Chankgeez wrote:OK, let's put it this way. Who would you rather've hung out with Kurt Cobain or Ian MacKaye?
I think I'd rather've hung out with Cobain.
It would've been more, uh, fun. (Not that MacKaye's not fun, but c'mon?)
I'd rather hang out with Krist than any of the others. If you read some of the fucking hilarious stories of the dumb shit they did, Krist was always shitfaced and at the center of it all.
Really? I dunno - Cobain was so depressed & crap. I know that Ian gets a bad rap, but he seems like a pretty affable guy in many of the interviews I've read. Driven and dedicated to his particular "thing," but I dig those sorts of people.
Ragged Trousers wrote:Seen a few folks on the 'net hating on Ian. I've only ever seen him in interview but he always seems a cool guy.
I believe the issue people had was how preachy he was, or something. I guess because he gets mad about slamdancing, or people heckling him- I can't say I blame him. I wouldn't want people trying to hurt each other or hecling me/the band at one of my shows. Seems like a dece enough guy to me. But I'd still rather hang out with Gibby
I dunno who I'd rather hang out with, I don't really think of bands that way. Lots of musicians I like are dicks in person, and I have several friends that make music I don't care for.
D.o.S. wrote:I dunno who I'd rather hang out with, I don't really think of bands that way. Lots of musicians I like are dicks in person, and I have several friends that make music I don't care for.
Minor Threat was one the first bands that started to get me liking music that wasn't radio friendly. Nirvana didn't do that. Minor Threat/Fugazi is more important to me then.
Still, everybody knows "Smells Like Teen Spirit" and it gets radio play. I can barely remember how "Salad Days" or "Turnover" go though
Tom Dalton wrote:"I want to be as big as I can if it's going to stop a bullet."
the problem with everyone saying "oh nirvana got me into these bands, therefore they're more influential" just stops there and refuses to go the step back, to where the real influence lies.
Gearmond wrote:the problem with everyone saying "oh nirvana got me into these bands, therefore they're more influential" just stops there and refuses to go the step back, to where the real influence lies.
I cannot think of one band that Nirvana got me into, Even the Melvins, the first time I read about them was Kim From Soundgarden talking about them.
Gearmond wrote:the problem with everyone saying "oh nirvana got me into these bands, therefore they're more influential" just stops there and refuses to go the step back, to where the real influence lies.
Are you talking about how The Pixies, Melvins, Sonic youth, etc. influenced Nirvana? Because I completely acknowledge that. And I could say personally Sonic Youth and The Pixies are more inspiring than Nirvana in my own music. However it was Nirvana that led me to them, and that goes for a lot of my friends. Now just because you found the Melvins without Nirvana doesn't discount that my generation found out about all of the bands Nirvana supported through Nirvana. Just like someone might check out Nirvana because Rivers Cuomo talked about how Nevermind greatly influenced the Blue album.
Or look at it this way, I'm going to go look up Fugazi now, because of you guys talking of them so highly. Who is more influential? You or Fugazi?
mr. sound boy king wrote:
Organic apples are not normal, they are special, like analog, whereas normal apples, like digital, taste sterile and lack warmth.
around 04 i had this dude working for me that loved the foo fighters. dave is such a great yeah yeah yeah... so i asked him what he thought of songs for the deaf. he didnt know what i was talking about. so i asked him what his favorite nirvana album was he gave me a dirty look and told me they sucked. when i explained i liked "dave" better as a drummer and we was in nirvana he thought i was fucking with him...
about a month later he was wearing a kurt cobain shirt...
magiclawnchair wrote:around 04 i had this dude working for me that loved the foo fighters. dave is such a great yeah yeah yeah... so i asked him what he thought of songs for the deaf. he didnt know what i was talking about. so i asked him what his favorite nirvana album was he gave me a dirty look and told me they sucked. when i explained i liked "dave" better as a drummer and we was in nirvana he thought i was fucking with him...
about a month later he was wearing a kurt cobain shirt...
i like nirvana.
but john coltrane is more important.
Coincidentally, when I first met my current roommate, I found out he owned Songs for the Deaf just because Dave was on it, because he loves Nirvana, and wanted to hear him play drums again. We had a common ground there, and now he likes a lot of heavier music. Kinda weird how that worked out.
Gearmond wrote:the problem with everyone saying "oh nirvana got me into these bands, therefore they're more influential" just stops there and refuses to go the step back, to where the real influence lies.
Are you talking about how The Pixies, Melvins, Sonic youth, etc. influenced Nirvana? Because I completely acknowledge that. And I could say personally Sonic Youth and The Pixies are more inspiring than Nirvana in my own music. However it was Nirvana that led me to them, and that goes for a lot of my friends. Now just because you found the Melvins without Nirvana doesn't discount that my generation found out about all of the bands Nirvana supported through Nirvana. Just like someone might check out Nirvana because Rivers Cuomo talked about how Nevermind greatly influenced the Blue album.
Or look at it this way, I'm going to go look up Fugazi now, because of you guys talking of them so highly. Who is more influential? You or Fugazi?
however that doesn't necessarily mean that everyone got into those bands through nirvana. i mean, its not like they weren't being played on MTV or Beavis and Butthead, and wouldn't have direct exposure.
Both bands were mind-blowing for me. Even though nowadays I don't listen to either much I still enjoy some of the bands I might never have found without the involvement of parts of either Nirvana or Fugazi (like Earth or Ataxia). It has never really ocurred to me to compare them, it actually never even ocurred to me that they were from the same time, because I have only discovered about Fugazi much later.
I think that Fugazi is more accomplished and more stand-alone in a way. They were musically great, really had their own style going on and had awesome energy. Also there is the whole dealing with the industry stuff.
Nirvana is much more than the music, in fact the bigger part of what Nirvana is takes place outside of their music. Nirvana was style, and suicide and drama and lots of stuff - plus some (pretty good) tunes.
So I would say that Nirvana were more important, because they affected a much broader field of life (and due to that many more people). If you'd ask musically important I'd say Fugazi because in that field they were just better. More intense. I am not sure which of these achievements is greater, actually. It's like comparing apples - wait, let's not go there.
On the personal level I have to say that while I like listening to Fugazi more, the whole approach of "let's take some folkey tunes and rip them through with fuzz" is much more relevant to my music. But there are approaches that are even more relevant. I won't say Sonic Youth now, but if I had to say Sonic Youth I'd say SONIC YOUTH.
Gearmond wrote:the problem with everyone saying "oh nirvana got me into these bands, therefore they're more influential" just stops there and refuses to go the step back, to where the real influence lies.
Are you talking about how The Pixies, Melvins, Sonic youth, etc. influenced Nirvana? Because I completely acknowledge that. And I could say personally Sonic Youth and The Pixies are more inspiring than Nirvana in my own music. However it was Nirvana that led me to them, and that goes for a lot of my friends. Now just because you found the Melvins without Nirvana doesn't discount that my generation found out about all of the bands Nirvana supported through Nirvana. Just like someone might check out Nirvana because Rivers Cuomo talked about how Nevermind greatly influenced the Blue album.
Or look at it this way, I'm going to go look up Fugazi now, because of you guys talking of them so highly. Who is more influential? You or Fugazi?
however that doesn't necessarily mean that everyone got into those bands through nirvana. i mean, its not like they weren't being played on MTV or Beavis and Butthead, and wouldn't have direct exposure.
I only had Beavis and Butthead and the "real" MTV for about five minutes though. I was born in 1990 and I wasn't musically or culturally conscious enough to look at MTV for more than five seconds. By the time I knew MTV existed it was Sum 41, Good Charlotte, and Avril Lavigne. The only good music I could get at through Television was Daft Punk and Gorillaz. I completely understand your case that for the generations conscious of the music when it was produced those other bands were easily accessible via other means. For me and the many after me, it's not. That's why I feel Nirvana is more influential to the world.
It's hard out there for a kid, and Nirvana points arrows to many good bands for us to enjoy what past generations had greater access to.
mr. sound boy king wrote:
Organic apples are not normal, they are special, like analog, whereas normal apples, like digital, taste sterile and lack warmth.
" - smile_man
