ive never seen a guy smoke and sing at the same time..
anywho they played "baby music" on purpose. they wanted to keep it simple and focus on melody. they had some of the most unique songs since oh i dunno the pixies.
Printable View
ive never seen a guy smoke and sing at the same time..
anywho they played "baby music" on purpose. they wanted to keep it simple and focus on melody. they had some of the most unique songs since oh i dunno the pixies.
Who would of ever thought two not too bad groups people could turn into such a disaster. I like alot of punk music and alot of goth music. It like they took all the worst qualities of those groups formed them together, found it wasn't bad enough and decided to get some more bad qualities to put into. Thats EMO in a nut shell.Quote:
Originally Posted by bah
Anyways, I like Nirvana. I have a few of their cds but I dont lie their over used songs like "Smells like teen spirit". I liked it at first but just like kurt i grew sick of it.
Thanks to Nirvana and their untalented, sad, ugly music, you see a lot of emos. Also I saw a lot of emos listening Nirvana.Quote:
Originally Posted by bah
I miss the 80's, when the people enjoyed the life.
Nirvana were crap! FFAF are the new age!
Perhaps mainstream music was more 'cheery' in the 80s, but it was surely no less hollow and commercialized.
Listening to culture club or blondie (later, disco style blondie) wouldn't be making me any happier than 90s rock. The clash were great.
Nirvana became probably the most commercial rock band of the early 90s. Not in a guns n roses schlock rock way, but in the level of production, promotion and attention the lables were giving to the genre at the time.
But they still had some great songs.
Blaming nirvana for emos is like blaming the blues for them.
Music expressing sorrow or anger has existed a long time and is often much more meaningful than happy poppy songs.
That doesn't mean you should go and wallow in your self pity, dress in all black, wear eye makeup and cut yourself while in the fetal position because life is just too cruel.
To quote the man, bill hicks:
“Because you know if you play New Kids on the Block albums backwards they sound better. "Oh come on, Bill, they're the New Kids, don't pick on them, they're so good and they're so clean cut and they're such a good image for the children." **** that! When did mediocrity and banality become a good image for your children? I want my children to listen to people who ****ing ROCKED! I don't care if they died in puddles of their own vomit! I want someone who plays from his ****ing HEART!”
Nirvana fit into the Radiohead category for me: bands that make decent albums, are competent at what they do but are massively over-rated. I do however like Kurt's way of saying something obviously incredibly close to the bone and then saying something totally random afterwards to throw you off of the scent.
From the alternative scene of the early to mid 90s, I think the Chili Peppers and Smashing Pumpkins were better. But all of them should be applauded for killing off hair metal.
I agree. It's also amazing to note that the Chili peppers have been together for over 20 years. The self titled album came out in 84, and even though they weren't as ridiculously popular as they have become, they were performing when glam metal was still all the rage.Quote:
Originally Posted by souLLy
It's almost the most interesting little point that while the big sound rock metal people were ODing on coke (as was the style of the age) people like the peppers and nirvana were up to their necks in heroine. It really shows the big transition in the times.
Drugs via music:
40s-50s Morphine (Hank Williams)
50s-60s Bennies
60s-70s LSD (Hendrix)
70s-80s Coke (way too many)
80s-90s Heroine
90s - ? i unno... e?
Yea, I thought I had much more to say about that, and I probably could, but ya'll see the point.