Conquer Club

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8jg5pjvwjw

oh, and

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WwlsPOnxzfk

"oh well..."

"...what ever..."

"...never mind."

Nirvana, in retrospect, is probably the most underwhelming band ever. They were still cool at the time, though.

Terrotorial Pissing.

Neoteny wrote:Nirvana, in retrospect, is probably the most underwhelming band ever. They were still cool at the time, though.

I completely disagree, they were our Sex Pistols. They changed everything, but did so completely unintentionally.

So, while in hindsight, yeah, both the Sex Pistols and Nirvana are pretty underwhelming musically, their influence, the zeitgeist, and all of that, elevate them to the Pantheon.

pimpdave wrote:

Neoteny wrote:Nirvana, in retrospect, is probably the most underwhelming band ever. They were still cool at the time, though.

I completely disagree, they were our Sex Pistols. They changed everything, but did so completely unintentionally.

So, while in hindsight, yeah, both the Sex Pistols and Nirvana are pretty underwhelming musically, their influence, the zeitgeist, and all of that, elevate them to the Pantheon.

I actually agree with pimpdave. I can't stand Nirvana's music, but I was and continue to be a grunge fan. Soundgarden, Pearl Jam, Mother Love Bone, Alice in Chains are all better bands and produced better music, but the influence of Nirvana was what propelled those guys to the top.

pimpdave wrote:

Neoteny wrote:Nirvana, in retrospect, is probably the most underwhelming band ever. They were still cool at the time, though.

I completely disagree, they were our Sex Pistols. They changed everything, but did so completely unintentionally.

So, while in hindsight, yeah, both the Sex Pistols and Nirvana are pretty underwhelming musically, their influence, the zeitgeist, and all of that, elevate them to the Pantheon.

I would say that you are agreeing with me, and I would agree with you. My dad asked me what the deal was with Nirvana, and I said it was more about what was attempted than what was accomplished. They're the band that is important, but I really wish wasn't so. Dave Grohl did much better after Nirvana...

Also, I think Chris Cornell is overrated, and I hear wayyyyyy too much about him. Soundgarden was cool, but please, for the love of god, stop.

I couldn't stomach watching the whole of those videos.

Neoteny wrote:

pimpdave wrote:

Neoteny wrote:Nirvana, in retrospect, is probably the most underwhelming band ever. They were still cool at the time, though.

I completely disagree, they were our Sex Pistols. They changed everything, but did so completely unintentionally.

So, while in hindsight, yeah, both the Sex Pistols and Nirvana are pretty underwhelming musically, their influence, the zeitgeist, and all of that, elevate them to the Pantheon.

I would say that you are agreeing with me, and I would agree with you. My dad asked me what the deal was with Nirvana, and I said it was more about what was attempted than what was accomplished. They're the band that is important, but I really wish wasn't so. Dave Grohl did much better after Nirvana...

Also, I think Chris Cornell is overrated, and I hear wayyyyyy too much about him. Soundgarden was cool, but please, for the love of god, stop.

Love the Foo Fighters. Consistently excellent albums.

I also agree on Chris Cornell. Audioslave was okay, but now his solo career is about pop music, not rock. I was and continue to be a big Soundgarden fan, but Cornell's music isn't Soundgarden anymore.

Neoteny wrote:

pimpdave wrote:

Neoteny wrote:Nirvana, in retrospect, is probably the most underwhelming band ever. They were still cool at the time, though.

I completely disagree, they were our Sex Pistols. They changed everything, but did so completely unintentionally.

So, while in hindsight, yeah, both the Sex Pistols and Nirvana are pretty underwhelming musically, their influence, the zeitgeist, and all of that, elevate them to the Pantheon.

Also, I think Chris Cornell is overrated, and I hear wayyyyyy too much about him. Soundgarden was cool, but please, for the love of god, stop.

+1 One of the worst live vocalists I've seen.

This is about the only Audioslave song I like, but that has more to do with the fact that it was used in Collateral, a film written and directed by the greatest film genius to ever live ever in the history of the world.

The guitar lick is so perfect.

Audioslave- Shadow on the Sun

Chris Cornell's first solo album, Euphoria Morning was quite good, I thought. But otherwise, I'm not too impressed. I have to say though that Soundgarden does indeed rule. They tune their guitars all weird, and totally rock. The vocals leave a lot to be desired.

WTF you f*ckers?!?

thegreekdog wrote:I also agree on Chris Cornell. Audioslave was okay, but now his solo career is about pop music, not rock. I was and continue to be a big Soundgarden fan, but Cornell's music isn't Soundgarden anymore.

A friend of mine described Cornell as "Soundgarden without the sound." I lol'd.

Juan_Bottom wrote:WTF you f*ckers?!?

Chill out, cracka. What's your beef?

Neoteny wrote:Chill out, cracka. What's your beef?

The woman that I love hates me, so I'm in a bad life mood. And then THIS happened!

pimpdave wrote:So, while in hindsight, yeah, both the Sex Pistols and Nirvana are pretty underwhelming musically, their influence, the zeitgeist, and all of that, elevate them to the Pantheon.

This is my beef. WTF do you mean "underwhelming?!" Do you realize that you would have nothing to compare them to if they never existed? That's pretty overwhelming to think about. Everything that is music since "nevermind" came about because of "nevermind!" No, Nirvana is not the Beatles, but I can only think of a handful of bands that have had anything NEARLY the impact that Nirvana had. And of course, this isn't a statement about impact... you're saying the music doesn't hold up by comparison but Beethoven doesn't hold up either...
Nirvana blows your f*cking minds. Your socks? Where are they? They were rocked clean off.

Juan_Bottom wrote:

Neoteny wrote:Chill out, cracka. What's your beef?

The woman that I love hates me, so I'm in a bad life mood. And then THIS happened!

pimpdave wrote:So, while in hindsight, yeah, both the Sex Pistols and Nirvana are pretty underwhelming musically, their influence, the zeitgeist, and all of that, elevate them to the Pantheon.

This is my beef. WTF do you mean "underwhelming?!" Do you realize that you would have nothing to compare them to if they never existed? That's pretty overwhelming to think about. Everything that is music since "nevermind" came about because of "nevermind!" No, Nirvana is not the Beatles, but I can only think of a handful of bands that have had anything NEARLY the impact that Nirvana had. And of course, this isn't a statement about impact... you're saying the music doesn't hold up by comparison but Beethoven doesn't hold up either...
Nirvana blows your f*cking minds. Your socks? Where are they? They were rocked clean off.

Hmmm... I don't know, man. Beethoven has ruined a lot of my socks over the years.

Ech... don't get me started on the freaking Beatles.

thegreekdog wrote:Ech... don't get me started on the freaking Beatles.

The Marching Band refused to yield.

Juan_Bottom wrote:

Neoteny wrote:Chill out, cracka. What's your beef?

The woman that I love hates me, so I'm in a bad life mood. And then THIS happened!

At least she's still alive. So long as she breathes there's hope.

Juan_Bottom wrote:

pimpdave wrote:So, while in hindsight, yeah, both the Sex Pistols and Nirvana are pretty underwhelming musically, their influence, the zeitgeist, and all of that, elevate them to the Pantheon.

This is my beef. WTF do you mean "underwhelming?!" Do you realize that you would have nothing to compare them to if they never existed? That's pretty overwhelming to think about. Everything that is music since "nevermind" came about because of "nevermind!" No, Nirvana is not the Beatles, but I can only think of a handful of bands that have had anything NEARLY the impact that Nirvana had. And of course, this isn't a statement about impact... you're saying the music doesn't hold up by comparison but Beethoven doesn't hold up either...
Nirvana blows your f*cking minds. Your socks? Where are they? They were rocked clean off.

Okay, first of all, I spin a Nirvana album all the way through at least once a month. Second of all, I have pretty much everything released, not just their studio albums. I have the old school t-shirt with the smiley face with the X'ed out eyes.

I fucking love Nirvana dude. I love their lyrics, I love their music, I love their style.

But truth be told, mechanically speaking, their music is simple and can grow tired if played too much (the same is very true of Beethoven). This is why I've spaced out the spins, as I've aged, and been exposed to much, much more music. But back in the day, dude, back in the day...

The only band I was ever in was a terrible garage band that played 70% Nirvana covers, 25% Smashing Pumpkins covers, and 5% Pearl Jam covers. Oh, and we did a terrible version of Helter Skelter, but f*ck the haters. Don't even step to my ripped jeans, long hair dyed pink, flannel wearing roots, cause I've got em, bro.

Juan_Bottom wrote:

Neoteny wrote:Chill out, cracka. What's your beef?

The woman that I love hates me, so I'm in a bad life mood. And then THIS happened!

pimpdave wrote:So, while in hindsight, yeah, both the Sex Pistols and Nirvana are pretty underwhelming musically, their influence, the zeitgeist, and all of that, elevate them to the Pantheon.

This is my beef. WTF do you mean "underwhelming?!" Do you realize that you would have nothing to compare them to if they never existed? That's pretty overwhelming to think about. Everything that is music since "nevermind" came about because of "nevermind!" No, Nirvana is not the Beatles, but I can only think of a handful of bands that have had anything NEARLY the impact that Nirvana had. And of course, this isn't a statement about impact... you're saying the music doesn't hold up by comparison but Beethoven doesn't hold up either...
Nirvana blows your f*cking minds. Your socks? Where are they? They were rocked clean off.

Whoa, homeslice. Take a breather. Like dave said, Nirvana are credited as the pioneers of a certain sound. But I think you are overstating their contribution to music as a whole. Everything since "Nevermind?" That's silly.

Ah, those were the days before I became all "Corporate" and "The Man" - long hair, goatee, flannel shirt unbuttoned over a t-shirt.

The Beatles are the NSync of rock music... not really... I just like Zeppelin and the Stones more.

pimpdave wrote:But truth be told, mechanically speaking, their music is simple and can grow tired if played too much (the same is very true of Beethoven).

Hmmm... I'm listening to the 7th right now and I don't see how it could be described as simple. Also, I've been listening to Beethoven since before I could walk and haven't tired of it yet.

pimpdave wrote:But truth be told, mechanically speaking, their music is simple and can grow tired if played too much (the same is very true of Beethoven). This is why I've spaced out the spins, as I've aged, and been exposed to much, much more music. But back in the day, dude, back in the day...

That's what I was getting at by underwhelming.

pimpdave wrote:Don't even step to my ripped jeans, long hair dyed pink, flannel wearing roots, cause I've got em, bro.

I was born in '86 so I was just a lil' kid when Nirvana hit...
And I've never had money, so I'm just now affording to buy music. I much prefer grunge bands like Pearl Jam or Nirvana over the radio made stuff today.
Which is something that I always think about. These bands became huge successes making their own music. No producers pulling chords, or chucking out songs... changing lyrics.... bringing in outside help. They did it their own way. This is not true of bands like Fall Out Boy or Nickleback...

pimpdave wrote:The only band I was ever in was a terrible garage band

My band was called "Pie After Friday." We were too much like Tenacious D to ever make any money... Every song was silly/angry/made little sense and was made up to go along with a cool jingle that we came up with. Matt would play his Guitar and I would sing to it until we found something that worked, and made everyone laugh... When I first heard Tenacious D I was all like "that's my style!!!"

Neoteny wrote:

pimpdave wrote:But truth be told, mechanically speaking, their music is simple and can grow tired if played too much (the same is very true of Beethoven). This is why I've spaced out the spins, as I've aged, and been exposed to much, much more music. But back in the day, dude, back in the day...

That's what I was getting at by underwhelming.

Isn't this true of every band/song except Lilly Allen's music? Hotchacha!