Nirvana-the most overrated band ever?!

[metallic ko]

By far the most overrated band in my mind. Grunge was never amazing at the best of times, and Nirvana were so painfully boring and simple that it boggles my mind how they were even signed, let alone got so big.

I guess they were the right band at the right time when people just wanted something different. Doesn't change the fact they're utter shit.

My tolerance for Nirvana fans is so incredibly low. They annoy the fuck out of me.

Took the words right out of my mouth.

[Desperado]

Yes thay are the most over rated band ever

[pain cake]

The only "amazing" Grunge albums were Ten and Dirt, Ten especially because everything on it was fucking awesome. The best vocals IMO ever, some of the best guitar rhythms, licks and riffs ever, the most soulful and meaningful lyrics I've heard and my favrourite drumming on an album ever.

Nirvana are crap, all that was special was some of Kurt's lyrics and Grohl's drumming, they bore the absolute shit out of me and is made worse by the fact all my friends love them.

they are popular still because of their passion. their energy. a three piece band (for the a long while) yet they came off blistering. they were real, as in human beings, they didnt give interviews that placated their audience, kurt cobain was an amazing lyricist. he wrote lyrics that hinted at things, suggestive lyrics, imagery, not outright statements for the most part and when they were outright they were outright in parody and in satire. they made masterfully catchy songs. but the energy is the main thing, the songs were simple and because of that, with the right kind of aggression, they came across as capable of making a bridge quiver. they were just brilliant in ways that i cannot sum up. they played sloppy a lot sure, but thats rock n roll, they handed out a well needed fuck you to the note perfect long guitar solo's and gave you these anti-solo's layered on top of that rhythmic bass/drum catchiness that i previously mentioned. and they were the kids, they looked like the kids, they dressed like the kids, whether they spoke for them is a buncha corny ass bullshit but as a band, fuckin forget about it, few can ever hold a candle to em. i wasnt around for the beatles nirvana or guns n roses, but i love and appreciate em still. its called having an open mind. i think that people that say the beatles are boring/childish whatever or like...y'know, not passionate enough should watch Paul Mccartney throwing himself, balls and all, into performing im down at shea stadium, positively pouring with sweat but just launching himself into the song. THAT is rock n roll!

This is very ironic, speaking of boring bands then get a boring post I could only stand reading the first 5 lines of.

Edited January 4, 2007 by pain cake

[Guest Ohdistortedsmile1789]

That title goes to Led Zeppelin.

Nirvana are overrated though. They produced an absolutely stunning album in In Utero, but nothing else that good. They were a good band, but 90's alt-rock produced several better bands including but not limited to Green Day, Stone Temple Pilots, and Rage Against the Machine.

I feel about the same.

[sweetness]

Theyre overrated as hell, but I dont think thats to say they were a bad band.

[kingwillie]

one of the worst bands of all time. Rage Against the Machine were so much better than them

[motownjunkie]

once again

here is the deal with Nirvana and Cobain.....

they ended hair metal and popularized independent music in one full swoop

we may not see another overnight movement of that sort ever again

if you try to understand by looking at lyrics or comparing them to alice in chains, your missing the point- hell Queensryche wrote better lyrics [arguably] but it was the sound, the emotion, the intensity and sincerity of those performances that are the point

thats what makes them important, not whether kurt was a an overrated poet, lyrically he was clever but thats not whats important about nirvana, they literally changed the perception of the commercial music industry on its head .

before them we had mega lame eighties music still playing on the radio

Edited January 4, 2007 by motownjunkie

[frankwhite]

The only "amazing" Grunge albums were Ten and Dirt, Ten especially because everything on it was fucking awesome. The best vocals IMO ever, some of the best guitar rhythms, licks and riffs ever, the most soulful and meaningful lyrics I've heard and my favrourite drumming on an album ever.

Nirvana are crap, all that was special was some of Kurt's lyrics and Grohl's drumming, they bore the absolute shit out of me and is made worse by the fact all my friends love them.

they are popular still because of their passion. their energy. a three piece band (for the a long while) yet they came off blistering. they were real, as in human beings, they didnt give interviews that placated their audience, kurt cobain was an amazing lyricist. he wrote lyrics that hinted at things, suggestive lyrics, imagery, not outright statements for the most part and when they were outright they were outright in parody and in satire. they made masterfully catchy songs. but the energy is the main thing, the songs were simple and because of that, with the right kind of aggression, they came across as capable of making a bridge quiver. they were just brilliant in ways that i cannot sum up. they played sloppy a lot sure, but thats rock n roll, they handed out a well needed fuck you to the note perfect long guitar solo's and gave you these anti-solo's layered on top of that rhythmic bass/drum catchiness that i previously mentioned. and they were the kids, they looked like the kids, they dressed like the kids, whether they spoke for them is a buncha corny ass bullshit but as a band, fuckin forget about it, few can ever hold a candle to em. i wasnt around for the beatles nirvana or guns n roses, but i love and appreciate em still. its called having an open mind. i think that people that say the beatles are boring/childish whatever or like...y'know, not passionate enough should watch Paul Mccartney throwing himself, balls and all, into performing im down at shea stadium, positively pouring with sweat but just launching himself into the song. THAT is rock n roll!

This is very ironic, speaking of boring bands then get a boring post I could only stand reading the first 5 lines of.

try sitting down then its called backing your opinion up with reasons instead of sayin "they suck" or "they were ok" or "such n such is better"

Edited January 4, 2007 by frankwhite

[krissirge]

i think the critisicm should be pointed not at the band,but Cobain

how should he be criticised if his band got VERY popular?

because Nirvana is a good band,Cobain was a whiny asshole,who singehandedly managed to take the fun out of rock n roll and thanks to his suicide we have to live with his "genius" for a long time.

[frankwhite]

i think the critisicm should be pointed not at the band,but Cobain

how should he be criticised if his band got VERY popular?

because Nirvana is a good band,Cobain was a whiny asshole,who singehandedly managed to take the fun out of rock n roll and thanks to his suicide we have to live with his "genius" for a long time.

how in the fuck do people come to this conclusion that kurt took the fun outta rock n roll? look at their gigs, people are flailing all over the place rocking out, including kurt himself...the music was so fucking energetic and trashing stages looks like a shitloada fun. so he was depressed or whatever and killed himself, what the fucks that gotta do with anything, some of the worlds greatest comedians in the world were massively depressed, doesnt make them depressing as people, their work shines out. just cuz you protest something doesnt make you whiney, in that case, Gandhi was whiney too. if he took the fun out of it for you its down to your misinterpretations not his intentions (although what do i know of them).

[FunkyMonk]

i think the critisicm should be pointed not at the band,but Cobain

how should he be criticised if his band got VERY popular?

because Nirvana is a good band,Cobain was a whiny asshole,who singehandedly managed to take the fun out of rock n roll and thanks to his suicide we have to live with his "genius" for a long time.

how in the fuck do people come to this conclusion that kurt took the fun outta rock n roll? look at their gigs, people are flailing all over the place rocking out, including kurt himself...the music was so fucking energetic and trashing stages looks like a shitloada fun. so he was depressed or whatever and killed himself, what the fucks that gotta do with anything, some of the worlds greatest comedians in the world were massively depressed, doesnt make them depressing as people, their work shines out. just cuz you protest something doesnt make you whiney, in that case, Gandhi was whiney too. if he took the fun out of it for you its down to your misinterpretations not his intentions (although what do i know of them).

Exactly, all videos I've seen of Nirvana gigs, everyone is going fuckin' nuts. Especially Kurt and the band. They were pretty crazy.

[pain cake]

The only "amazing" Grunge albums were Ten and Dirt, Ten especially because everything on it was fucking awesome. The best vocals IMO ever, some of the best guitar rhythms, licks and riffs ever, the most soulful and meaningful lyrics I've heard and my favrourite drumming on an album ever.

Nirvana are crap, all that was special was some of Kurt's lyrics and Grohl's drumming, they bore the absolute shit out of me and is made worse by the fact all my friends love them.

they are popular still because of their passion. their energy. a three piece band (for the a long while) yet they came off blistering. they were real, as in human beings, they didnt give interviews that placated their audience, kurt cobain was an amazing lyricist. he wrote lyrics that hinted at things, suggestive lyrics, imagery, not outright statements for the most part and when they were outright they were outright in parody and in satire. they made masterfully catchy songs. but the energy is the main thing, the songs were simple and because of that, with the right kind of aggression, they came across as capable of making a bridge quiver. they were just brilliant in ways that i cannot sum up. they played sloppy a lot sure, but thats rock n roll, they handed out a well needed fuck you to the note perfect long guitar solo's and gave you these anti-solo's layered on top of that rhythmic bass/drum catchiness that i previously mentioned. and they were the kids, they looked like the kids, they dressed like the kids, whether they spoke for them is a buncha corny ass bullshit but as a band, fuckin forget about it, few can ever hold a candle to em. i wasnt around for the beatles nirvana or guns n roses, but i love and appreciate em still. its called having an open mind. i think that people that say the beatles are boring/childish whatever or like...y'know, not passionate enough should watch Paul Mccartney throwing himself, balls and all, into performing im down at shea stadium, positively pouring with sweat but just launching himself into the song. THAT is rock n roll!

This is very ironic, speaking of boring bands then get a boring post I could only stand reading the first 5 lines of.

try sitting down then its called backing your opinion up with reasons instead of sayin "they suck" or "they were ok" or "such n such is better"

WOW sarcasm! Aren't you a smart one. Hey before saying I don't back my oppinions up maybe you should read my oppinions above your post I quoted. Wasn't saying there was anything wrong with your post, I'm just saying it was boring, and found that humorous as we were talking about one of the most boring bands ever.

[frankwhite]

The only "amazing" Grunge albums were Ten and Dirt, Ten especially because everything on it was fucking awesome. The best vocals IMO ever, some of the best guitar rhythms, licks and riffs ever, the most soulful and meaningful lyrics I've heard and my favrourite drumming on an album ever.

Nirvana are crap, all that was special was some of Kurt's lyrics and Grohl's drumming, they bore the absolute shit out of me and is made worse by the fact all my friends love them.

they are popular still because of their passion. their energy. a three piece band (for the a long while) yet they came off blistering. they were real, as in human beings, they didnt give interviews that placated their audience, kurt cobain was an amazing lyricist. he wrote lyrics that hinted at things, suggestive lyrics, imagery, not outright statements for the most part and when they were outright they were outright in parody and in satire. they made masterfully catchy songs. but the energy is the main thing, the songs were simple and because of that, with the right kind of aggression, they came across as capable of making a bridge quiver. they were just brilliant in ways that i cannot sum up. they played sloppy a lot sure, but thats rock n roll, they handed out a well needed fuck you to the note perfect long guitar solo's and gave you these anti-solo's layered on top of that rhythmic bass/drum catchiness that i previously mentioned. and they were the kids, they looked like the kids, they dressed like the kids, whether they spoke for them is a buncha corny ass bullshit but as a band, fuckin forget about it, few can ever hold a candle to em. i wasnt around for the beatles nirvana or guns n roses, but i love and appreciate em still. its called having an open mind. i think that people that say the beatles are boring/childish whatever or like...y'know, not passionate enough should watch Paul Mccartney throwing himself, balls and all, into performing im down at shea stadium, positively pouring with sweat but just launching himself into the song. THAT is rock n roll!

This is very ironic, speaking of boring bands then get a boring post I could only stand reading the first 5 lines of.

try sitting down then its called backing your opinion up with reasons instead of sayin "they suck" or "they were ok" or "such n such is better"

WOW sarcasm! Aren't you a smart one. Hey before saying I don't back my oppinions up maybe you should read my oppinions above your post I quoted. Wasn't saying there was anything wrong with your post, I'm just saying it was boring, and found that humorous as we were talking about one of the most boring bands ever.

yes, sarcasm, well spotted, round of applause. a smart one? jurys still out. and i didnt say you didnt back up your opinions, i just said that it was what i was doing as opposed to 'sayin "they suck" or "they were ok" or "such n such is better" '. it raised sufficient enough interest to warrant a reply, thats about the best you can do on a message board, thanx

Edited January 4, 2007 by frankwhite

[krissirge]

i think the critisicm should be pointed not at the band,but Cobain

how should he be criticised if his band got VERY popular?

because Nirvana is a good band,Cobain was a whiny asshole,who singehandedly managed to take the fun out of rock n roll and thanks to his suicide we have to live with his "genius" for a long time.

how in the fuck do people come to this conclusion that kurt took the fun outta rock n roll? look at their gigs, people are flailing all over the place rocking out, including kurt himself...the music was so fucking energetic and trashing stages looks like a shitloada fun. so he was depressed or whatever and killed himself, what the fucks that gotta do with anything, some of the worlds greatest comedians in the world were massively depressed, doesnt make them depressing as people, their work shines out. just cuz you protest something doesnt make you whiney, in that case, Gandhi was whiney too. if he took the fun out of it for you its down to your misinterpretations not his intentions (although what do i know of them).

Exactly, all videos I've seen of Nirvana gigs, everyone is going fuckin' nuts. Especially Kurt and the band. They were pretty crazy.

In the 70's and 80's rock stars not only wanted to have fun but we're expected to have fun for us,but then grunge came and music was reduced to a vehicle expressing pain and angst, where fun never entered into the equation.You can say bad things about Creed or Nickelband but atleast their members weren't afraid to be rock stars.

[frankwhite]

i think the critisicm should be pointed not at the band,but Cobain

how should he be criticised if his band got VERY popular?

because Nirvana is a good band,Cobain was a whiny asshole,who singehandedly managed to take the fun out of rock n roll and thanks to his suicide we have to live with his "genius" for a long time.

how in the fuck do people come to this conclusion that kurt took the fun outta rock n roll? look at their gigs, people are flailing all over the place rocking out, including kurt himself...the music was so fucking energetic and trashing stages looks like a shitloada fun. so he was depressed or whatever and killed himself, what the fucks that gotta do with anything, some of the worlds greatest comedians in the world were massively depressed, doesnt make them depressing as people, their work shines out. just cuz you protest something doesnt make you whiney, in that case, Gandhi was whiney too. if he took the fun out of it for you its down to your misinterpretations not his intentions (although what do i know of them).

Exactly, all videos I've seen of Nirvana gigs, everyone is going fuckin' nuts. Especially Kurt and the band. They were pretty crazy.

In the 70's and 80's rock stars not only wanted to have fun but we're expected to have fun for us,but then grunge came and music was reduced to a vehicle expressing pain and angst, where fun never entered into the equation.You can say bad things about Creed or Nickelband but atleast their members weren't afraid to be rock stars.

these are stereotypes. the fun loving 'sink one for me' groupie jocking pomp rocker and the depressed maudlin grungers, its bullshit.

[Lithium]

I think I love you, Frank.

[krissirge]

i think the critisicm should be pointed not at the band,but Cobain

how should he be criticised if his band got VERY popular?

because Nirvana is a good band,Cobain was a whiny asshole,who singehandedly managed to take the fun out of rock n roll and thanks to his suicide we have to live with his "genius" for a long time.

how in the fuck do people come to this conclusion that kurt took the fun outta rock n roll? look at their gigs, people are flailing all over the place rocking out, including kurt himself...the music was so fucking energetic and trashing stages looks like a shitloada fun. so he was depressed or whatever and killed himself, what the fucks that gotta do with anything, some of the worlds greatest comedians in the world were massively depressed, doesnt make them depressing as people, their work shines out. just cuz you protest something doesnt make you whiney, in that case, Gandhi was whiney too. if he took the fun out of it for you its down to your misinterpretations not his intentions (although what do i know of them).

Exactly, all videos I've seen of Nirvana gigs, everyone is going fuckin' nuts. Especially Kurt and the band. They were pretty crazy.

In the 70's and 80's rock stars not only wanted to have fun but we're expected to have fun for us,but then grunge came and music was reduced to a vehicle expressing pain and angst, where fun never entered into the equation.You can say bad things about Creed or Nickelband but atleast their members weren't afraid to be rock stars.

these are stereotypes. the fun loving 'sink one for me' groupie jocking pomp rocker and the depressed maudlin grungers, its bullshit.

and stereotypes just come around from nothing?

[frankwhite]

i think the critisicm should be pointed not at the band,but Cobain

how should he be criticised if his band got VERY popular?

because Nirvana is a good band,Cobain was a whiny asshole,who singehandedly managed to take the fun out of rock n roll and thanks to his suicide we have to live with his "genius" for a long time.

how in the fuck do people come to this conclusion that kurt took the fun outta rock n roll? look at their gigs, people are flailing all over the place rocking out, including kurt himself...the music was so fucking energetic and trashing stages looks like a shitloada fun. so he was depressed or whatever and killed himself, what the fucks that gotta do with anything, some of the worlds greatest comedians in the world were massively depressed, doesnt make them depressing as people, their work shines out. just cuz you protest something doesnt make you whiney, in that case, Gandhi was whiney too. if he took the fun out of it for you its down to your misinterpretations not his intentions (although what do i know of them).

Exactly, all videos I've seen of Nirvana gigs, everyone is going fuckin' nuts. Especially Kurt and the band. They were pretty crazy.

In the 70's and 80's rock stars not only wanted to have fun but we're expected to have fun for us,but then grunge came and music was reduced to a vehicle expressing pain and angst, where fun never entered into the equation.You can say bad things about Creed or Nickelband but atleast their members weren't afraid to be rock stars.

these are stereotypes. the fun loving 'sink one for me' groupie jocking pomp rocker and the depressed maudlin grungers, its bullshit.

and stereotypes just come around from nothing?

no but they are generalisations that negate the inherent individuality of the human condition.

[sweetness]

they literally changed the perception of the commercial music industry on its head .

and fuck them for that

[frankwhite]

they literally changed the perception of the commercial music industry on its head .

and fuck them for that

right, yeah, bring back michael bolton

[JeanGenie]

Nirvana changed the music reception? not really. they did nothing that hadn't already be done before they became famous. they were nothing special and even admitted it themselves.

They didn't change music, the people changed their taste as it always happens from time to time and Nirvana were at their peak when it happened. The only reason why people see Nirvana as ground breaking music changing rock super act is, because MTV created such an hype around this band. Nirvana is the result of a marketing strategy.

[frankwhite]

Nirvana changed the music reception? not really. they did nothing that hadn't already be done before they became famous. they were nothing special and even admitted it themselves.

They didn't change music, the people changed their taste as it always happens from time to time and Nirvana were at their peak when it happened. The only reason why people see Nirvana as ground breaking music changing rock super act is, because MTV created such an hype around this band. Nirvana is the result of a marketing strategy.

i agree (for once) bowie still sucks tho j/k!!!!

Edited January 5, 2007 by frankwhite

[Midnight Rambler]

I think they are overrated. I like them, when they first came out i really liked them, but i just dont think they deserve the aclaim they recieve. Just my opinion, but i hate it when they get mentioned in the same breath as the beatles, i dont think theyre in the same league as the beatles, or the stones or dozens of other bands. However i think that mainstream rock had gotten to such a bad point that nirvana had to happen, i mean if u compare nirvana to def leppard theres no comparison, nirvana wins hands down. I think nirvana did for american music in the nineties, what the sex pistols did for british music in the seventies. The sex pistols and the clash and the jam etc were a breath of frsh air, but after those bands had run there course, we were left with what was the worst decade for mainstream bristish music ever, the 80s. Granted there were lots of cool underground bands like the smiths, but the mainstream sucked. And right now i think we're goin through the same thing, the only music that was released this decade that i thinks worth listening to aint gettin played on the radio, its like the 80s all over again. But anyway, i got a little carried away there, yeah i think that nirvana are definately the most overrated band in the history of the world ever.