T
TheBlackGhost
Guest
I think I’ve covered every option. I give you every kind of person I’ve ever encountered on this, my favorite band. Now please.
Discuss.
Discuss.
- Status
M
mjg116
Guest
Whilst I haven’t listened to them for years - they were the reason I wanted to learn guitar and now 11-12 years later I have played in church heaps and am playing guitar semi-professionally. So I can thank Nirvana for the inspiration.
F
Flopfoot
Guest
Nirvana was an okay band. Nothing great. (How hard is it to play power chords…)
T
TheBlackGhost
Guest
Then you guys have to vote!
mjg- You would be choice two.
FlopFoot- You would obviously be the cynical choice.
mjg- You would be choice two.
FlopFoot- You would obviously be the cynical choice.
W
WanderAimlessly
Guest
I voted: I’m extremely cynical, and quite frankly, absolutely nothing impresses me (which is true 
).
PF
).PF
M
mlchance
Guest
The real choice: Nirvana was derivative and cliched. They didn’t do anything that hadn’t previously been done a thousand times by other bands. Nirvana was successful because they were a corporate product marketed to be successful.
– Mark L. Chance.
– Mark L. Chance.
D
Dandelion_Wine
Guest
I’m with Flopfoot (none of the choices seemed to fit me so I voted he was ‘hawt’).
100 years from now are people going to be talking about Nirvana? Not the band. They were in the mix when it was going on, but not much more than that.
Sorry ghost
100 years from now are people going to be talking about Nirvana? Not the band. They were in the mix when it was going on, but not much more than that.
Sorry ghost
C
catcher5
Guest
I don’t know if people will be talking about Nirvana in 100 years, but they made some very good music that I still enjoy listening to.
T
TheBlackGhost
Guest
The hot choice is for these horrible (may sound cliche but yeah) teenage girls who only follow what is popular now. When the box set was released, a few more of these kinds popped up. You see the whole point is they usually go on and on about how “Kurt is so hot” and I’ve actually heard some say they can’t wait to see them in concert, and as im sure most of you know Kurt is dead, Nirvana isn’t a band anymore, so that shows their extent of how much of a fan they are.I’m with Flopfoot (none of the choices seemed to fit me so I voted he was ‘hawt’).
100 years from now are people going to be talking about Nirvana? Not the band. They were in the mix when it was going on, but not much more than that.
Sorry ghost
T
TheBlackGhost
Guest
You obviously don’t know much about Nirvana at all beyond maybe some misguided word of mouth, and maybe some of their more popular (but not as good) songs.
C
Celia
Guest
I have to agree. Nirvana created the whole alternative-grunge scene, and that hadn’t existed before them. Before them we had aging 80’s hair bands and Ozzy types. (nothing against Ozzy, of course…he was good in his own right.)
Nirvana was an great band. I don’t know if they’re my favorite, but they’re definetly up there. Certainly the alt bands today draw a lot of their inspiration from them, from what I’ve read and heard, though they’re a pale imitation.
D
deb1
Guest
I enjoyed Nirvana and was relieved when all the hair bands disappeared. I can also say that I was not into the band because Kurt was ‘hot.’ He always looked dirty and ungroomed to me. I had absolutely no desire for the guy.
T
TheBlackGhost
Guest
No someone un-groomed and unkept, Dave Grohl back in those days. Dave’s actually my favorite musician, he’s in my opinion the best drummer I’ve ever heard (yup, even a bit better then John Bonham), not to mention he can play a ton of other instruments, sing very well. I mean he created the Foo Fighters, you must of heard them by now.
O
Oren
Guest
I couldn’t really vote for any of the options. They are one of my favorite bands, but not my absolute favorite. They are definitely one of the best bands ever.
And in NO WAY cliched or derivitave. Whoever wrote that is off their rocker.
I’ve been listenin to em a lot lately. And they’re still better than anything around now.
And in NO WAY cliched or derivitave. Whoever wrote that is off their rocker.
I’ve been listenin to em a lot lately. And they’re still better than anything around now.
M
MEP
Guest
“Well I’m old and I just don’t understand all this crazy music of today.”
Ummmm… Kurt topped himself like a decade ago. I wouldn’t call Nirvana the music of today. It’s old now, and almost as overplayed on the radio as all the Sublime music that the radio still plays every minute of every day.
And the whole “voice of a generation” thing was blown waaaaay out of proportion too (and yes, I am part of that generation). Nirvana was a great band made up of talented musicians (Grohl had just as much to do with it as Kobain did).
The spectacle and hype surrounding the band was much larger than the music itself (which is exactly why Kurt topped himself – that and he married Courtney Love which I imagine would drive anybody to reconsider living). They were good, but that’s all they were. They were a good band that followed in the footsteps of other great bands that came before them (but never achieved the notoriety of Nirvana). Honestly, the Pixies had a larger real impact on music than Nirvana did. Nirvana just got more recognition for what was really done by others before them.
So… good band, but greatly overhyped and greatly overplayed on alternative radio (or oldie stations as I like to call them now).
Ummmm… Kurt topped himself like a decade ago. I wouldn’t call Nirvana the music of today. It’s old now, and almost as overplayed on the radio as all the Sublime music that the radio still plays every minute of every day.
And the whole “voice of a generation” thing was blown waaaaay out of proportion too (and yes, I am part of that generation). Nirvana was a great band made up of talented musicians (Grohl had just as much to do with it as Kobain did).
The spectacle and hype surrounding the band was much larger than the music itself (which is exactly why Kurt topped himself – that and he married Courtney Love which I imagine would drive anybody to reconsider living). They were good, but that’s all they were. They were a good band that followed in the footsteps of other great bands that came before them (but never achieved the notoriety of Nirvana). Honestly, the Pixies had a larger real impact on music than Nirvana did. Nirvana just got more recognition for what was really done by others before them.
So… good band, but greatly overhyped and greatly overplayed on alternative radio (or oldie stations as I like to call them now).
M
MEP
Guest
No, no, and no. Grunge predates Nirvana by years. It was just a Seattle thing before Mudhoney turned it into a West coast thing and then later Nirvana, Soundgarden (older than Nirvana) and Pearl Jam all kind of together made it a nationwide thing. Alternative has gone by many names over the years and predates grunge and Nirvana by decades (listen to some Velvet Underground or again, the Pixies, or even try punk (real punk, not that Green Day/Blink 182 garbage) – sidenote, most grunge musicians referred to themselves as punk before the music press started to call the Seattle scene grunge, a term that most of the original grunge bands rejected for years).
The aforementioned Pixies already killed the hair band scene and then broke up before Nirvana played their first tune. You just didn’t notice it until you saw Smells Like Teen Spirit on MTV.
Most alt bands were more influenced by punk, and post-punk college rock (again, the Pixies without whom there would be no Nirvana). Nirvana’s footprint on popular media and society is pretty huge. Nirvana’s impression on music is really very small, and the grunge scene that developed after Nirvana and Pearl Jam became successful was really awful (and thankfully short-lived).
M
mlchance
Guest
No, they didn’t. They came out of that scene, which had already existed for years, especially in the Pacific Northwest and New England college towns. Nirvana then became a polished, corporate product in order to merchandise a regional style to a nationwide audience.
How presumptuous. You obviously don’t know anything about what I know.
I was in the thick of things when the real alternative music scene was born in late 70s and early 80s. Nirvana rode in on the coat-tails of the real alt-rock innovators. The influences of acts such as the Ramones, the aforementioned Pixies, Sonic Youth, Patti Smith, Lou Reed and John Cale (with or without the Velvet Underground), Iggy Pop, et cetera, are shockingly apparent to anyone who has studied the music involved.
I may be off my rocker, but I’ve forgotten more about the origins of alternative music than the Johnny-come-lately Nirvana generation ever learned to begin with.
– Mark L. Chance.
D
deb1
Guest
Yep, heard of David Grohl and I like him quite a bit.
C
Celia
Guest
Well sure but *mainstream *it hadn’t happened and that’s what I mean. What average teenager, especially on the East coast, had heard of these Seattle/West Coast underground whatever bands? None of them really made a mark (on the national scene, anyway,) until Nirvana, like you said. And when I say alternative…I mean today’s “punk” not the good old stuff. (don’t know too much about the Velvet Underground!) I’ve read interviews with Green Day, etc. , that said they were influenced by that music. Thas all I’m sayin.
I was about 9 or 10 when Smells Like Teen Spirit came out so forgive me for not really “being there” lol, but I do remember what the perspective of my older sister’s friends were of the band. As the “average listener” I guess you could say.
Oh, Mark I guess this answers your quote too. My bad. I should have been more clear by what I meant. “Created” I guess wasn’t the best word, lol.
T
TheBlackGhost
Guest
MEP said:
That was more directed to people of the 50s-60s eras, I had a lot more to add to that part of the poll, but word limit restricted me.
Although I think you are really underestimating them, I guess I can agree. Although if you break it down, Kurt Cobain did do a bit more then half of the stuff Dave did, although I think Dave’s share talent makes up for that.
I can definatly agree with the Love statement, that poor guy. They did follow in the footsteps of great bands, like the Pixies as you mentioned (I like the Pixies too, I own one of their CD’s), I think Nirvana had much more of an (name removed by moderator)act then the Pixies, and not just because of their popularity. If you were to listen to some of Nirvana’s music outside of their studio stuff, you might understand the pure talent the entire band had. In my opinion Nirvana is much better then the Pixies, and had much more of an impact then they did.
I wouldnt call them overhyped, and I wish they were played more, I don’t hear much of them on the radio around here.
- Status