Nirvana Poll

[edgeofthorns]

I was a freshman in college when Nirvana broke big. I remember thinking it sounded boring and dull...I think I was right. IMO, the grunge era was nothing but a bunch of kids that blamed parents and society for their problems. It got old real quick.

~Brian~

 

[AeonicSlumber]

I was a freshman in college when Nirvana broke big. I remember thinking it sounded boring and dull...I think I was right. IMO, the grunge era was nothing but a bunch of kids that blamed parents and society for their problems. It got old real quick.

~Brian~

Wait, so punk, metal, "classic rock," etc never did this? Also, I'm not sure what you were "right" about. Nirvana ended up being one of the best selling bands of all time, so actually you are (and so am I lol as I'm not huge on everything that came after Bleach) wrong, haha.

 

[AeonicSlumber]

Rock died... All we got was this "alt rock" and "modern rock" stuff from then forward.

Rock died, but all we got was rock?

It took over in popularity, yes but that genre itself didn't kill metal, the record labels giving up on metal is what "killed" it.

To me, this is a weird chestnut I see a lot of people banging on. I mean, yeah metal wasn't as huge as it was in the 80's, but for people to say it died (and yeah, I know you're not saying that specifically)-- or more specifically, that it was the label's fault that it died--I'm not so sure. Honestly, labels have and always will sign whatever the people go for. It's not their fault that generation found bands like Nirvana, Peal Jam, Blink 182, and Green Day to be cool. Conversely, SONY signed Earache Records to major a distribution and marketing deal in the 90's, because they believed Carcass, Napalm Death, At The Gates etc would be huge mainstream acts. Many of those bands themselves landed major label deals that did not last long. Oh and let's not forget Roadrunner also getting major label push from Def Jam in the mid 90's as well. The labels definitely tried to push metal, but nobody bought it -- at least not compared to the amount of people that were buying alt rock, pop punk and grunge. It was the buyer's fault for metal not taking off in the 90's, not the label.

 

[nomisofsiman]

Rock died, but all we got was rock?

That was funny to see. I think what he meant was traditional classic rock.

 

[J-Dubya 777]

Just because a band sells well, it doesn't automatically equate to them being "good" IMO. It may get me to notice them, but it won't change my opinion that I thought (& still think) Nirvana sucks

At that time, all kinds of crap was being forced down the listeners throats by radio. If it wasn't for getting on the internet in 1995, I'd probably still be listening to Priest, Maiden, & Skid Row exclusively. And back then, WhoTF were Angra? I initially used the internet to seek out all these metal bands that seemed popular everywhere but here in the US.

Oh, and I still have my copy of Pearl Jam's debut cd, and I still listen to it a couple times a year....

 

[AeonicSlumber]

That was funny to see. I think what he meant was traditional classic rock.

I got that, but you know, I think that's a pretty ridiculous mindset. I mean, look at us now, with all these retro bands like Airbourne and the like? Who cares? It's just genericism at the highest level. Things have to change and evolve. That's life. Time waits for no one. Sorry if you don't like the new rock over the old rock, but let's be real, it's not anyone else's fault that a couple people chose to stay behind yanno?

I mean I don't get why there's an obsession for people to want MORE AC/DCs, or more Iron Maidens, or MORE Helloweens. There are only one of each of those bands! You could never duplicate them, because it's those specific musicians that made those specific songs so good!.

 

[Dragongrrrl]

I hated them then. I hate them now. I will hate them always. I felt it was best not to mince words.

QFT.

I liked Alice in Chains and earlier Soundgarden, but Nirvana and Pearl Jam and the like always triggered my gag reflex. Still do. uke:

 

[nomisofsiman]

To me, this is a weird chestnut I see a lot of people banging on. I mean, yeah metal wasn't as huge as it was in the 80's, but for people to say it died (and yeah, I know you're not saying that specifically)-- or more specifically, that it was the label's fault that it died--I'm not so sure. Honestly, labels have and always will sign whatever the people go for. It's not their fault that generation found bands like Nirvana, Peal Jam, Blink 182, and Green Day to be cool. Conversely, SONY signed Earache Records to major a distribution and marketing deal in the 90's, because they believed Carcass, Napalm Death, At The Gates etc would be huge mainstream acts. Many of those bands themselves landed major label deals that did not last long. Oh and let's not forget Roadrunner also getting major label push from Def Jam in the mid 90's as well. The labels definitely tried to push metal, but nobody bought it -- at least not compared to the amount of people that were buying alt rock, pop punk and grunge. It was the buyer's fault for metal not taking off in the 90's, not the label.

I guess my main point is that people seem to label grunge as this evil movement that was the sole reason metal suffered in the 90s. These bands (at least the early ones) had no clue in the beginning that they were going to be all that popular. It's really a combination of things in terms of why things happened the way they did. A lot of labels did drop metal bands during that time, which could've been part of it. But in essence, it's just one of those things much like the movie industry where it's hard to really tell what's going to do well and what's not. We'll never know if some of those bands who got less distribution would've had more success than they did or not. As for those Earache bands, I do find it amusing people thought they would be huge mainstream acts. They're like the complete opposite of mainstream.

 

[nomisofsiman]

I got that, but you know, I think that's a pretty ridiculous mindset. I mean, look at us now, with all these retro bands like Airbourne and the like? Who cares? It's just genericism at the highest level. Things have to change and evolve. That's life. Time waits for no one. Sorry if you don't like the new rock over the old rock, but let's be real, it's not anyone else's fault that a couple people chose to stay behind yanno?

I mean I don't get why there's an obsession for people to want MORE AC/DCs, or more Iron Maidens, or MORE Helloweens. There are only one of each of those bands! You could never duplicate them, because it's those specific musicians that made those specific songs so good!.

It doesn't happen very often but I agree with everything you said.

 

[Diabolik]

Angra's Angels Cry came out in 1993. That disproves any "metal is dead" complaints from that era...

yes, but also dont forget, it wasnt easily available in US stores was it?

 

[Diabolik]

That's why I put "dead" in quotes. I don't believe the actual music ever died, just that a lot of people stopped listening to it and some of the bands we loved, started to sell out.

It was cool hanging out with you back then in the late 80's early 90's.

 

[Orion Crystal Ice]

Don't much like the band, don't much care, not affected by the hype save for being annoyed.

I like AeonicSlumber's post about stuff just sitting around and the fans refusing anything else. Metal fans especially are notorious for this and they have less excuses than others. I always see this puzzling juxtaposition where a metal fan is groaning and wants a 'different' wall of sound than what they are used to hearing all of the time, but if said different wall of sound presents itself, they kind of 'meh' at it and eventually go off for something that sounds exactly like another existing band and whose metal subgenre can be easily, effortlessly pigeonholed, with references. In metal nowadays, if a band cannot directly, completely market to an exceedingly clean-cut bracket of listener and swarm the airspace, then the band is scary and people aren't sure about listening to them and the label won't push them. The retro bands, btw, are absolutely hilarious in how they are 'staying true to the roots of it all', and all this death/grind/flower metal/whatever is untrue, and they are the most true, while they dress exactly like Riot, having to actively search out beat up looking hi-tops on eBay. I guess being true is about having no identity, if so, I can't fathom why the old crummies don't love all the new mass produced crap.

 

[Bamafan]

I never really enjoyed Nirvana, but I didn't become violently while listening to them. I can't fault the Seattle music movement for placing metal on life support. Let's face it, the excesses of late 80's hard rock cried out for a counterrevolution. To loosely quote from the most miserable book I ever had to read, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, when the prevailing paradigm becomes unworkable, a revolution occurs that will create a new dominant paradigm. Hip hop and grunge were those revolutions. I actually liked AIC because they had a level of musical proficiency and songwriting skill that I could appreciate, but aside from the occasional Soundgarden song, I had no use for grunge. Since I was living in Memphis at the time, the 90's were my blue(s) period.

 

[Heavenly Call]

For me, Nirvana hit at just the right time. Middle school/high school years, shifting social groups, etc. I not only liked them at the time, but they got me started "following" music. I wanted to read about them, watch videos of them, and even play guitar because of that band. As I discovered more and more music, I began to discover some of their flaws (over simplistic riffs, incoherent lyrics, etc) but even now, knowing and liking the kind of music I do, I must say that Nirvana albums still take me somewhere different. It's more of a personal bond perhaps, but theres' something in those songs that is raw and primal that I've never really been able to find in any other band. So I'm different than most of the posters here, I loved Nirvana, I still like Nirvana, and will always like Nirvana.

 

[General Zod]

Did you ever like them? Yes or no?

I liked a few songs, but was never really a fan of the band. Actually, of all the bands from Seattle that hit big, they were by far my least favorite.

I do not recall caring much about Cobain's death. I don't think I made metal meathead jokes about it, but I cannot be sure.

My reaction was more less the same. It's a shame when anyone chooses to take their life, especially puzzling when they would seem to have it all. But I had no personal reaction to it one way or the other.

[/quote]It is somewhat interesting to me, as this was the pre-Internet period when I looked to grunge and "alternative" rock to fill the a musical void due to my inability to find much new metal.[/quote]I did the exact same thing. Then I stumbled upon HardRadio.com and began re-discovering Metal.

 

[AMBR]

I liked a few songs off Nevermind for a little while because it was interesting and different. Once it became mainstream, that quickly wore off and it became irritating to me. I liked select songs from several of the key grunge bands, but always the songs lost their interest for me quickly.

 

[DuchessOfDork]

Never liked them. :/ I remember listening to DC 101 as a kid, and in high school, always searching for something that I'd like. I don't think I ever connected to anything that was played on the radio in the 90's.

 

[lane_miller]

I have never been a fan of Nirvana. I like some virtuosity in my music and they have none.

 

[Jasonic]

Yep, I liked them.
Many great tunes from both BLEACH and NEVERMIND, as well as their sub pop singles.

This is a great tune / video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QECJ9pCyhns

 

[nomisofsiman]

Yep, I liked them.
Many great tunes from both BLEACH and NEVERMIND, as well as their sub pop singles.

This is a great tune / video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QECJ9pCyhns

I must say, I'm quite surprised.