Nirvana: vastly overhyped and overrated:

[dickkotite]

and to further crush you boozer....

you made a claim that geffen took control of nirvan because they were the fresh new faces on the block and they could be molded and exploited to their specs.

this is absurd.

Geffen wants to make money. if they were interested in tapping into the new grunge scene, they could have grabbed the other semi-established acts. Do you think that any of these bands would have rejected a big label? that is every bands wet dream, whether they want to admit it or not. If geffen came a callin, they would have listened to what was being proposed. these other bands were not in any position of great power at that time........

secondly, in order to secure a record deal, record companies prefer acts that are established, ones that have already done the leg work and ahve a following. bands who dont play out and are unknown dont get signed no matter how good they are. it is a bad investment. geffen could have signed any of those bands or at least made the attempt but who knows if they did or not.

Nirvana was putting out demos and playing lots of local shows. they got signed because cobain was something special. he was not a fake a phoney a fraud like cris cornell and his shirtless pretty boy promo pics. cobain had a genuine dark side, true emotion and it came out in his simplistic but powerful music.

what have these other bands done that makes them so great?

pearl jam - great debut and then perpetual suckyness

AIC - a few good songs, so mediocre

screaming trees - ditto

mother love bone - absolutely the pits

soundgarden - some very good stuff but again just fluff with little substance. cornell may have one of the greates voices but there is nothing more to him. if nirvana is cheesey and overproduced, what the hell do you call "black holed sun" that song is so overproduced and cheesy

faith no more - the original stuff with singer #1 like we care alot was the better stuff. mike patton was just a little masturbating homo. they had a few pop hits and the rest was god awful

at least nirvan/cobain could play a singer acoustic and sing and have some soul

[dickkotite]

Yeah I said it, and it's true. Everyone points to the genius of Kurt Cobain and his music, yet nobody wants to admit to how they got to where they were. Go listen to their album, Bleach. A bunch of been there done that underground punk sounds by seemingly poor musicians. They were going nowhere fast sounding like that. Enter Geffen records to polish the turd and clean up the crappy sounds and actually put some decent sounding overdubs into the guitar tracks and suddenly you have something marketable. All that was left to do was hand it over to MTV so they could bend you all over and shove this Frankenstein up your collective rear ends. The real Nirvana and the extent of Cobain's ability was plain to see on the Bleach album. The real genius of Nirvana was created by sound men and studio workers, along with the addition of a guy who has at least a shred of musical talent named Dave Grohl.

MTV saw the end of Hair bands was near and didn't know the direction that music was going to take until the REAL first grunge band hit the scene almost 2 years before Nirvana. In fact, they hit on so early that MTV had no idea where to put them, so they threw them into heavy metal typically seen on Monster's Ball. The Band? Alice In Chains. The song? Man In The Box. They were the first "grunge" band to hit the mainstream. The difference was "grunge" wasn't even a word when they first showed up, and MTV had to have their own band where they could release this new sound under their own terms. Enter Nirvana with Smells Like Teen Spirit and the suits at MTV and Geffen laughed all the way to the bank.

Face it, you've all been fooled into worshipping a talentless corporate driven god named Cobain. DISCUSS>>>>>>>>

this is just crazy. bleach was bleach. it was raw and for that it was cool. you cant just take a band and throw them into a studio and lay overdubs and create the next big thing. it doesnt work that way. i have thousands possibly tens of thousands of hours of studio experience and own my own place. trust me sonny boy. you CANT polish a turd that much...

who wrote the songs? geffen, mtv or cobain? musicians grow from album #1 to album #2 or 3 big time.

the funny thing is that im not even a nirvana fan

[dickkotite]

i cant believe im writing all this about a band i dont love.....

another point. pearl jams debut was their best. after that, they became huge and then they REALLY had studio time to fiddle with.

Yet, they REgressed.

Nirvana PROgressed

[Preston Howley III]

Whoa, where did that come from? One of my all time favorite bands. Mike Patton is one of the best frontmen of our time.

Mike Patton knows music. He can write it, and he can create it. He can produce it. He's a bonifide talent, and he does what he wants- nobody looking to pack stadiums or get lots of airplay would name his band Mr. Bungle.

Cobain was an amateur guitar player who wrote a few clever pop tunes.

I can't believe somebody cough cough- Kotite- cough would compare Cobain to Lennon let alone compare him to Mike Patton.

Boozer is striking on a theme that rubs me raw with Nirvana-

They had a total lack of integrity. Don't sign a mega contract, get an industry insider to produce your record, and then put on some act like you're the antithesis of corporate rock.

Nirvana was corporate rock in the same sense that Van Halen, Journey, and Def Leppard were corporate rock.

The only difference was they wore smelly flannel shirts. At least Dave Grohl has come to terms with it, and by the way I'm not knocking it. I never got into the pile on "they sold out" thing. I know how sleazy the music biz is and I know how hard it is to make it, so once you get your shot, make as much money as you can because you might never see that chance again.

[Bugg]

"Face it, you've all been fooled into worshipping a talentless corporate driven god named Cobain. DISCUSS>>>>>>>>"

To follow up JetMo-They're all corporate if you know who they are. And that's not a knock, just a fact. Once you get out of your garage and sign any record deal, you will get sold like soap.

I don't care who you present-they've all sold out. So what? The idea of "they sold out, MAN!", is such 1960s hippie gibberish. They all sold out.Deal with it. I don't know if it's age or experience, but nobody gets paid in thank you notes, and in as scummy a business as music, you cannot fault anyone for getting the cash while they can. Or they might end up like Todd Rundgren out on the road at 62 pretending he's the lead singer for a band he had nothing to do with to pay for his prescriptions.

[stormshadow19]

pearl jam - great debut and then perpetual suckyness

AIC - a few good songs, so mediocre

screaming trees - ditto

mother love bone - absolutely the pits

soundgarden - some very good stuff but again just fluff with little substance. cornell may have one of the greates voices but there is nothing more to him. if nirvana is cheesey and overproduced, what the hell do you call "black holed sun" that song is so overproduced and cheesy

faith no more - the original stuff with singer #1 like we care alot was the better stuff. mike patton was just a little masturbating homo. they had a few pop hits and the rest was god awful

at least nirvan/cobain could play a singer acoustic and sing and have some soul

You're going to bash AiC, but prop up Nirvana? You're totally on crack, Dickie. AiC's unplugged session blows anything Nirvana did out of the water. If you learn A5, E5, and B5, you just mastered 75% of Nirvana's music catalogue. Kurt Cobain was not a Music Jesus. He was a depressed guy who married a crack whore.

[Jetfan13]

I agree...3 chords and a bsaeline and Cobain singing left a lot to be desired. The only talent in the band was Dave Groh (FOO FIGHTERS)

[Thor99]

To follow up JetMo-They're all corporate if you know who they are. And that's not a knock, just a fact. Once you get out of your garage and sign any record deal, you will get sold like soap.

I don't care who you present-they've all sold out.

Check out Fugazi. Let me know if they've 'sold out' or are corporate.

[Alk]

Im sorry i didnt realiz that they were one of YOUR favorites. If i was armed with this tidbit of info, i would never have called them a decent band.

mike patton is GAY, btw. the old singer was 10x better

bastard. I liked their first two albums but Chuck Mosely just wan't very good. I am curious to hear some of the bands that he was in after FNM gave him the boot though. The one thing that kills me is that Courney Love was actually in that band when it first started. At least they had the sense not to keep her around. If they had, she would probably be raping two of my favorite bands of all time.

[Boozer76]

sorry boozer but i have to crush your theory.

i just did a google on the 4 top seattle bands and for the most part, 3/4 were doing stuff by around 85-86. nirvana came just a **** hair later putting out demos in 1987-8.

this is hardly the scene you are describing about grunge being firmly established and nirvana being the johhny come latelys who got lucky. If nirvana debuted in say 92, id appreciate your point more. now, we are just splitting hairs.

You still completely missed my point. First of all Kurt Cobain was a young teen in 87, and again all of their music up to Bleach was COMPLETELY different than what they were on the Nevermind album. They came out with a toally different sound and style. You can't tell me that a band who plays hard underground punk style music "evolves" into what Nevermind was. Listen to the old demo's and debuts of AIC, P-Jam, Soundgarden etc.. It may sound a bit more raw simply because the equipment to record and play on wasn't as good, but the music styles were exactly what they were to become. There was no great transformation as there was with Nirvana. It was as if Prince came out and started playing heavy metal. Grunge and underground punk have absolutely no correlation whatsoever.

Your dillusion if you don't think record companies like Geffen are constantly on the prowl for moldable bands that may take off. Make no mistake about it I am certain that there were hundreds if not thousands of other bands that we don't know about that Geffen was also trying to mold. Nirvana happened to be the ones that worked out.

Geffen could not go out and sign a band like Soundgarden, AIC or PJam to mold on their own. They were already established and had a rather large fanbase. They could not market them as some new big thing. If you lived in the NW you already knew those bands. They were playing larger clubs/venues in the area and doing it with bands of their likeness. Nirvana was playing in the punk rock scene, totally seperate from those guys.

[Boozer76]

this is just crazy. bleach was bleach. it was raw and for that it was cool. you cant just take a band and throw them into a studio and lay overdubs and create the next big thing. it doesnt work that way. i have thousands possibly tens of thousands of hours of studio experience and own my own place. trust me sonny boy. you CANT polish a turd that much...

who wrote the songs? geffen, mtv or cobain? musicians grow from album #1 to album #2 or 3 big time.

the funny thing is that im not even a nirvana fan

The hell you can't polish a Turd that much!! Britney Spears is a star. Jessica Simpon is a star. The Backstreet Boys, 98degrees are stars. Blink 182 are stars. Take away the studio editing from any of these clowns and they are nothing but crap. Spears and Simpson are probably porn stars, the boy bands are still hanging around at bars, working construction, and sporting their leather bomber jackets and drakkar. Blink 182 and NUMEROUS others would just be deadbeat kids smoking pot working at music stores selling Barry Manilow to your mother in their hundreds of piercings.

I can play some guitar, but i can't sing very well at all. I guarantee if Geffen records took me and expended all their efforts to making me a star, you'd be listening to me on the radio.

Geffen wanted to get a band of their own to mold and "spearhead" this new stylre of music that had yet to even be named. Creating your own monster and perpetuating a ginat lie to the masses is the best way to do it.

[Boozer76]

pearl jam - great debut and then perpetual suckyness

AIC - a few good songs, so mediocre

screaming trees - ditto

mother love bone - absolutely the pits

soundgarden - some very good stuff but again just fluff with little substance. cornell may have one of the greates voices but there is nothing more to him. if nirvana is cheesey and overproduced, what the hell do you call "black holed sun" that song is so overproduced and cheesy

faith no more - the original stuff with singer #1 like we care alot was the better stuff. mike patton was just a little masturbating homo. they had a few pop hits and the rest was god awful

PJam is still making great music today, and have been the whole time. They got wrapped up in the whole rebelious theme and lost out on their fame big time. Vitalogy had some incredible songs mixed in with deliberate crap simply intended to piss off their record label who was pushing them to spit out albums like hotcakes. Had they kept their mouths shut and just made music they would have an enormous following today.

AIC is hardly mediocre any way you slice it. Cantrell was the most talented guitarist of the bunch and their harmonies were absol;utely incredible. AIC would still be huge today if Staley didn't decide to start using heroine.

Screaming Trees were what they were. Not a hugely successful band but they were good.

MotherLoveBone- I never really liked them that much, but believe it or not they are credited by their real peers as being the ones who really started it all.

Soundgarden-There is a boatload more to Cornell than his voice. I admit I'm not a fan of the superunknown album, but badmotorfinger was arguably the best album of the grunge era. That album made you want to put your head through a wall. Cornell is also an extremely accomplished acoustic player as noted by numerous solo songs and soundgarden covers.

Faith No More-They were never really my cup of tea, so I won't argue to much with you here.

at least nirvan/cobain could play a singer acoustic and sing and have some soul

This is absolutely absurd. AIC's unplugged album ran circles around Nirvana in every way shape and form. The best acoustic guitar player for Nirvana didn't even play guitar. Furthermore the best acoustic player on their unplugged album wasn't even in their band!! Chris Cornell also humiliates Cobain with an acoustic guitar.

[Jetfan13]

The hell you can't polish a Turd that much!! Britney Spears is a star. Jessica Simpon is a star. The Backstreet Boys, 98degrees are stars. Blink 182 are stars. Take away the studio editing from any of these clowns and they are nothing but crap. Spears and Simpson are probably porn stars, the boy bands are still hanging around at bars, working construction, and sporting their leather bomber jackets and drakkar. Blink 182 and NUMEROUS others would just be deadbeat kids smoking pot working at music stores selling Barry Manilow to your mother in their hundreds of piercings.

I can play some guitar, but i can't sing very well at all. I guarantee if Geffen records took me and expended all their efforts to making me a star, you'd be listening to me on the radio.

Geffen wanted to get a band of their own to mold and "spearhead" this new stylre of music that had yet to even be named. Creating your own monster and perpetuating a ginat lie to the masses is the best way to do it.

good point. Steve Miller has been around for 30+ years and he is absolutely terrible live

[joewilly]

this thread lacks passion. try to mean what you say guys. thanks

[joewilly]

my definition of corporate

springsteens album "the river" was not corporate

"born in the usa" was corporate.

peter frampton's 1st albums were not corporate. He went on to finish his career in a big corporate way

[Bugg]

No offense Joe Willie, but if you're going to get wound up about who is and isn't 'corporate" you're wasting your time.

"Frampton Comes Alive!" was sold like soft drinks. He toured like a dog to support for a few years. And what else could a young guy do if he wanted to bank some cash, since everyone's first record deal, as lucky as you are to have it, is practically slavery?

Springsteen was fighting with his management(again, that first record deal and the original manager, a recurring theme) and sued to get out of some stuff right before the release of "The River"."The River" wasn't some Rhino Records deal slapped together in a basement. It was put out by CBS as a double album. There weren't many of those other than compilations-"Quadraphenia", Tommy", "The Wall" and "The River", in the 1970s because that was very expensive. He also timed the release of him playing the song "The River" on the "No Nukes" album and movie for maximum exposure. Tom Petty, by contrast, wouldn't allow his songs or footage to be so used. And there's no fault to any of them.

Judge bands by the music rather than the business. Because the business is scummy. It's like asking your girlfriend to make a lsit of all her ex-boyfriends-there's no point. And we all have to make a living. I'm at a loss-do musicians take a vow of poverty?

[dickkotite]

well to each his own. now were beating a dead horse.....

i still dont buy the "any progression=corporate influence" thing.

if that were true, pink floyd would still be ummagumma sounding, queensryche would still be metal, rush would be keyboardless etc etc

Im not saying that cobain was on lennons level, what im saying isthat some people have emotional issues and are diturbed and that it comes out in their music. If you guys thin that lennon was happy go lucky normal, think again. go listen to his solo stuff lke"my momma is dead" andwhatnot. the guy had issues as did cobain.compare lennon to mcarthy, both were great writers, but whowrote the happygo lucky ditties and was /is a happy guy in life and has all sorts of financial endeavors? thats Mcarthy. Lennon was the freak, the dark side. Many of the greatest artists through history were screwed in the head. When musicians are like that, their music, to me, tends to be superior. in that sese cobain and lennon were brothers. the proof? put ashotgun in your mouth and blow your head off as a millionare...who does that? few people. so dont tell me that he was some corprate pawn because then he woud be alive today with his own MTVreality show or something.

nd i have to disagree with the "3 chord" theory. so what? some great bands use that formula. prety much all acdc is that way and it kicks ass. How abot a band like the cranberries? each o their songs is pretty much only 1 riff rpeatingover and over ad over until it fades out (reading writing rithmatic) cheesey or by deign? Imnot saying that nirvana did anything musically tehnical and awsome im sayin that their CORE their BASIC songwriting was superior to the others. you can do less with more sometimes

now boozer, you just wen through a big list and pretty much admitted that they all are weak. so why praise them?

and vitology was god awful and a disapointment.

I think a lot of you guys are for whatever reason fans of the seattle scene and yo are bitter as to why nirvana made it wile others didnt do as well.ok so you like AIC. well good for you then to each his own. alls im sayingis that from wat i know about the seattle scene, PJ dd some great stuff early on, soundgarden did a real good record, AIC made somecontributionsbut nirvana (cobain) were better.its all opinion.

and bugg is right. to say that nrvana "sold out" is silly. its human nature t sort of sell outif the oppotunity arises its calld greed which is part of us all. look at cornell today, he goes after the "new superband" and joins forces with the worse half of RATM. that band is ust plain terrible, the worst everand cornell is making a great living off it

[dickkotite]

this thread is silly because it is just everyones personal opinion., myself incuded

[dickkotite]

oh yes and what about AIC when they were "alice n chainz" and they wore lipstick and spandex? yea nobody wants to bring up that part o their career lol

i guess they can evolve but nirvana cant

[Boozer76]

oh yes and what about AIC when they were "alice n chainz" and they wore lipstick and spandex? yea nobody wants to bring up that part o their career lol

i guess they can evolve but nirvana cant

Not when they were Alice N Chainz, but when they were Diamond Lie which lasted all of about a month. Alice in Chains and Layne Staley were one of the first, if not the first, to say F-It to the glam rock era and get doewn to who they really are. Well before any corprate label got a hold of them, since no corporate label would have allowed it to happen at the time.

AIC started as Diamond Lie, evolved to Mothra, then changed the name to F*ck, then Alice N Chainz, then finally Alice in Chains.

[Bugg]

Not when they were Alice N Chainz, but when they were Diamond Lie which lasted all of about a month. Alice in Chains and Layne Staley were one of the first, if not the first, to say F-It to the glam rock era and get doewn to who they really are. Well before any corprate label got a hold of them, since no corporate label would have allowed it to happen at the time.

AIC started as Diamond Lie, evolved to Mothra, then changed the name to F*ck, then Alice N Chainz, then finally Alice in Chains.

Problem is for any band that lasts is the friends you have-bandmates-at 18 and you are all going to be very different people at 25, 30, 35, 40. People change, especially through their 20s. And most of us change jobs, workplaces, friends. And the band that really make it don't really do that; they're stuck with this collection of a-holes. If they want to stay on the gravy train(not a knock, just a fact) you probably have to put up with at least a band mate or 2 that you personally despise.

[Preston Howley III]

Im not saying that cobain was on lennons level, what im saying isthat some people have emotional issues and are diturbed and that it comes out in their music. If you guys thin that lennon was happy go lucky normal, think again. go listen to his solo stuff lke"my momma is dead" andwhatnot. the guy had issues as did cobain.

Lennon was hung up on a protection rejection thing. Yoko spotted that and played the role of mommy, exploiting him right until his instant karma moment. But you know, lots of people have abandonment issues- it doesn't mean just because they learn a few chords that they are qualified to write music. Lennon had a gift. He was born to write music. Now, if all he ever did was I want to hold your hand and You're gonna lose that girl, then year, comparing him to Cobain is valid. But lets set the record straight right here right now, if Cobain lived to be a hundred he would never write a masterpiece like Strawberry Fields Forever.

Face it Dickie, Boozer is dead nuts on-

There is a huge jump from Bleach to Nevermind. It two different bands. How many of those songs did Cobain actually write? He was sued for plagiarizing a Killing Joke song for one of them. I'm sure he ripped off more, but the statue of limitations wouldn't allow for further litigation. I'll give credit where credit is due-

Smells like teen spirit is a beautiful song that captures the feeling an ugly duckling experiences during high school pep rallies. It's as intense as a Van Gogh painting. But then he shot his load. That's all he had. What was left? Cover versions of Bowie's B-sides?

compare lennon to mcarthy, both were great writers, but whowrote the happygo lucky ditties and was /is a happy guy in life and has all sorts of financial endeavors? thats Mcarthy. Lennon was the freak, the dark side. Many of the greatest artists through history were screwed in the head. When musicians are like that, their music, to me, tends to be superior. in that sese cobain and lennon were brothers. the proof? put ashotgun in your mouth and blow your head off as a millionare...who does that? few people. so dont tell me that he was some corprate pawn because then he woud be alive today with his own MTVreality show or something.

Dickie, you're reducing a violent suicide to something pragmatic and logical. He was a junkie, who had no coping mechanisms, who copped out of the responsibility of fatherhood and adulthood. Hey I respect him this much-

At least he didn't really punk out and kill her and the kid, like so many low lifes do.

i have to disagree with the "3 chord" theory. so what? some great bands use that formula. prety much all acdc is that way and it kicks ass.

I agree. Yet, nobody is comparing Angus Young to John Lennon.

How abot a band like the cranberries? each o their songs is pretty much only 1 riff rpeatingover and over ad over until it fades out (reading writing rithmatic) cheesey or by deign? Imnot saying that nirvana did anything musically tehnical and awsome im sayin that their CORE their BASIC songwriting was superior to the others. you can do less with more sometimes

I agree. Simple is not a synonym for worse. Beethoven's 5th opens up with two notes, yet those two notes are in the Guinness book of world records for most discernible song ever.

and vitology was god awful and a disapointment.

No argument from me. Pearl Jam is totally unlistenable. I think they are horrible. I like that song they did for Singles and thats it.

I think a lot of you guys are for whatever reason fans of the seattle scene and yo are bitter as to why nirvana made it wile others didnt do as well.ok so you like AIC. well good for you then to each his own. alls im sayingis that from wat i know about the seattle scene, PJ dd some great stuff early on, soundgarden did a real good record, AIC made somecontributionsbut nirvana (cobain) were better.its all opinion.

I can listen to Nirvana. I like alot of their songs. But this idea they created something new and original is ridiculous. First time I heard Nirvana on the radio was Lithium. My initial thought was "this is stuff I've been listening to for years; it's finally getting airplay". They were ok, they weren't special. And thats alright, that doesn't make them crap. But you can't put Nirvana in the same league with the Beatles. I mean, lets get serious.

and bugg is right. to say that nrvana "sold out" is silly. its human nature t sort of sell outif the oppotunity arises its calld greed which is part of us all. look at cornell today, he goes after the "new superband" and joins forces with the worse half of RATM. that band is ust plain terrible, the worst everand cornell is making a great living off it

I agree. Bands pay their dues, touring on the road, playing dive after dive, making no money, and one day you go from a 7000 strong Cult following to a Global monster-

CASH IN it can all be over by tomorrow.

[Preston Howley III]

w lennon to mcarthy, both were great writers, but whowrote the happygo lucky ditties and was /is a happy guy in life and has all sorts of financial endeavors? thats Mcarthy.

Yeah Helter Skelter what a happy ditty.

[Preston Howley III]

And let's face it what the Beatles brought to all of us was harmony-

Harmony and melody created in the tubeway during WW II when the German were bombing the living crap out of them. They created those "happy ditties" as a way of pretending that what was actually happening to them was not really happening at all.

Rock and roll is a bastard music.

The young boys in post war England grew up without fathers; they were killed during the war.

They only had surrogates for fathers, and many of those surrogates were sailors and merchant marines; they came to our ports in the USA and bought "exotic" records of Black blues and Jazz artists and brought it back to England where that music became a novelty.

The majority of those black blues singers were all bastards-

And I believe there was a connection between the English est bastards and them.

They could identify with the feeling and they were able to connect.

That's all it is. And strains of it still shine through in so much music today. And I know it when I see it. Or when I feel it.

I know what's real.

Songs like When I'm sixty four and Maggie May and Honey Pie...

You can trace that right back to the English Dance Hall post war music.

[vanDoug]

good point. Steve Miller has been around for 30+ years and he is absolutely terrible live

You mean?

He's good on recordings?

d

[dickkotite]

I have never said nor have i implied that nirvana "started" grunge.

I dont know the history of grunge as boozer does. he knows the names of AICs multi monikers. Like I suspected from the get go, he is WAY TOO into it. I cant argue with him because I really dont know what happened up there, and I dont care much either because I always thought it was noteworthy but not near revolutionary.

All i can comment on is what im familiar with and to me cobain was big time for many of the reasons i mentioned whether you guys agree or not

So then, inform me...did cobain ever take credit for starting grunge? if he did, and it is well documented then you guys are right he should shut up. If he didnt, then you guys are barking upo the wrong tree.

Did cobain steal songs? I never heard that he did. If it is well documented that he stole material then you guys are right. if not, you are again barking up the wrong tree. and dont confuse stealing with influence. if some riff sounded like a killing joke tune that doesnt mean it was stolen. i can name a billion songs that sound like other songs.

so tell me what did cobain do to warrant this hatred? If you can educate me and give me a laundry list of ****iness, song stealing, claims to fame then i will clam up and say that he is indeed foolish.

Heres the thing, if you CANT give me that list, then its not cobains fault if some label picked up his band, put them in a good studio and the stars aligned and they made it huge. NOT HIS FAULT!

Like I said from day one, Boozer is a seatle sound nut. He probably knows a ton of bands from that time and he probably is pissed that it went mainstream and that for whatever reason MTV annointed cobain the leader of something that i suspect cobain never asked for

[dickkotite]

I would still like to hear an explanation of why it is OK for boozers heros, AIC to make a ton of changes including the removal of lipstick but nirvana gets killed for the bleach/nevermind transition.

And some other inconsistencies here. you say cobain was writing simple music, then you imply he stole stuff or that the producer wrote it. well, you cant have it both ways. If it is simple music, then why would another write such simple music? if cobains material stunk, why would some producer write "new" material that is so simple? you would think that it would get more grand.

and one more thing - I have nevermind. where are the studio effects and trickery? where are the 10,000 overdubs? The album is well recorded, that is not the fault of nirvana. I hear a good drum sound, a great bass sound a good guitar sound and not much more. Please tell me what to look for to indicate that there was some kind of studio trickery, im only a gradute of the institute of audio research NYC, ive only recorded an LP that sold 10,000 copies, interened for 2 years at a big NYC recording studio assistant engineering with some huge studio musicians and some major artists, recorded 4 full length cds in my home studio, managed the audio technical division of a major cd/tape manufacturer for 6 years. please tell me what to listen for or how exactly a studio creates a masterpiece from a pile of crap.

Now, im going to pull out nevermind and dust it off for a listen.

[Preston Howley III]

I

so tell me what did cobain do to warrant this hatred?

DK there is no "hatred". Just simply pointing out that this elevating Kurt Cobain to the status of Jimi Hendrix, Jim Morrison and John Lennon is utterly ridiculous.

He was an ignorant dumba*s with marginal talent. He wrote one good song. I could have done that. And as Boozer pointed out, if Geffen records wanted, they could have made me the 90's version of Elvis.

It's just that simple. Maybe if fans of Kurt Cobain toned down the rhetoric, and stopped comparing him to John Lennon, there would be no controversy.

[Thor99]

Did cobain steal songs?

Nope. That was Sheryl Crow.

[Preston Howley III]

I would still like to hear an explanation of why it is OK for boozers heros, AIC to make a ton of changes including the removal of lipstick but nirvana gets killed for the bleach/nevermind transition.

And some other inconsistencies here. you say cobain was writing simple music, then you imply he stole stuff or that the producer wrote it. well, you cant have it both ways. If it is simple music, then why would another write such simple music? if cobains material stunk, why would some producer write "new" material that is so simple? you would think that it would get more grand.

and one more thing - I have nevermind. where are the studio effects and trickery? where are the 10,000 overdubs? The album is well recorded, that is not the fault of nirvana. I hear a good drum sound, a great bass sound a good guitar sound and not much more. Please tell me what to look for to indicate that there was some kind of studio trickery, im only a gradute of the institute of audio research NYC, ive only recorded an LP that sold 10,000 copies, interened for 2 years at a big NYC recording studio assistant engineering with some huge studio musicians and some major artists, recorded 4 full length cds in my home studio, managed the audio technical division of a major cd/tape manufacturer for 6 years. please tell me what to listen for or how exactly a studio creates a masterpiece from a pile of crap.

Now, im going to pull out nevermind and dust it off for a listen.

Two words: BUTCH VIG.

C'mon DK, you're a self professed member of the music industry, you want to tell me what kind of salary Vig comanded for producing a sht band like Nirvana?

Yeah, like we all knew who Shania Twain was until Mutt Lange entered the picture.

CORPORATE FRAUD.

[dickkotite]

DK there is no "hatred". Just simply pointing out that this elevating Kurt Cobain to the status of Jimi Hendrix, Jim Morrison and John Lennon is utterly ridiculous.

He was an ignorant dumba*s with marginal talent. He wrote one good song. I could have done that. And as Boozer pointed out, if Geffen records wanted, they could have made me the 90's version of Elvis.

It's just that simple. Maybe if fans of Kurt Cobain toned down the rhetoric, and stopped comparing him to John Lennon, there would be no controversy.

Ilike that. "no hatred" followed by "ignorant dumbass" where did his igrorance lie?

[dickkotite]

Two words: BUTCH VIG.

C'mon DK, you're a self professed member of the music industry, you want to tell me what kind of salary Vig comanded for producing a sht band like Nirvana?

Yeah, like we all knew who Shania Twain was until Mutt Lange entered the picture.

CORPORATE FRAUD.

i like that. now nirvana has to be crucified for doing what every big band does - work with a top producer.

what band does not? why is nirvana bad for doing what everybody else does?

so now which is it, did he steal music, did Vig write the tunes? or are they bad for simply having a nice decay time on the snare track?

Im still waiting to be educated too. I know little about cobain. was he a dick? did he ever say that he created grunge? im serious too not being a dick here

[dickkotite]

and a word about brittny spears...

what do you want? there is a market for that crap. she certainly has the look, she certainly has the moves and she works with top producers so the music will be well recorded. I doubt that she or madonna or any of them ****ies ever write anything more than some lyrics. the music is all producer-invented.

does that mean that she has no talent? no way, she has talent. Not my cup of tea but you cant take a guy like maxman with his belly and overbite and turn his sqeaky voice into the next big thing. neither can you make william chung a star. britney spears has something to work with so i hate her as much as you but dont say that she has no talent

[Boozer76]

I'm far too drunk to answer these questions right now. But I fo have the answres mr/ koytite, so stay tuned tomorrow.

[Preston Howley III]

Ilike that. "no hatred" followed by "ignorant dumbass" where did his igrorance lie?

How about his choice of women. That would be a good place to start.