or exploded into the mainstream consciousness it was practically over. Same with Grunge in '91. It was never meant to be any lasting style of music (Although......), it was more a swift kick in the head to the complacencies of mainstream rock. Bands breaking up and deaths didn't help things either.

metalinmyveins wrote:

Wow...I can't say I support your theory on having a lot of average guitarists play their music to the masses. I think we need to weed a lot of those average guitarists out, and kick them to the curb so to speak. I would much rather listen to a technical guitar player any day of the week.

Being a technical guitar player has nothing to do with Rock N' Roll, Kurt Cobain will forever be a better Rock N' Roll guitarist than Yngwie or any other technical guitarist.

The 90's were an economic boom. The middle class grew to a record amount, and the socio economic disparity was much improved compared to the decade before. The Aids/HIV epidemic was more of a problem in the 80's considering we had no idea what we were up against. Magic Johnson's revelation that he had the HIV virus in 1991 gave hope to many stricken with the disease. He not only was a winner, but he put a face on the disease that showed people that this can strike even it's iconic stars when they're not careful. The 90's also didn't have to deal with the Cold War, which was a constant reminder for all just a decade before.

I will stick to my theory on Grunge, and why it didn't last. People woke up. They realized that they weren't that bad off, and refused to be wrapped up in music which was cynical in nature. Grunge preyed on those who were cynical in nature, and when they gobbled those people up, it was over for all intents and purposes. It was a style that pigeonholed itself, which led to a short existance.

Kurt Cobain a better guitarist than Yngwie Malmsteen!



You can enjoy Kurt Cobain more, but to say that he was a more accomplished guitarist is absolutely ludicrous. There is no merit to that statement at all.

metalinmyveins wrote:

The 90's were an economic boom. The middle class grew to a record amount, and the socio economic disparity was much improved compared to the decade before. The Aids/HIV epidemic was more of a problem in the 80's considering we had no idea what we were up against. Magic Johnson's revelation that he had the HIV virus in 1991 gave hope to many stricken with the disease. He not only was a winner, but he put a face on the disease that showed people that this can strike even it's iconic stars when they're not careful. The 90's also didn't have to deal with the Cold War, which was a constant reminder for all just a decade before.

Fair enough....but recessions and high unemployment rates don't help. I guess things picked up more towards the mid 90's.

I think AIDS/HIV being out in the open would have led to certain fear/insecurity amongst people.

metalinmyveins wrote:

I will stick to my theory on Grunge, and why it didn't last. People woke up. They realized that they weren't that bad off, and refused to be wrapped up in music which was cynical in nature. Grunge preyed on those who were cynical in nature, and when they gobbled those people up, it was over for all intents and purposes. It was a style that pigeonholed itself, which led to a short existance.

Grunge addressed common feelings about the awkwardness of growing up when your a teenager/young adult, i guess the kids grew up and they didn't need it anymore.

metalinmyveins wrote:

Kurt Cobain a better guitarist than Yngwie Malmsteen!



You can enjoy Kurt Cobain more, but to say that he was a more accomplished guitarist is absolutely ludicrous. There is no merit to that statement at all.

I never said Kurt was a more accomplished guitarist, i said he was a better Rock N' Roll guitarist. And that's all that counts. Can you hum a Yngwie guitar part? How about a Kurt Cobain guitar part?

Can I hum guitar parts to certain Yngwie songs? Sure. I think a lot of it has to do with what you grow up around. I grew up in the hey day of Yngwie. One of my favorite albums of all time is "Trilogy". I would have no problem humming the songs, maybe not the soloing, but I think Yngwie had more than a few memorable riffs in the 80's. Are they as noticeable to the general public? Heck no, but then, I never was one who followed what would be considered trendy music.

I agree with what you stated regarding Grunge, and how it addressed the awkwardness of growing up as a youth...That was the problem with grunge, it just didn't know how to move beyond certain subject matter. Everything was doom & gloom (and revolving around the same subject matter).

On the AIDS/HIV thing...When Magic came to the forefront, many people were excited, because when someone with some clout has this dreaded disease it raised the consciousness of not only people in the United States, but also that of people around the world. It did create a little bit of a stir in the NBA, when Magic talked about coming back. Not all players were looking forward to a Magic return. Karl Malone was one of those in particular. That being said, Magic did play on the 1992 Dream Team, and was welcomed with open arms. I remember how some people thought that since Magic was diagnosed that there would be a race to find a cure, and that maybe they would name something after him. I think it was the first time in a long time, where people felt differently about the disease. Magic was inspiring because he believed he could beat this disease. To me, he was the first real hope.

You have to remember that every celebrity before that who died from AIDS was merry like Liberace, Rock Hudson, & Freddie Mercury. Magic Johnson raised awareness like never before, because it struck a high profile heterosexual.

metalinmyveins wrote:

I agree with what you stated regarding Grunge, and how it addressed the awkwardness of growing up as a youth...That was the problem with grunge, it just didn't know how to move beyond certain subject matter. Everything was doom & gloom (and revolving around the same subject matter).

The bands/artists that were left grew with their audience, take a look at Pearl Jam's ever popular career since. Alot of their fans must be in their 30's by now. They sing about all manner of things.

The thing is there were only 4 big bands (you know 'em) that were successful, only 1 is left (AIC doesn't really count) so that is why it was only a time/place kind of phenomenon. I didn't continue because no one was left not because it couldn't remove itself from certain subject matter.

Grunge was far from one dimensional to begin with anyway musically and lyrically.

How many of you were into grunge in the 90s?