*kills good music, creates buttrock and then shoots himself*

*kills good music, creates buttrock and then shoots himself*
pssss nothing personeel kid

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=l9tzaJa58F0
youtube.com/watch?v=vabnZ9-ex7o
youtube.com/watch?v=x1U1Ue_5kq8
youtube.com/watch?v=Wh8ZXNy4KOI
youtube.com/watch?v=Om93hASQEjA
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Epic, upvoted bro! i love extreme, white lion and warrant :P

>kills good music, creates buttrock
You seem to have Nirvana mixed up with Oasis.

At least Oasis has good songs, Nirvana was garbage

idk dude i liked lithium

Even Noel admitted Nirvana had excellent songs, contrarian

>Nirvana
>excellent songs
pick one

You have to admit that Nirvana were the ignition for buttrock

Scentless Apprentice
Endless nameless
Milk it

all shit

...

I thought Elvis invented buttrock, and it's just been reinvented since. Nirvana is like the sixth time around.

nirvana has a couple songs i would listen to, whereas if oasis was on the radio id have to leave the room or go turn it off

i realized this before i even cared about music as much
everybody tried to copy nirvana and it turned into nickelback and then everybody tried to copy nickelback and it just got exponentially worse

This.
>50’s has Elvis wannabes
>60’s had Beatles/psycadelic wannabes
>70’s had butt prog and punkless new wave
>80’s had hair metal
>90’s and 00’s has fake Nirvana/Pearl Jam wannabes and bad pop punk
>10’s have pop “rock.”

Why would someone want to copy Nickelback?

$$$

...

>80s had hair metal

80s had a lot more than hair metal boyo. 80s were the best decade for rock music

That guy was just listing off bad trends from that decade

’s and 00’s has fake Nirvana/Pearl Jam wannabes and bad pop punk
I'll bash your fucking face nigga

You people act as if he intended to cause that amount of change, as if he deliberately desired to spawn all of the copycat bands that followed in the wake of his death. Do you even realize how much Kurt reveled in authenticity? Had he lived to see what he inspired, he would have HATED the Post-Grunge bands of the time that poorly emulated his persona, music and lifestyle. No artist decides what upheaval their creations resurrect in this world, moreso the novice fawns over said creations and restructure their works in a recycled manner.

Use an Oxford comma you fuckface tard

punk killing real music
as always

Nirvana isn't punk

Friendo being based as always

>Do you even realize how much Kurt reveled in authenticity

He cared so much he openly ripped off other bands. I mean 4/6 songs on hormoaning are cover songs

This is all Thurston Moore's fault

did you not read this

>cover songs are rip offs!

you people are obtuse dimwits

how so?

>4/6 songs

you mean 2/3s

learn math, mongoloid

He liked Bleach and pimped Nirvana, took them on their tour in Europe and got them their Geffen deal which lead to their two shit albums and Cobain's suicide

Nirvana didn't create buttrock, imitators who were much less talented created buttrock.

then explain this buttrock

youtube.com/watch?v=l9tzaJa58F0

LOVE MUHSELFFF BETTUH TAHN YOOOU

This is a pretty blatant rip off.

youtube.com/watch?v=vabnZ9-ex7o
youtube.com/watch?v=x1U1Ue_5kq8

That sounds more like power-pop than buttrock

similat, perhaps even inspired but a rip off? Coldplay stealing a Joe Satriani song was a ripoff

according to some dolt on Sup Forums

Not buttrock in the slightest. Most buttrock wouldn't have nearly the quality of lyricism as On A Plain. It's sardonic, ironic and utterly abrasive. And plus, it's still rougher in production than the likes of Nickelback and Creed.

Congratulations on noticing one of the only two songs on Nevermind that sounded similar to other rock songs of the 70s-80s. You still have 10 more to go.

you can be sardonic and still be a vapid moron

maybe you relate to the sardonicism, but it's still trite

i'm on a plain... i can't complain HOLY HELL SOMEONE CALL STEVEN SPIELBERG, this guy can WRITE!

I can think of multiple Creed songs that are more abrasive and have better harmonic structure

youtube.com/watch?v=Wh8ZXNy4KOI

Oh, I guess Nirvana only ripped off other bands a few times, so that makes it okay.

Find one other instance of them ripping a band off? And no, a COVER isn't ripping them off.

I'll even give it to you that Come As You Are is disconcertingly similar to that Killing Joke song, and they should've seen that and given Killing Joke a credit for it, but that's the ONE TIME.

Also killing joke took it from the damned and they didnt complain like little bitch boys

Hey faggot Kurt Cobain openly said he was trying to rip off the pixies.

Having a EP with 4/6 songs as covers is a fucking joke, also he used punk rock as a cover for his lack of effort to play good.

>*plays shitty guitar solo*

>Were a punk band! xDD

One of the worst things this man has done is perpetuate the myth that punk rockers don't care about their music.

kys kurt
oh, wait...

>Kurt Cobain openly said he was trying to rip off the pixies.

Yeah, they took the soft-loud dynamic, is that really ripping off a band? Playing one section softly and then the next loud? Are you daft and obtuse or pretending because you're on the verge of capitulating the argument entirely?

And Kurt isn't the sole arbiter of judgement when it comes to his music. What an argumentative crutch.

>Having a EP with 4/6 songs as covers is a fucking joke

TWO-THIRDS, you middle school dropout. Or current middle school student. Or United States doctorate student. You're stupid enough to be all of the above.

Dude the beatles first album is half covers. And yet its still a great album . i dont see your argument

it's not like punks have said that themselves since 1975 you disingenuous retard

NEVER PLAY OTHER PEOPLES SONGS

IT IS BAAAAAAAAD

basically, he has to take shortcuts like that to make a point, and it's still not a cogent point

No, that isn't even remotely abrasive, like at all. It's utterly generic and pretentious. But anyway, On A Plain details the chronicles of writer's block and the nonsensical nature of it, which shifts into a myriad of interpretations and contradictory ideas. For example, the self-referential beginning line gives off this perplexing opening as to mystify the listener into digging more to find the meaning of the song. This searching inside a song that essentially has no meaning is exactly what Kurt wanted to expose in people, and how their pompousness to focus on things that in the grand scheme of things don't matter ruins their enjoyment of life. And plus, most buttrock fails to have a sort of wit or understatement towards them, taking themselves too seriously.

He said he was trying to rip off the pixies he didn't say he was trying to only use their soft loud dynamic

>TWO-THIRDS

There were 6 songs on the album and 4 were covers. Not 3 songs and 2 were covers. Eat shit faggot

>There were 6 songs on the album and 4 were covers. Not 3 songs and 2 were covers.

holy shit, you are literally a retard

everyone point and laugh at this idiot that doesnt understand elementary fractions

hahahahahahahaha what a dope

Name 1 punk band that played shitty on purpose.

HAHAHA I didn't reduce the fucking fraction.

Underageb&

Electric Eels

inb4 "they don't count because I don't know them!"

apparently you dont know most things

it's not only that you didn't reduce it, you claimed that 2/3 isn't the proper reduction

you are dumb as shit

>mah nig

>contrarian
cool

I don't think Kurt cared enough about genres to defend the idea that Nirvana was a punk band. I think that you are missing the entire point of the majority of their music if you think he was trying to make an effort to look like they played good.

Besides, they actually WERE good. Just because a solo isnt 600 notes and doesnt move at 1000bpm doesnt mean that it isnt catchy. Seven Nation Army is one of the easiest songs to play on a guitar ever conceived, and it is still widely accepted as being good songwriting (I would have said it is "good", but that would only bring a myriad of contrarian 10 year olds to post about how it is "utter shit" despite the critical and commercial acclaim).

Last but not least, Kurt said a lot of shit. He usually said it sarcastically, as most of Nirvana's lyrics are. I sincerely doubt he was being completely serious when he said something like "[he was] trying to rip off the pixies".

You are literally butthurt that your favorite obscure shit-tier band doesn't have the recognition it doesn't deserve while a band like Nirvana is played to death (for good reason) because their music -which nowadays sounds like "cookie cutter" grunge/alternative (because it has been copied to death) -is hailed as opening the doors for alternative and grunge at large, despite the fact that Kurt didnt really want to be the figurehead he was seen as.

Stop bitching soyboi.

>Besides, they actually WERE good
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Absolutely this. And also...
>One of the worst things this man has done is perpetuate the myth that punk rockers don't care about their music.
Idiot, punk music has always reveled in simplicity. From the 70s, with bands like the Ramones, the Sex Pistols and the Misfits, they always played sloppily and utilized 3-4 power chord melodies as the basis for their music. It wasn't meant to be complex or intricate. Kurt did nothing to perpetuate the claim; even if Nirvana never existed, it would be a blatantly obvious fact that Punk was simple, yet abrasive, noisy and chaotic. Reread again and stop being idiots.

>electric eels

HAHA

youtube.com/watch?v=Om93hASQEjA

This man has committed crimes against rock music.

I don't even like punk rock that much but I know that its not in its not punk rock ethos to play horribly on purpose. Thats just called making shitty music.

>Soyboi

I'm sorry you're the Nirvana fan not me

you sound 14

You're a delusional idiot that doesn't know a thing about punk. Like I said, Punk music has NEVER been about complexity. Read again.

And plus, the National Anthem wasn't even a song of theirs. They were just messing around with noise and distortion. Re-listen to In Utero again. Stop being idiotic.

Simplicity is not playing badly you fucking dunce. Go to a small club and play horribly on purpose you wont finish your set I'll guarantee you that.

who gives a fuck about an oxford comma

>shitpost.jpg
is this supposed to be a satire of scaruffi pitchfork I don't understand

*scaruffi or pitchfork

>Re-listen to In Utero again. Stop being idiotic.
in utero is shit
deal with it

>Punk music has NEVER been about complexity

Its never been about playing horribly on purpose either.

Go tell the minutemen to play "simple music", that they're not "punk" enough

Nirvana didn't play badly at all. Most of their "terrible" songs contained much more delectable, compelling hooks, interesting lyricism and raw, yet beautifully visceral distortion than any other generic buttrock band that merely focused on style over substance. If you think all of their music is bad, then you have a terrible ear for everything, and you're utterly delusional (again). Stop being an ignorant plebeian and accept that Nirvana had much more talent than any Punk band ever.
>not liking them
Utterly abhorrent. Quit Sup Forums.

Just a random title.

haahahaahaa holy shit, how about most of them in the beginning like the London SS, the Sex Pistols, Sham 69? They thought pub rock's elitist muso tendencies were lame, they were tired of blues-rock and prog was shit. It was almost a rule to play badly and sloppily. People who didn't do that were considered suspect. It changed later on as John Lydon said because the more careerist rhythm section in the Sex Pistols wanted to be tight and a regular money-grabbing band. Fucking retard

Nearly all of that mentality was replicated in Washington aside from proto-buttrock like the half of Green River that Mark Arm ditched (because he knew they would form a hair band with Andrew Wood) and Soundgarden after the point Hiro got tired of them becoming a Led Zeppelin tribute act and left. Kurt was always inbetween the Seattle and Olympia scenes (DIY, twee) and liked bands like Sonic Youth. He never cared for being a muso

Also pic related is someone way smarter than you. in b4
>HHUUUH HURRRGH PUNX STARTED WITH MEME ROLLINS NOT WITH BRITISH POSERS! hxcc VEGAN FOR LYFe

>than any other generic buttrock band that merely focused on style over substance

>Muh hair metal bands

As if those were the only bands in the 80s and 90s

>accept that Nirvana had much more talent than any Punk band ever and if you don't like them quit Sup Forums

HAHAHAAHAHAHAH

All these fucking plebs saying punk rock is this and that. Listen here kiddos.
Punk is about being true to yourself and doing the best you can in whatever art form you do.

NO! You have to play horribly and accept that Nirvana is better than any punk rock band ever and if you don't like them you have to quit 4chinz!

post-punk is better than punk because it took punk ethos beyond shallow aggression plus infused it with experimentation and interesting composition and whatnot

the smashing pumpkins were the only grunge band to bother experimenting, fusing different styles and going beyond shallow grunge slacker feelies. imagine an alternative world where post-grunge implied alternative bands like smashing pumpkins instead of bands even more shallow than regular grunge

>Lead singer is in a hospital gown
>bassist is playing drums while standing up
>drummer is tearing apart the drum kit and throwing around cymbal like a frisbee
>this guy still takes it seriously
gg friendo

Like Kurt Cobain didn't employ this ethos in his music at all?

They are. 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 and excellent 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. As aforementioned, 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."

This.

This as well, but The Smashing Pumpkins were barely even Grunge; their heavily layered, atmospheric guitars were more Shoegaze/Dream Pop inspired, mixed with the Heavy Metal, Arena Rock and Indie of the 80s. Although I love Nirvana, Smashing Pumpkins were better.