Why the FUCK does anyone like Nirvana? It's just generic 90s whiney grunge, sure maybe it was different at the time...

why the FUCK does anyone like Nirvana? It's just generic 90s whiney grunge, sure maybe it was different at the time, but there's literally no excuse to still be listening to Nirvana. Is it because suicide?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=Sb7GmolHTd4
docs.google.com/document/d/1EqfotMwtn4I0A_VN9g42ogA1nAZfvd6FGDPPLO1QxQs/edit?usp=drivesdk
youtube.com/watch?v=gmtbsFW0tCw
youtube.com/watch?v=DnquV7rNQSc
youtube.com/watch?v=xYZKAx75Gt0
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Fact: If Nirvana NEVER existed, NOTHING would be different in music today.

In Utero is a good babby's first noise rock album

you don't think less shitty post grunge and bland alt rock would exist?

>grunge
>an actual music genre

>If Nirvana NEVER existed
post grunge would've never existed, grunge would remain an underground scene with little notoriety and rock musicians would still hold their rockstar mystique

It's because we needed to reassert the paradigm of suicide rock stars so that we'd properly appreciate the passing of our generation's voice, lil peep

I don't think that's true, considering the sheer volume of music that was beginning to appear, something would have eventually innovated and caught on, Nirvana was just the lucky one.

>generic 90s whiney grunge
Who sounded like them before them?
>inb4 m-muh Milk It sounds like a Melvins song
>inb4 P-Pearl Jam and Mother Love B-Bone were around first!!
>inb4 Come as You Are sounds like Eighties by Killing Joke
>inb4 muh Pixies
>inb4 muh Flipper

>grunge would remain an underground scene
lolno

I'm not saying anyone sounded like them before, in fact I acknowledged the fact that they were new at the time, but I'm talking about nowadays. Sure, Stravinsky was influential, but beyond music snobs he's no longer relevant.

It's because...wait for it...

They're good...also...holy shit...it...it can't be...it's...because...

I like them.

Sage.

So it would have been better?
I hate Nirvana now.

>Why listen to old song if they're old lol listen to new songs
Ah, I see. You're a pop fag.

>so it would have been better?
If you were into fagmetal, sure.

not at all, but I'm saying that in the light of all of the new music in the same vein (naturally aping off of Nirvana's success) that followed it, what's the point?

Also,
>Nirvana wasn't pop

This except less condescending, In Utero is really good
Kurt was also just a genuinely good songwriter

youtube.com/watch?v=Sb7GmolHTd4

You said they were generic but then that they were unique sounding but whatever. People still listen to Nirvana because of how well their good stuff has aged, and w/r/t the aspect of suicide that's a whole discussion unto itself that most people on Sup Forums aren't emotionally honest enough to have.

sage your own comment
>major tool alert

I guess that was miscommunication on my part, I meant generic in hindsight, after everyone jumped on the grunge bandwagon

>but I'm saying that in the light of all of the new music in the same vein (naturally aping off of Nirvana's success) that followed it
Because I like Grunge and there hasn't been any good Grunge songs lately, especially ones that carry the same style as Nirvana.

>Incesticide is pop
>bleach is pop
>in utero is pop

They were popular.

>what does pop mean

why do people like katy perry, lady gaga, drake, carly rae jepsen, or any other pop artist

because its easy to listen to, catchy, easy to understand, performed by a likable person, performed by a person they admire, and because other people like it you can find common ground with others while listening to this.

nirvana had some quality tunes with nice melodies rendered through the fashionable grunge filter. nostalgia is a huge selling point. i still like them because they made catchy songs about being disillusioned youths. it's 2 + 2 man. if you really have to ask why popular artists are popular you're not seeing the bigger picture. come back when you graduate high school

>likable person
I'm not even memeing here, why do people like Kurt Cobain? I just don't get it.

because he died

Pic related is the best Nirvana

Ugh... Read this.
docs.google.com/document/d/1EqfotMwtn4I0A_VN9g42ogA1nAZfvd6FGDPPLO1QxQs/edit?usp=drivesdk

he embodied a movement against the corporatization of music. he was a rough around the edges drug addled crooner who was anti corporate, anti establishment and believed in self expression.

also yes he killed himself in his prime and that has added weight to his legacy. no denying it.

Nirvana happened in the way that it did partially because alternative kids wanted to be part of the mainstream, but more importantly because the kids who only listened to the radio were told that Bon Jovi was the only heavy music you could like. And it wasn't as fast as people say either, Mr. Big still topped the charts in 1991 and a 9 minute GnR song did a year later. But his cult of personality coupled with his inability to stop doing drugs is why they started churning out other grunge bands how they did.
It's easier to turn him into a tragic martyr than to examine how awful a guy he was, for a lot of reasons.

Thanks for the doc, kinda helpful trying to understand it. Naturally, I'm still not a fan because opinions, and your comment on me favoring more technical music is kinda correct, but I really like hardcore punk too so idk lol xd.

are you actually 15

try again, what makes you say that I'm 15?

>It's easier to turn him into a tragic martyr than to examine how awful a guy he was
Other than the fact that he was a junkie and killed himself after having a kid, he wasn't awful person, just fucked up.

>I really like hardcore punk too so idk lol xd.
mostly its the way you write though

that was irony

i think you're severely underestimating the amount of people who picked up a guitar or started a band because of nirvana and kurt cobain

you probably mean it was sarcasm. but either way you made a thread asking why people like [popular music group] and all your posts have been "i dont get it" or "oh i kinda understand." it reeks of you wanting replies rather than real discourse.

this is an interesting thought. i agree. for me it was rage against the machine and buckethead that made me want to pick up a guitar. i learned a lot of nirvana songs as a beginner.

and how many people would that be?

I don't understand this post. Are you saying that music would be the same regardless of if Nirvana never existed, or that without Nirvana, music would be the same as in the 80s?

one of the funniest shows ever made

youtube.com/watch?v=gmtbsFW0tCw

youtube.com/watch?v=DnquV7rNQSc

youtube.com/watch?v=xYZKAx75Gt0

Because they were a solid band with great production (Butch Vig + Sound City Studios on Nevermind, for instance) who, yes, did and still do sound unique on their own terms.

The something sounds like something else so it's not worth listening to is the laziest criticism there is. If I want to hear Smells Like Teen Spirit, I need to listen to Smells Like Teen Spirit. No pre-grunge act (Pixies, Sonic Youth, Melvins) nor grunge contemporary (Alice In Chains, Pearl Jam, Soundgarden, etc) play Smells Like Teen Spirit, or Lithium, or Heart Shaped Box. If I want to listen to Bone Machine, then I listen to the Pixies, since none of those bands play Bone Machine.

That's typically how this works.

And no, Stravinsky isn't irrelevant.

how the fuck does something become generic with the benefit of hindsight? if it wasn't generic to begin with, it doesn't becaome generic because other people made similar sounding things. this is retarded.

Me

also me

me

lol i like the idea that people say that someone like wagner is generic because you can hear other modern compositions imitate his work

...

>it doesn't becaome generic

It's a lazy criticism in an effort to sound hip and jaded.

"Oh, you like Nirvana, do you? You probably thought they were real special and so alternative with their use of elements such as noise in their work. Ha ha. Let me introduce you to the New York 70s No Wave scene, Japanese Noise Rock, and the Power Electronics scene, and I'll show you what real, non-generic "alternative" music sounds like. Ha ha."

A band can produce pop music without being popular.
What makes a music production pop music is an specific structure of composition that have been use for the last sixty years.
I don't understand why people is not bored of it yet.

Low quality bait

+1

explain

Why aren't you replying to my explanation?!

>I don't understand why people is not bored of it yet.
because pop produces catchy music
p.s. your grammar sucks

Uh, oh, I replied to my own post! FUCK!

(you)

Because he made enjoyable music and was a really good songwriter.

Because I agree with you desu. Except for the part where you said Nirvana isn't on the same league as Beatle. For crying out loud if we are going to get all technical boners here, Beatles weren't all that technical themselves. Especially their earlier acts.

because your pretend academic pontificating is uninteresting, unoriginal, and completely devoid of anything that hasn't be said before a million times. reading your post is like listening to someone saying that stanley kubrick is an influential director

no

why not

Unplugged alone completely justifies Nirvana's existence.

yes

gay

>pop music is an specific structure of composition that have been use for the last sixty years.

The ABABCBB structure and its variants? 4/4 time? Tonality?

Because it's a solid foundation that is indeed infinitely flexible (like storytelling's 3 act structure, which has been around for thousands of years) from which to build on.

I agree pop artists don't always use it ambitiously, but that's the fault of their own laziness and not the structure itself.

Except for the fact that since Kurt Cobain is such a popular figure, there's not much you can say about him that hasn't already been said before. But at least that post had originality besides "Nirvana's overrated" or "Nirvana is one of the best rock bands of all time." Hell, it's much better than any of the other ones on this thread at least; it helps people unfamiliar with Nirvana and/or baffled with their success gain a more broad perspective.

Yeah pretty boring band.
I mean, I guess they're exciting when you're 14-15, but there isn't much to keep you around after that.

i heard the same perspective from my druggie roommate in college 6 years ago. fuckin nathan. he was such a faggot. was a depressive fatboi who would hit himself as he went to sleep and whenever he got drunk or high he would talk about how much he hated himself and life.

anyway, you're not special. i like you even less than the OP

well i guess no bands sounded like nirvana before them

but just for fun
>mudhoney
>my war era black flag
>nomeansno

youre a moron, a teenager, and everything wrong with this board. stop listening to nirvana, and maybe consider ending yourself like nirvana. fuck you

*well i guess no bands sound like nirvana if you disclude all the bands that sounded like nirvana


there fixed it fuck you

>your everything wrong with this board
>attacks other peoples music tastes because they dont match his own

honestly

Retard, read this again:
>it helps people unfamiliar with Nirvana and/or baffled with their success gain a more broad perspective

You clearly are familiar with Nirvana, so of course it doesn't phase you.

why are so many people getting ass blasted from a band that ended in 1994?

anyways,
>favorite studio album?
>song?
>b side?

where my bleach niggas at

>In Utero
>Milk It
>Sappy

thats not the point you complete twat

the point was, nirvana OBJECTIVELY had a lot of bands that sounded very similar to them come before them. the guy i was responding to discludes a lot of those bands with vapid memeing, but they still exist and you could make the case that nirvana ripped them off.

also the "muh musics subjective bro, lay off my OPINION :(((((((((((" bullshit really highlights how teenage you are

go smoke pot and listen to xxtentacion while telling people not to judge you and wearing supreme "ironically," you colossal waste of living space.

>this assblasted over Nirvana
You must be a metalfag

the negative effects nirvana had are still being felt today in music

mudhoney i could see, but they were nowhere near as consistent as nirvana, and mark arm had none of kurt cobain's pop sensibilities.

nothing on my war sounds anything like nevermind or in utero era nirvana, and only the last three songs have a passing resemblance to bleach.

nomeansno is far more technical, and they were much more of a punk band.

i don't agree with the other guy, as kurt cobain was heavily noted for wearing his influences on his sleeve, but to make the claim that nirvana wasn't at all unique for their time is simply wrong.

>attacking people and being an edgelord is an adult thing to do
>respecting other peoples OPINION is a teenage thing to do

I can't pick a single favorite song or album, but they've got a goldmine of bsides
>talk to me, spank thru, pen cap chew, most vagina etc

>be you
>wrong
>create post that required effort,
>this post is wrong and makes me look like a moron
>"you are wrong, moron"
>feel satisfied in the fact that although i am wrong, and stupid, at least i get to pretend that i made a stranger angry on the internet

nomeansno does not sound like nirvana what planet do you live on. if nirvana did sound like them they would have been a way better band

and my war is a hardcore punk/sludge album that i definitely think cobain was aware of but it doesn't sound like nirvana either. nirvana's sound is butch vig working magic in the studio on a bunch of first takes

if you say so. i guess i get that the punk attitude nirvana had is a reason for their longevity but i really feel like you're overthinking it. i really do think their anti-authority stance did have a big role in their mainstream appeal but the specificity of the punk aspect is probably not as important as kurt's specific mindset. its hard to say. he was a big meat puppets fan and thats probably my favorite thing about him.

nirvana was a perfect blend of pop music and punky aesthetic. i already aped you for saying those bands sound like nirvana (although mudhoney is a valid comparison) but nirvana took the genre in a direction that only soundgarden and pearl jam were able to execute as well, and thats the catchy pop angle. this whole thread is retarded either way.

>bleach
>i hate myself and i want to die
>see above

IS THERE

ANOTHER

ANOTHER

i know that, as someone with learning disabilities, you have to spend a lot of time reading, and re-reading posts on the internet just to understand that. Picturing the agony that your parents go through, wishing they just had a normal 13 year old, makes me feel genuine pity for you. However, if you had just reread my post ONE MORE TIME, you might have come the realization that I was not attacking the other guy for his opinion whatsoever- I was attacking the idea that nirvana were not obviously influenced by other bands.

Teens (avant-teens in particular who just learned about Schoenberg in Music Theory 101 class) are the one who believe music quality can be defined objectively.

Realizing music is subjective is the adult opinion.

Go outside if you're getting this worked up about the computer.

REASON

ok i replace my nomeansno with the entire genre of 80s post-hardcore

its because they're a fucking good band

FOR YOUR STAIN

nomeansno was 80's post-hardcore...

i like this statement