Don't get me wrong, I think they were a great band and they put out some great songs.  I just wonder if anyone else thiks their supposed legacy and impact on music has been a bit overblown by the media, particularly MTV?  Think about it; grunge was really only popular for a few years and MTV was already calling it dead by 1996/97.  By the late '90s teen pop and nu-metal had taken over the radio and any remaining legacy of Nirvana and the grunge sound could be found in crappy "post-grunge" bands like Nickelback, Creed, and Puddle of Mud.  So for that reason, I would say Nirvana's impact was actually short-lived and mixed at best.

Nirvana never did a thing for me...and I wish people wouldn't compare them to Joy Division.

Nirvana never did a thing for me...and I wish people wouldn't compare them to Joy Division.

I'm with you Max. Nirvana never did a thing for me either. **No idea** why they are famous.

Nirvana are often compared to the Beatles.  People say things like "Nirvana were the Beatles of the 90s"

The only reason Nirvana became what they became was because Cobain killed himself.  Joy Division had the same fate, but Joy Division was a better group. 

From Nirvana came the Foo Fighters
From Joy division came New Order.  I'll take New Order for the win!

Don't get me wrong, I think they were a great band and they put out some great songs.  I just wonder if anyone else thiks their supposed legacy and impact on music has been a bit overblown by the media, particularly MTV?  Think about it; grunge was really only popular for a few years and MTV was already calling it dead by 1996/97.  By the late '90s teen pop and nu-metal had taken over the radio and any remaining legacy of Nirvana and the grunge sound could be found in crappy "post-grunge" bands like Nickelback, Creed, and Puddle of Mud.  So for that reason, I would say Nirvana's impact was actually short-lived and mixed at best.


I have a very hard time seeing how grunge itself was considered "innovative" in 1991 ???, in fact, I think grunge was a step backwards from things like new wave.

Nirvana are often compared to the Beatles.  People say things like "Nirvana were the Beatles of the 90s"


I wouldn't even compare Nirvana to the Rutles.

Don't get me wrong, I think they were a great band and they put out some great songs.  I just wonder if anyone else thiks their supposed legacy and impact on music has been a bit overblown by the media, particularly MTV?  Think about it; grunge was really only popular for a few years and MTV was already calling it dead by 1996/97.  By the late '90s teen pop and nu-metal had taken over the radio and any remaining legacy of Nirvana and the grunge sound could be found in crappy "post-grunge" bands like Nickelback, Creed, and Puddle of Mud.  So for that reason, I would say Nirvana's impact was actually short-lived and mixed at best.


I think it was mostly media hype.  For one thing, if Eddie Vedder died instead of Kurt, Pearl Jam would have been the king of grunge, even though Pearl Jam sold more albums and concerts than Nirvana in their heyday.

But as far as the genre goes, it is hard to say that Grunge didn't influence modern music, because there was so many bands that sounded like the top four even coming in the 2000s decade.

Yes!

I have a very hard time seeing how grunge itself was considered "innovative" in 1991 ???, in fact, I think grunge was a step backwards from things like new wave.


It was a rebellion against hair metal and "the 80s sound".

Ok, I'm outnumbered here, but I love Nirvana (and grunge, for that matter).  In my opinion, they really were a game-changer.  I will give you that, because they are the first to have really crossed over, their's is the face of grunge, but they may not be the best example of what the genre has to offer.

Nirvana are often compared to the Beatles.  People say things like "Nirvana were the Beatles of the 90s"

Noooo, goddammit!  The Beatles could play their instruments, wrote good songs, and were fun.

The only reason Nirvana became what they became was because Cobain killed himself.  Joy Division had the same fate, but Joy Division was a better group. 

From Nirvana came the Foo Fighters
From Joy division came New Order.  I'll take New Order for the win!


Ian Curtis's widow didn't slut around with all manner of showbiz lowlifes.  Let's keep that clear.
::)

Nirvana never did a thing for me...and I wish people wouldn't compare them to Joy Division.


They compare Nirvana to Joy Division? Death makes for some strange bedfellows, lol.

I didn't, and still don't know, what the big thing was about Nirvana. They were okay but nothing special and I don't think they would have gained the same level of legendary status had Kurt Cobain not committed suicide.

Sadly, yes. I liked his 'Nevermind' album and that is it!

Where as I love the rarer stuff...

I must have a thing for ratty music.

They had good songs and sounded fresh in the 90s.  But I still prefer Pearl Jam (their first 3 albums mostly).
Nirvana were MTV darlings and were very lucky.

I remember having an unauthorized documentary way back.

One of the people on it described Nirvana as the most unlikely band.

Funny, most of the people replying have an avatar of Britney Spears, Eminem, or some musical loser. Cobain forged an entire new sound, that alone is enough to call him Legend. The rest is all subjective.. which is why you have avatars of sheeshty artists.

All I see is an Eminem avatar dude.  ::)

And even then Eminem at least brought a new flavor to hip-hop and even though I personally don't like his music, I recognize his talent as a wordsmith. Cobain(and others) rehashed punk and rock critics/fans thought somehow it was new and unique? The true "innovative" music from the '90s was electronica/IDM and some rap and R&B, grunge brought nothing new in sounds or ideas, just repackaged punk(like it's cousin emo too).

Funny, most of the people replying have an avatar of Britney Spears, Eminem, or some musical loser. Cobain forged an entire new sound, that alone is enough to call him Legend. The rest is all subjective.. which is why you have avatars of sheeshty artists.


If you like, we can all have an avatar of your face and make everyone sick

I want to know where he saw Brittany Spears at in this thread, I think the poor dude is hallucinating.

He probably saw Jim Schrute's avatar and thought that pumpkin with teeth was her :D

Either that, or he mistook my Avatar for Britney which means not only is he blind, but he doesn't know how to read lol

Ah, okay.

If you like, we can all have an avatar of your face and make everyone sick

;D

How do you overrate pimply stoner kids with dirty hair and ill-fitting clothes?
???

http://img.memecenter.com/uploaded/Kurt-Cobain-vs.-Justin-Bieber_0d5fc03d03a9bbc5e82340af64360580.jpg

How do you overrate pimply stoner kids with dirty hair and ill-fitting clothes?
???

What a generalization, Max!  ::)  Dave Grohl does not fit your profile and has gone on to build the lovely Foo Fighters

http://img.memecenter.com/uploaded/Kurt-Cobain-vs.-Justin-Bieber_0d5fc03d03a9bbc5e82340af64360580.jpg


LOL

It was a rebellion against hair metal and "the 80s sound".


Yeah that is a good point, grunge was more a direct reaction to the slick and overproduced '80s sound and styles than something that brought truly new sounds in rock. In a way punk was the same way, it was basically rehashed '60s garage rock, punk was more a reaction against the excessive prog rock styles of the '70s, the image/fashion of punk is more iconic. One thing punk and grunge did was take rock back to basics, stripped it down to it's bare minimum. I think hip-hop and electronica took the helm for innovation in music during the '90s/'00s/now early '10s, to me it just looks like mainstream rock stopped being innovative after new wave, of course there's been other trends like shoegaze and post-rock, but they have been more underground and/or incorporated electronica or nonrock influences.

No, Nirvana deserved the Legacy they made... It changed the scene, the times, it all.  I was truly moved by the music and as someone that struggled with drugs and alcohol, I can relate to the pain of addiction and seeing the bleakness in things.
I'm just glad I made it thru.

^ Good for you, Goo!  Continued success in your sobriety!

Kurt Cobain actually said that? (looking at Goo's signature, I thought I posted right after her...)

Hm...interesting debate. Do I think they are more famous because Cobain committed? Hell yes. Do I think everything since the year 1995 would have made a go of it without Nirvana? Hell no. Whether you like Nirvana a lot, a little, or not at all, they captured many demographics in regards to the alternative scene. What is now indie (as in Indie Rock, independent, like Death Cab for Cutie, Chevelle, even wimpiers bands such as Snow Patrol, Dashboar Confessional, 1Republic or w/e they are called, Weezer even) would not have been given a single chance from crtitics and music fans a like if it weren't for Nirvana. I, personally, find the Beatles to be in the situation most posters here are saying Nirvana was in. The BEATLES WERE AT THE RIGHT PLACE AT THE RIGHT TIME. So if you are to say that the Beatles are Legends, you must say Nirvana is. They also brought out a new attitude for music, since punk was never properly understood from the millions of BIG (not long) haired, burnt out alcoholics that were "music fans" in the '80s. It was an alternative to corporate rock, and also very uncaring. It was self-proclaimed gold. Because of this, a new attitude, genre, and (with all of that distortion and bluntness) a new, or originally overlooked, sound. Nirvana may not have produced like legends do, but they meant more to music than any of the bands in the last 10-15 years...and the 10 years before them...

Yeah that is a good point, grunge was more a direct reaction to the slick and overproduced '80s sound and styles than something that brought truly new sounds in rock. In a way punk was the same way, it was basically rehashed '60s garage rock, punk was more a reaction against the excessive prog rock styles of the '70s, the image/fashion of punk is more iconic. One thing punk and grunge did was take rock back to basics, stripped it down to it's bare minimum. I think hip-hop and electronica took the helm for innovation in music during the '90s/'00s/now early '10s, to me it just looks like mainstream rock stopped being innovative after new wave, of course there's been other trends like shoegaze and post-rock, but they have been more underground and/or incorporated electronica or nonrock influences.


Agree with this, except the post punk revival of the 2000s (Interpol, The Strokes etc.) was pretty good, even if derivative.