Great guitarist

punk standards are not real standards

I agree, OP.
docs.google.com/document/d/1EqfotMwtn4I0A_VN9g42ogA1nAZfvd6FGDPPLO1QxQs/edit?usp=drivesdk

You clearly have never played in a punk band or been a part of any real punk scene

No one cares. Only Andy Wood had the potential to be as great a rock star as Kurt but he destroyed himself with drugs even more quickly

This is the most idiotic post I've ever seen. No, not even remotely. None of the bands you mentioned would have even been able to cross over to the mainstream and be as widely successful as Nirvana without their indie credibility being horribly diminished, their critical acclaim heavily decreasing, or the quality of their music declining as well. What made Nirvana such a unique band in the first place was their ability to craft melodic pop tunes, the types that even kids would be able to remember, and merge it with a destructive, brutal and beyond distorted noise that appealed to hardcore and metal fans. Their ethos revolved around passion, spontaneity, and creativity, all jammed into simplicity. They didn't pride themselves on being the most intricate artists (though at times, their music, especially on In Utero, could rival quite a few art rock/metal bands at the time in terms of lyricism), but what they lacked in complexity, they made up for in sheer energy combined with abstract idealism. Kurt Cobain's singing was somewhat of an acquired taste, but still was original insofar he was the first real singer to actually yell melodically, without sounding like a ditz or a moron.

Meanwhile, most indie bands didn't have that level of ubiquity or simplicity as Nirvana; they thrived on their pretentiousness and inaccessibility, even with signing on to a major label. Therefore, they remained in an inevitable rut. If they ever attempted to mix "poppier" influences into their music, they would lose all sorts of credibility with their original fan-base, and in turn, be heavily shunned and rejected as "sell-outs." (cont.)

>The whole grunge thing is so...wrong. It's non-music. So simple, again and again following the same scheme. Time after time. One group is perfectly replacable for the other. The danger I think is that you're obliged to like grunge. When you say, "well, grunge; don't like it at all", ohlala...than you don't understand it at all. Then you're out. While I think: "When something is not good, it's bad." Period.

And if they tried to make the same music that got them their reputation in the first place, mainstream audiences wouldn't have even batted an eye at all. Since Nirvana always had that lingering pop influence in their abrasive Alt. Rock sound, they could easily avoid, and get away with the amount of popularity they received. Could you honestly say the same for any other Indie Rock band of the 80s/90s? And do you really think that even if they got popular, would they have made a "Smells Like Teen Spirit," "Heart-Shaped Box," or "Lithium"?

>Only Andy Wood had the potential to be as great a buttrock star
ftfy

People talking positively about Andy Wood in the Nirvana threads just proves that it's about contrarianism most of the time. Mother Love Bone fucking sucked. Green River and Mudhoney were not "as good if not better" than Nirvana.

It's embarrassing buttrock. At least, in his death, we got Pearl Jam