Jump to content


Click to shop at FS Books
Photo
- - - - -

What Do You Think Of A New Age Grunge Style Of Music

Grunge Rock Grunge Music



  • Please log in to reply
94 replies to this topic

#21 neonspectraltoast

neonspectraltoast

    Senior Member

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,465 posts

Posted December 29 2015 - 10:53 AM

Grunge never had any distinctive characteristics because, like punk and rock and roll in general, it was a label given to an explosion of individualism.  When music becomes elitist, it is no longer the highest art form.  It's just the proverbial plug stuck up the artists' ass.



#22 Theprodu

Theprodu

    Modus Lascivious

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,696 posts

Posted December 29 2015 - 12:03 PM

Grunge never had any distinctive characteristics because, like punk and rock and roll in general, it was a label given to an explosion of individualism.  When music becomes elitist, it is no longer the highest art form.  It's just the proverbial plug stuck up the artists' ass.

What was so individual about it?  What music do you call elitist?



#23 Reverand JC

Reverand JC

    Willy Fuckin' Wonka

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,093 posts

Posted December 29 2015 - 12:05 PM

Everyone did go nuts for Nevermind, one of those times when everyone you knew was playing the same album for a period of about 6 months or so

Mediocre song writing skills?, album was full of catchy tunes, all of which Im totally sick of now...but back in the day.....

Anyhoo, "Grunge" was pretty much only one album by one band

 

Every Nirvana tune in a nutshell:

 

Mumbled verse in Eminor

 

Screamed Chorus in GMajor

 

Add some references to disease, guns and depression in the lyrics.

 

Read this genius couplet out loud and see how much sense it makes:

 

"Load up on guns and bring your friends,

It's fun to lose and to pretend,

I'm overboard,

And self assured,

Oh no I know a dirty word."

 

I could go on and on about this drivel.

 

I think Nirvana would have just been a footnote if Cobain didn't paint the walls with his brains.

 

C/S,

Rev J


  • Theprodu likes this

"I believe that creative imagination rules the universe.
I believe in the beauty of first love and the eternal power of all love.
I believe in dreams and dreamers, being one myself.
I believe in the power of modern medicine and the wisdom of ancient medicine as well.
I believe in the power of laughter and the beauty of a good joke." Willie Nelson


#24 Theprodu

Theprodu

    Modus Lascivious

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,696 posts

Posted December 29 2015 - 12:06 PM

Lol, seems like you're the one with disdain for a certain art form here. 

Oh, you're a perceptive one!

 

I wouldn't call it an art form though, just bad pop music.



#25 neonspectraltoast

neonspectraltoast

    Senior Member

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,465 posts

Posted December 29 2015 - 03:06 PM

 

 

What was so individual about it?  What music do you call elitist?

 

I think maybe you guys perceive grunge as being some form of music.  In my mind, it more refers to the scene at the time, though we can split hairs about that, I suppose.  Beck was a part of that scene.  Weezer was a part of that scene.  Green Day was a part of that scene.  Hell, even the Cranberries were a part of that scene.  There was no formula.  And most of the bands didn't think of themselves as grunge.  Nirvana thought of themselves as a punk band.  So criticize NIrvana for being simplistic, but they weren't trying to be musical geniuses.  Some people call them musical geniuses.  Maybe they are right.  Maybe they are wrong.  

 

Like Nirvana or not, whatever.  If you want to, deny that the scene was defined by the label "grunge."  Okay.  But the scene did exist, and as far as the scene goes, it was unified, and it wasn't unified by any one particular style of music.  There were punk bands, there were folk artists, there were industrial bands breaking new ground. 

I call it elitist when someone likes a particular style of music, so they lump everything else in a category of "not really being music."  I hate Nickelback, but I won't seriously accuse them of not being, technically, music.  What is music if not something that frees the spirit, and who is to say whose spirit can be freed by what?  Okay, so we're all guilty of having various degrees of intelligence and various different bands will be able to liberate us depending on what our intelligence level may be.  Some artists are for dumb people, and some artists are for really smart people.  So I'll admit, maybe I'm dumber than you for liking Nirvana, a lot, which I do, but it's what gets my creative juices flowing.  If Nirvana was really good at promoting individuality, which I think they were, Kurt Cobain was a fierce individualist, then I think their music was really good at freeing people's spirits, which is what good music does, and which is probably why people call them musical geniuses.  

 

Even if you have
Even if you need
I don't mean to stare
We don't have to breed
We could plant a house
We could build a tree
I don't even care
We could have all three

 

INDIVIDUALITY.  That was the message.  That's what people were excited about at the time.  Though yeah, we can get into whether technically that's what we're talking about when we're talking about grunge.  But to speak of "grunge" in terms of a particular formula of music and forget about what the scene was really like at the time is a disservice.  


Edited by neonspectraltoast, December 29 2015 - 03:08 PM.


#26 Theprodu

Theprodu

    Modus Lascivious

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,696 posts

Posted December 29 2015 - 03:31 PM

I just never got into the 'attitude' part of any music scene. I didn't listen to rock music to piss off my parents or as a protest on greater society, or as a release of teen angst. (In fact I rarely paid any attention to the content of rock lyrics, just the melody and syllabic cadence) I just liked the music. And when rock music seemed to become more about attitude than musical substance...well, that turned me off. Punk music I was like, ok, whatever, these guys don't care about sounding good, they prefer to sound offensive. But the new punk and grunge made a slicker form of mainstream 'punk', and ended up crucified by their peers when they made it big. Ha, they became the rockstars they once hated! Ain't karma a bitch



#27 Guest_xenxan

Guest_xenxan
  • Guests

Posted December 29 2015 - 04:50 PM

I think maybe you guys perceive grunge as being some form of music.  In my mind, it more refers to the scene at the time, though we can split hairs about that, I suppose.  Beck was a part of that scene.  Weezer was a part of that scene.  Green Day was a part of that scene.  Hell, even the Cranberries were a part of that scene.  There was no formula.  And most of the bands didn't think of themselves as grunge.  Nirvana thought of themselves as a punk band.  So criticize NIrvana for being simplistic, but they weren't trying to be musical geniuses.  Some people call them musical geniuses.  Maybe they are right.  Maybe they are wrong.  

 

Like Nirvana or not, whatever.  If you want to, deny that the scene was defined by the label "grunge."  Okay.  But the scene did exist, and as far as the scene goes, it was unified, and it wasn't unified by any one particular style of music.  There were punk bands, there were folk artists, there were industrial bands breaking new ground. 

I call it elitist when someone likes a particular style of music, so they lump everything else in a category of "not really being music."  I hate Nickelback, but I won't seriously accuse them of not being, technically, music.  What is music if not something that frees the spirit, and who is to say whose spirit can be freed by what?  Okay, so we're all guilty of having various degrees of intelligence and various different bands will be able to liberate us depending on what our intelligence level may be.  Some artists are for dumb people, and some artists are for really smart people.  So I'll admit, maybe I'm dumber than you for liking Nirvana, a lot, which I do, but it's what gets my creative juices flowing.  If Nirvana was really good at promoting individuality, which I think they were, Kurt Cobain was a fierce individualist, then I think their music was really good at freeing people's spirits, which is what good music does, and which is probably why people call them musical geniuses.  

 

Even if you have
Even if you need
I don't mean to stare
We don't have to breed
We could plant a house
We could build a tree
I don't even care
We could have all three

 

INDIVIDUALITY.  That was the message.  That's what people were excited about at the time.  Though yeah, we can get into whether technically that's what we're talking about when we're talking about grunge.  But to speak of "grunge" in terms of a particular formula of music and forget about what the scene was really like at the time is a disservice.  

 

The last statement paints it perfectly.

 

Personally, Nirvana were overrated. I never did take to them. Although I was and still am a big fan of Soundgarden, who kind of sailed under the radar in the early days; even to a point where Chris Cornell rarely gets any or very little credit as one of the best singer songwriters then and now.

 

"Grunge" always seem to be the combination of Punk, ala Black Flag: SamHain: Misfits and of the Heavier sounds of Sabbath:Saxon and Zep.

 

Like Toast says, 'Grunge' was and still is the identity of the times.

 

Now music just plain isn't there. Too many one and done. Make a quick buck, find someone younger, more obscene to replace the last. Talent is no longer part of or required in the music industry today.



#28 Theprodu

Theprodu

    Modus Lascivious

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,696 posts

Posted December 29 2015 - 05:24 PM

I like Cornell.


  • scratcho likes this

#29 Asmo

Asmo

    Slo motion rider

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 34,166 posts
  • LocationThe pulsing cavern

Posted December 30 2015 - 05:16 AM

I prefer Nevermind above Soundgarden, most of Pearl Jam and basically everything else that is considered grunge. But the album kind of grew on me and grunge is not spend well on me at all anyway. Just because it makes use of simple formulas and techniques doesn't make the songs less great (some would argue that it's on the contrary :P) and it also doesn't make the musicians involved untalented. Like Neonspectraltoast says: they really weren't trying to be musical geniuses. Hey maybe they were trying to make it big (as opposed to their or Cobain's image I guess) but they were doing it in their own way in their own unique style that sounded new and refreshing at the time and lots of people loved it (and apparently still do).


Posted Image


#30 Theprodu

Theprodu

    Modus Lascivious

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,696 posts

Posted December 30 2015 - 06:47 AM

I prefer Nevermind  Hey maybe they were trying to make it big (as opposed to their or Cobain's image I guess) but they were doing it in their own way in their own unique style that sounded new and refreshing at the time and lots of people loved it (and apparently still do).

Riiight...hate to pop your fantasy but...

 

 

wiki

Nevermind became a huge commercial success, selling millions of copies and popularizing the Seattle grunge movement and alternative rock in general.[4] However, all three members of Nirvana—singer and guitarist Kurt Cobain, bassist Krist Novoselic, and drummer Dave Grohl—later expressed dissatisfaction with the sound of the album, citing its production as too polished.

 

Early in 1992, Cobain told Rolling Stone that he was sure that the band's next album would showcase "both of the extremes" of its sound, saying "it'll be more raw with some songs and more candy pop on some of the others. It won't be as one-dimensional [as Nevermind]".

 

Nirvana ultimately chose Albini to record its third album

Although he considered the group to be "R.E.M. with a fuzzbox" and "an unremarkable version of the Seattle sound", Albini told Nirvana biographer Michael Azerrad he accepted because he felt sorry for the band members, whom he perceived to be "the same sort of people as all the small-fry bands I deal with", at the mercy of their record company.

Albini instituted a strict policy of ignoring everyone except for the band members; the producer explained that everyone associated with the group aside from the musicians themselves were "the biggest pieces of shit I ever met"

 

Cobain originally wanted to name the album I Hate Myself and I Want to Die, a phrase that had originated in his journals in mid-1992. At the time, the singer used the phrase as a response whenever someone asked him how he was doing. Cobain intended the album title as a joke; he stated he was "tired of taking this band so seriously and everyone else taking it so seriously"

 

 

Cobain was obviously a fucking puke, and not only didn't care about quality or musicianship, didn't care about the band. He wasn't being an individual, he was just a fucked up kid throwing a temper tantrum, you could hear it in his voice, you could see it in his demeanor. And all his fans could relate with that apparently. It's just sickening


Edited by Theprodu, December 30 2015 - 06:47 AM.


#31 Asmo

Asmo

    Slo motion rider

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 34,166 posts
  • LocationThe pulsing cavern

Posted December 30 2015 - 07:04 AM

 

Riiight...hate to pop your fantasy but...

 

 

wiki

 

 

Cobain was obviously a fucking puke, and not only didn't care about quality or musicianship, didn't care about the band. He wasn't being an individual, he was just a fucked up kid throwing a temper tantrum, you could hear it in his voice, you could see it in his demeanor. And all his fans could relate with that apparently. It's just sickening

 

Which fantasy did you pop?

 

Like I said, despite his image, I acknowledge he was chasing after fame/succes. I'm not a fan of Cobain as a person (and also not even of the band), I merely said where it comes to grunge I dig Nevermind better than Soundgarden and most of Pearl Jam. That you say he didn't care about quality or musicianship and his band doesn't really mean shit to me, wether it is true or not. Sooo....? You are just shitting on another artist you dislike. You have a problem with how his fans regard him and his music and you seem to think I'm one of them merely because I don't regard Nevermind as utter crap and the people who made it as utterly talentless.  It's just sickening ;) :P 


Edited by Asmo, December 30 2015 - 07:07 AM.

Posted Image


#32 Theprodu

Theprodu

    Modus Lascivious

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,696 posts

Posted December 30 2015 - 07:21 AM

 

 

 

Which fantasy did you pop?

 

 

 

That he was doing it his way. They had to hire a producer in an attempt to get the sound they apparently didn't get on their first.

 

I didn't write the wiki page, I don't have to shit on the band, they did a good enough job shitting on themselves.



#33 Asmo

Asmo

    Slo motion rider

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 34,166 posts
  • LocationThe pulsing cavern

Posted December 30 2015 - 07:26 AM

Not sure where you got that I thought he managed his own sound and album production. How many musicians use a producer for that? I don't see the issue :P


Posted Image


#34 Theprodu

Theprodu

    Modus Lascivious

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,696 posts

Posted December 30 2015 - 07:48 AM

 they were doing it in their own way in their own unique style that sounded new and refreshing at the time and lots of people loved it (and apparently still do).

They obviously didn't like the sound of their first record, as it didn't reflect "their own unique style" So they hired a different producer, in hopes that he would make them sound more like what they thought they should sound like but didn't know how. Their "own unique sound" was a contrivance of many minds, not  " doing it their way"

 

You like the music, fine, good enough, but don't try to convince me they were anything special, anymore than any other pop phenom. The monkees, Bay city rollers, the sex pistols, what have you...



#35 guerillabedlam

guerillabedlam

    Senior Member

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 20,710 posts
  • LocationCalifornia

Posted December 30 2015 - 07:49 AM

They obviously didn't like the sound of their first record, as it didn't reflect "their own unique style" So they hired a different producer, in hopes that he would make them sound more like what they thought they should sound like but didn't know how. Their "own unique sound" was a contrivance of many minds, not  " doing it their way"

 

 

 

Nevermind was not Nirvana's first record


Bvztpo7.png

 


#36 Theprodu

Theprodu

    Modus Lascivious

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,696 posts

Posted December 30 2015 - 08:00 AM

First major label record


Edited by Theprodu, December 30 2015 - 08:02 AM.


#37 Theprodu

Theprodu

    Modus Lascivious

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,696 posts

Posted December 30 2015 - 08:01 AM

~


Edited by Theprodu, December 30 2015 - 08:02 AM.


#38 Theprodu

Theprodu

    Modus Lascivious

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,696 posts

Posted December 30 2015 - 08:07 AM

Not sure where you got that I thought he managed his own sound and album production. How many musicians use a producer for that? I don't see the issue :P

You said he did it his way and that he was some maverick of individuality...no wait , that was 'toast.

 

anyway he was the "voice of a generation" which is disgusting enough for me, considering his message.  If it's true then what a fucked up generation. It's pity-full



#39 Asmo

Asmo

    Slo motion rider

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 34,166 posts
  • LocationThe pulsing cavern

Posted December 30 2015 - 08:21 AM

 

They obviously didn't like the sound of their first record, as it didn't reflect "their own unique style" So they hired a different producer, in hopes that he would make them sound more like what they thought they should sound like but didn't know how. Their "own unique sound" was a contrivance of many minds, not  " doing it their way"

 

You like the music, fine, good enough, but don't try to convince me they were anything special, anymore than any other pop phenom. The monkees, Bay city rollers, the sex pistols, what have you...

 

 

I'm not a fan of Nevermind, it just goes to show how I am even less impressed with most other grunge. 

 

 

You said he did it his way and that he was some maverick of individuality...no wait , that was 'toast.

 

anyway he was the "voice of a generation" which is disgusting enough for me, considering his message.  If it's true then what a fucked up generation. It's pity-full

 

He did it his way, they were for a large part his songs. Production doesn't take away from that (well not every thing he put into it in this case at least). 

 

I did not say he was some pillar of individuality or something, I was just going against your remark how he wasn't being an individual at all where it comes to his music, but 's all teenage angst. This is of course nonsense, coming from your subjective dislike for the guy, his music and/or the message behind it. Even if it is mainly teenage angst, if it comes from inside him and he pours this angst in a whole album of musical tunes (that you may dislike) why/how is he being less of an individual because of it?

 

I would advice you don't concern yourself so much with remarks like he was the voice of a generation. It only holds as much merit as you give to it ;) He was a strong voice of the 90's though, wether we like it or not. Maybe you just don't like his generation? I mean what's so pitiful about it except if you take that sentence a little too seriously?


Posted Image


#40 Theprodu

Theprodu

    Modus Lascivious

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,696 posts

Posted December 30 2015 - 08:26 AM

 

 

 He was a strong voice of the 90's though, wether we like it or not.

 

Only due to mass crass marketing from the record industry.







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Grunge Rock, Grunge, Music

Click to shop at Sensi Seed Company