UKC

Nirvana

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
 broken spectre 06 Apr 2022

I've looped (almost exactly) a 28 year musical odyssey visiting many genres and sub genres, both the renowned and the obscure and have come full circle back to where it all began for me, as someone who listens to music inordinately.

Nirvana.

 magma 06 Apr 2022
In reply to broken spectre:

only another 100 years of popular music to discover..

Post edited at 14:27
 Iamgregp 06 Apr 2022
In reply to broken spectre:

Same.  I'm 40.  First got into music in my teens and Nirvana were one of the first I discovered.  In the meantime I've played in bands, produced electronic music, DJ'd, collected records from all sorts of genres...

And the whole time Nirvana have never been far from the top of the record pile, and I'm not sure they ever will.

In reply to magma:

If one listened indiscriminately to all the musical content out there it would likely take in excess of 100 years (and most of it would be shite!)

 magma 06 Apr 2022
In reply to broken spectre:

the 20 year period of early 60s to early 80s produced more top tunes than since Nirvana many people would argue..

2
In reply to magma:

Catchy but with some exceptions (Hendrix for example) not what I'd call proper music.

10
 Iamgregp 06 Apr 2022
In reply to magma:

They could argue it all they want, but they'd still be wrong.

Not that I'm slating that era, I just don't think that 20 years produced more great music than 1989 to today.  It's not even close.

10
 magma 06 Apr 2022
In reply to broken spectre:

you've dug yourself a hole with 'proper music'

 magma 06 Apr 2022
In reply to Iamgregp:

different drugs?

 Iamgregp 06 Apr 2022
In reply to magma:

Different world.

Think of all the genres and styles of music that didn't exist in the early 60s to 80s that have been a huge part of music and culture 89 to present day...

Then volume - the sheer amount of music that has been released 89 to present compared to what the early 60s to 80s produced, not to mention 1989 to present is 13 years longer than early 60s to 80s...

Like I said, it's not even close & not remotely a fair contest!

1
In reply to broken spectre:

Disagree

Nirvana were a second rate killing joke tribute act, back in their day they couldn't hold a torch to mudhoney, who in turn were lost in sonic youth's wake. 

Idolatry builds great careers. In my dystopia vision Kurt Cobain  and Freddy Mercury are in South America, enjoying Cuban cigars and counting their riches. 

14
In reply to Presley Whippet:

Mudhoney were a one hit wonder with "Touch Me I'm Sick" and Sonic Youth, sorry, who are they? Kurt Cobain was seminal. It isn't about idolatry it's about vision.

8
In reply to broken spectre:

If seminal = pretty boy junky relying on looks and angst rather than talent then yes. 

15
In reply to Presley Whippet:

> If seminal = pretty boy junky relying on looks and angst rather than talent then yes. 

And cardigans. I know you're saying he had no talent because we are arguing.

Also I'd argue they were the most un-angsty musicians in history.

Post edited at 19:01
1
In reply to broken spectre:

Yeah, nice knitwear

In reply to Presley Whippet:

He'd have been 55 now and didn't get to embarrassingly fizzle out like you or I.

 Phil S Morris 06 Apr 2022
In reply to broken spectre:

Nirvana had a really cool minor hit in 1968, then some American band stole the name.

1
In reply to Presley Whippet:

Nirvana weren’t even the best of the grunge bands, let alone anything else.I think if you dropped the filler tracks off Nevermind, and replace with the best tracks off In Utero there’s definitely a good album there. However, it’s not Dirt, or Superunkown.

4
In reply to broken spectre:

But we get to enjoy cardigans with leather elbow patches, pipes and slippers. I know which I would rather.

There were lots of reasons for kc to fake his death, think about it. He IS in South America enjoying the spoils. 😁

 RX-78 06 Apr 2022
In reply to broken spectre:

I assume you're joking about sonic youth? Since if you wre a nirvana fan it should have lead you to them. Try listening to teenage riot as an example.

 DaveHK 06 Apr 2022
In reply to Presley Whippet:

> If seminal = pretty boy junky relying on looks and angst rather than talent then yes. 

Give it a rest, you banged that drum pretty hard on the overrated acts thread. Nirvana weren't my cup of tea either but try to exercise a bit of awareness and see the difference between not to your taste and plain shite.

In reply to RX-78:

Pretty good! Undertones of Joy Division. It's good but could it capture a generation like Smells Like Teen Spirit did (that has 1.2 billion listens on Spotify as opposed to Teen Age Riot's 0.05 billion)?

In reply to DaveHK:

Thing is they kind of are my taste, just not very good at it and overrated for reasons of sympathy.

A sad early demise does not always equal talent and this is a case in point.

Now, modern guides books.... 

Post edited at 20:21
6
 DaveHK 06 Apr 2022
In reply to Presley Whippet:

> A sad early demise does not always equal talent and this is a case in point.

A sad early demise can give acts exposure and boost sales and no doubt they benefitted from that but it won't turn a sow's ear into a silk purse. They had something, maybe not enough to support the kind of acclaim they received but they weren't talentless.

Post edited at 20:31
 RX-78 06 Apr 2022
In reply to broken spectre:

People with more discerning taste😉

 65 06 Apr 2022
In reply to Presley Whippet:

> Nirvana were a second rate killing joke tribute act, back in their day they couldn't hold a torch to mudhoney, who in turn were lost in sonic youth's wake. 

I always thought Nirvana were a second rate Pixies and Melvins tribute act (with Tourettes being life wholesale from Rocket From The Tombs' '30 seconds over Tokyo'). That leaves a lot of room for being really good though, which I thought they were.

I never got Mudhoney. Sonic Youth were one of the greatest bands ever imho, despite being a possible Destroy All Monsters tribute act.

1
 MisterPiggy 06 Apr 2022
In reply to broken spectre:

Nirvana - ah, those were the days.

On the anniversary of Nevermind, even Radio 4 paid hommage: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000zv9p

Well worth a listen.

And votes in favour of Mudhoney, Sonic Youth, Black Flag 😀

Finally, just to share a tip on how to leave a concert... Picture the scene... Jammed in fron of the stage at a Sonic Youth concert - not even enough room to raise my arms over my head... Singing my lungs out and jumping up and down. To my right, the sweating crowd parts... 'How can that be?' A youngster staggers along, the heaving, sweating mass splitting before him. He passes in front of me, gasping "I'm gonna puke, gonna puke!" 😀 A good tip if you ever need to exit the mosh pit in a hurry.

 FactorXXX 06 Apr 2022
In reply to MisterPiggy:

> Finally, just to share a tip on how to leave a concert... Picture the scene... Jammed in fron of the stage at a Sonic Youth concert - not even enough room to raise my arms over my head... Singing my lungs out and jumping up and down. To my right, the sweating crowd parts... 'How can that be?' A youngster staggers along, the heaving, sweating mass splitting before him. He passes in front of me, gasping "I'm gonna puke, gonna puke!" 😀 A good tip if you ever need to exit the mosh pit in a hurry.

Unless it's a Macc Lads gig.

 Mike-W-99 06 Apr 2022
In reply to 65:

I thought they were a Vaselines tribute band?

I actually like them a lot and am still annoyed I turned down the chance to see them just before they made it big. A lot of folk still think (based on my works best debut albums thread in our forums) that Nevermind was their debut, Bleach is pretty good.

 Iamgregp 06 Apr 2022
In reply to Thread:

Not sure why Sonic Youth or Black Flag are being brought into a thread about Nirvana. Not the same genre of music, different image, sound, message and aesthetic.

By all means compare them, but to say that one surpassed the other? Might as well say NWA surpassed The Isley Brothers.

Big fan of Sonic Youth by the way, it’s just that they’re not a Grunge band.

Post edited at 23:36
1
 Iamgregp 06 Apr 2022
In reply to 65:

Exactly. Take the loud/quiet dynamic of The Pixies plus the hooks, mix it with the Grunge aesthetic and sound of The Melvins and you’ve got Nirvana.

What band isn’t a product of their influences?

 Offwidth 07 Apr 2022
In reply to broken spectre:

I'm with you. I'm 60 soon and I still love their brief output as much as the heroes of my youth.

Clauso 07 Apr 2022
In reply to magma:

> only another 100 years of popular music to discover..

Make it another 1000 years, perhaps?... Here's a brief tour courtesy of Richard Thompson:

youtube.com/watch?v=DDZdU-snqTs&

 65 07 Apr 2022
In reply to Iamgregp:

> Not sure why Sonic Youth or Black Flag are being brought into a thread about Nirvana.

I agree with your post especially re Sonic Youth, but Black Flag’s later output was hugely influential to what eventually became grunge. Punk songs being played slow with a heavier than early Sabbath sound.

 mark s 07 Apr 2022
In reply to broken spectre:

I recently watched montage of heck which was brilliant. 

My fav band , made me look into other music when I first heard them in 91. Not going to say I was a fan before nevermind as I'd never heard of them.

In fact I still love grunge now, Alice in chains ,pearl jam all brilliant.

 wbo2 07 Apr 2022
In reply to broken spectre:  I went to see Sonic Youth at Brixton Academy circa 1990 and they were genuinely pretty dull, and would probably rate as one of my most disappointing gigs.  But when you're going to decry every band ever as a 'xxx tribute band' (insert obscure group noones heard of) the whole thing gets a bit farcical.

 Not very similar to Nirvana either

In reply to paul_in_cumbria:

interesting you mention Dirt and Superunknown, because for me Facelift and Badmotorfinger were both the best albums of those two bands. I do love the two you mention though

 Durbs 07 Apr 2022
In reply to broken spectre:

There was a great documentary on the Beeb recently about Nirvana in the UK - all the nostalgia and also reminded me of how good they were, especially live.

Kurt mentions his biggest references were The Beatles and Led Zep (specifically Rock n Roll) - and you can really hear it; the songwriting and melody of the former, the volume and energy of the latter.

He was also a very good guitarist, there are some interesting (ish...) videos on YT about how even Teen Spirit, despite being the first sone everyone learned on guitar, is actually quite hard to play as Kurt did.

Not saying they're at TOOL-level of musicianship, but much more than power chords and distortion.

Anyway - Hard to be objective when for many they were such an important band whilst growing up. I re-listened to Nevermind recently, still have to skip Teen Spirit, but Breed, Lounge Act Territorial Pissings? Oof, bangers.

In reply to broken spectre:

> Pretty good! Undertones of Joy Division. It's good but could it capture a generation like Smells Like Teen Spirit did (that has 1.2 billion listens on Spotify as opposed to Teen Age Riot's 0.05 billion)?

Yeah because popularity always defines greatness (check out how many record Julio Iglesias and Barry Manilow have sold). 

No Pixies, no VU, no Sonic Youth, no Nirvana

 Tom Last 07 Apr 2022
In reply to broken spectre:

I used to have a recurring nightmare about being at Reading '92, me and my friends getting too baked in the tent and us missing Nirvana' s last ever UK show. 

As it was I had missed it anyway, listening, aged 13 at the time, to a Nevermind bootleg but just too young to be heading down the road to Reading Festival. 

In 1994 I sat in my maths lesson reading NME with Jim, who I remember telling me, "don't worry, Nirvana are a bit passé now anyway!" I still have that NME. I recognise Jim's crude 15yo hand in having scrawled an amateurish pistol beside Kurt's head. 

In the mid-nighties, I saw Hole in Virgin Megastore - they weren't great. Like all of us, I saw many more bands over the years: The Pogues, PJ Harvey, Johnny Cash, The Cure, Fugazi, Pulp, Prodigy, Rage Against the Machine, these were brilliant.

The best festival gig I ever saw was Pulp at Glastonbury in 1995. I saw them there again three years later. Having watched the succession of Sonic Youth, Nick Cave and Bob Dylan - all of them who I was very excited about and none of whom it turned out deserved to be there - Pulp were the heroes of the hour and put in an unexpectedly brilliant performance yet again. 

I've seen more bands over the years of course, but never scratched that itch. The Nevermind bootleg is back in the current tape-deck equipped car. 

Elvana are on at The Phoenix in a couple of months and I couldn't be more excited. 14 again just for a night. I might even crowd surf! An intentionally hilarious cover-band maybe but at this point I wouldn't swap those tickets for anything in the world. 

Post edited at 10:26
 MisterPiggy 07 Apr 2022
In reply to Iamgregp:

Sorry... That was me.

I group any noisy, jumpy up and downy music from the 90s as grunge.

'Fraid I have a pet peeve with music journalist forever splitting music into genres, sub genres ad ifinitum. If it's loud, doesn't spend any money or wardrobe/set design, appeared in the 90s, it's grunge.

Anyway, happy listening to whatever floats your boat; flannel shirts optional. 🙂

In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:

> interesting you mention Dirt and Superunknown, because for me Facelift and Badmotorfinger were both the best albums of those two bands. I do love the two you mention though

Yes, could have chosen those too, they’re brilliant. Interesting that kurt Cobain cited King Crimson’s Red album as an influence. As a lifelong Sabbath devotee, I dabble with playing doom type metal and a lot of my musician friends with the same tastes cite (like me) Red, Larks Tongues In Aspic, Starless and Bible Black and the live album USA from Crimson in the same breath as say Master of Reality from Sabbath. Technically the Crimson is harder to play, but the Sabbath is harder to play convincingly!😂

 MonkeyPuzzle 07 Apr 2022
In reply to broken spectre:

I think Nirvana get a lot of jip because of their insane success. The reason the "second-rate Melvins rip-off/Killing Joke rip-off/Pixies rip-off" comparisons fall down is that, as good as those bands are/were, none of them had Cobain's ear for a melody (bar possibly the Pixies), or his voice (bar none). He was capable of writing and performing ear-bending art rock stuff like Beeswax or Aneurysm but also singalong power pop like In Bloom, Lithium and the rest. Those other bands could do the first bit but not truly bridge the gap to second.

I don't think you have to listen to Nirvana or their success as an insult to any of the just as good, but more underground bands of the time. There always has to be a Biggest Band In The World and I think it's pretty brilliant that for a time is was a band as good as Nirvana.

 MonkeyPuzzle 07 Apr 2022
In reply to Durbs:

> There was a great documentary on the Beeb recently about Nirvana in the UK - all the nostalgia and also reminded me of how good they were, especially live.

My mate Alan is in that doc. He was their merch guy for their UK tours - lucky bugger. Whereas I only had tickets for their 1994 In Utero tour, which got cancelled for some reason I can't remember.

> Kurt mentions his biggest references were The Beatles and Led Zep (specifically Rock n Roll) - and you can really hear it; the songwriting and melody of the former, the volume and energy of the latter.

> He was also a very good guitarist, there are some interesting (ish...) videos on YT about how even Teen Spirit, despite being the first sone everyone learned on guitar, is actually quite hard to play as Kurt did.

> Not saying they're at TOOL-level of musicianship, but much more than power chords and distortion.

> Anyway - Hard to be objective when for many they were such an important band whilst growing up. I re-listened to Nevermind recently, still have to skip Teen Spirit, but Breed, Lounge Act Territorial Pissings? Oof, bangers.

I'm going to see Tool in Manchester on the 2nd of May. Just thought I'd mention that.

 65 07 Apr 2022
In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

Agree about Nirvana and their melodies, which was a key aspect of many late 80s American post-punk noise bands, Dinosaur Jr and Husker Du especially.

I think they were at their best a really good band, just not punk enough for my tastes. From the muddy banks of the Wisgah is imho one of the most underrated live albums though.

There’s an episode of early/mid 90s arts programme The Late Show simply called, No Nirvana, never mind. It’s a collection of studio performances by a load of bands from that era, Sonic Youth, Dinosaur Jr, Smashing Pumpkins et al. I’m sure it’s on YouTube. 

 Iamgregp 07 Apr 2022
In reply to 65:

Oh for sure, you can totally hear the influence of sludge/downer kind of stuff on Nirvana.  Particularly on Bleach and In Utero, not so much of the Butch Vig overproduced Nevermind.  

 Iamgregp 07 Apr 2022
In reply to MisterPiggy:

Yeah I can understand that the endless invention of nonsense sub and micro genres is annoying, but I think music journos are also guilty of the "lump them all together" crime meaning bands are often grouped together with a bunch of other bands that are completely alien to them, just because they were around at the same time, or look a bit the same, or happen to play guitar in the 90s.

Radiohead were categorised as Britpop for years, for example...

It's not just in rock, happens in hip hop all the time.  Soulful J-Dilla produced beats?  Right you lot are all "Backpack". 

 aln 07 Apr 2022
In reply to Presley Whippet:

Sonic Youth and Nirvana aren't at all comparable. I love both, but different beasts 

 aln 07 Apr 2022
In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

> I'm going to see Tool in Manchester on the 2nd of May. Just thought I'd mention that.

I'm going to see Low in Edinburgh on the 25th April. Also worth mentioning 😀 1st gig in over 2 years! Very excited. 

 Iamgregp 07 Apr 2022
In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

> I think Nirvana get a lot of jip because of their insane success. The reason the "second-rate Melvins rip-off/Killing Joke rip-off/Pixies rip-off" comparisons fall down is that, as good as those bands are/were, none of them had Cobain's ear for a melody (bar possibly the Pixies), or his voice (bar none). He was capable of writing and performing ear-bending art rock stuff like Beeswax or Aneurysm but also singalong power pop like In Bloom, Lithium and the rest. Those other bands could do the first bit but not truly bridge the gap to second.

This is it right here.  This is why they were so big, bigger than all other bands cited. 

It's that mix of power and melody.  Along with one of the most remarkably emotive voices rock music has ever heard.  Played by 3 (and later 4) remarkable musicians and delivered by a guy who really meant it.

That's why they were the best.

 mark s 07 Apr 2022
In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

> My mate Alan is in that doc. He was their merch guy for their UK tours - lucky bugger. Whereas I only had tickets for their 1994 In Utero tour, which got cancelled for some reason I can't remember.

> I'm going to see Tool in Manchester on the 2nd of May. Just thought I'd mention that.

I remember tool back in the early 90s but never bothered as I was more into metal but recently they have blown socks off. The drum cam footage of Danny playing pneuma is outstanding 

 Andy Clarke 07 Apr 2022
In reply to Iamgregp:

> Think of all the genres and styles of music that didn't exist in the early 60s to 80s that have been a huge part of music and culture 89 to present day...

I find this topic fascinating, so apologies if this post is a bit long-winded. Back in the day, I taught some General Studies in the Sixth Form. The theme set by the exam board was Revolutions and I used this to structure a brief historical analysis of post-WW2 popular music, culture and fashion. (Along with studies of Romanticism and Impressionism/Abstract Expressionism, before traditionalists get outraged.) It concentrated on a few key bursts of development and analysed the music, lyrics and styles of seminal artists. It was very broad brush, but it went:

1956: Rock n' Roll Arrives (Elvis Presley & Chuck Berry)

1965-7: The British Beat, the Summer of Love and the Birth of Rock (Who, Dylan, Beatles)

1976-7: Sounds of the Cities: Punk and Hip-hop (Sex Pistols, Clash, NWA* & Public Enemy)

I was conscious that I needed to extend it with 1988/9 and The Summer of Love Returns (EDM/acid-house/rave) but I got distracted (blame Ofsted). The handy thing about such a broad brush approach was that it identified (manufactured?) a "revolution" every decade. Anyway, my question is: do you think it would be possible to identify two or three such key bursts of synergistic creativity post 89  (eg maybe mid 00s UK grime) or has the proliferation of genres and the ever-present availability of everything that ever happened made such an approach impossible? I realise you might reject it entirely on the basis that it's just lumping stuff together - but history, posterity and teachers have a habit of doing exactly that!

*Lesson came with a Parental Advisory sticker.

Post edited at 17:03
 FreshSlate 08 Apr 2022
In reply to paul_in_cumbria:

That's interesting, if you were to make a thread about how good Alice in Chains were, you'd probably have 4 or 5 people vaguely agreeing with you and that would be that. Nirvana has had the sort of success and longevity that they'll probably still have their detractors in 100 years.

That can't be said for many of the other bands mentioned here and probably can't be said for the majority of my favourite bands either. 


New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...