Least Favorite.......with a twist.

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from softwareDevMusician. Show softwareDevMusician's posts

    Re: Least Favorite.......with a twist.

    In Response to Re: Least Favorite.......with a twist.:
    In Response to Re: Least Favorite.......with a twist. : Wasn't either Robert Lamm or Cetera the lead singer in most of their songs?
    Posted by jaytf25

     
    Terry Kath sang lead on a lot of their earlier stuff, notably Make Me Smile and Color My World, and some others I can't remember. They were never the same after his passing.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from p-mike. Show p-mike's posts

    Re: Least Favorite.......with a twist.

    I'll say U2, but what I really mean is Bono.



     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from p-mike. Show p-mike's posts

    Re: Least Favorite.......with a twist.

    In Response to Re: Least Favorite.......with a twist.:
    As for Nirvana, I agree they weren't new (SLTS has the exact same riff as 'More Than A Feeling')...but I also think they were aware of that, too...which is why Cobain thought they didn't deserve all the adulation they received.  In the end, he just couldn't take it.  But I disagree that they weren't good musicians.  I think Dave Grohl is one of the best drummers around today, and Cobain was a very skilled guitarist as evidenced by his unplugged performance.  Their mystique is very much grounded in the brevity of their existence.
    Posted by Mattyhorn


    This is a point that I don't think gets stressed often enough. It's been pointed out that grunge was nothing new, and if you're one of those people who happens to believe that Cobain simply couldn't live with his own genius (as I do not), that's all well and good. But if this guy doesn't stick a shotgun in his mouth, I doubt very much anyone, anywhere is discussing Nirvana as a lynchpin in any serious discussion of rock legacies.


     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from jesseyeric. Show jesseyeric's posts

    Re: Least Favorite.......with a twist.

    In Response to Re: Least Favorite.......with a twist.:
    In Response to Re: Least Favorite.......with a twist. : This is a point that I don't think gets stressed often enough. It's been pointed out that grunge was nothing new, and if you're one of those people who happens to believe that Cobain simply couldn't live with his own genius (as I do not), that's all well and good. But if this guy doesn't stick a shotgun in his mouth, I doubt very much anyone, anywhere is discussing Nirvana as a lynchpin in any serious discussion of rock legacies.
    Posted by p-mike


    Nirvana was a very good band, but nothing special as far as I am concerned. I always believed that musially and lyrically, Alice In Chains left them in the dust.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: Least Favorite.......with a twist.

    I think maybe even Cheap Trick had a bigger impact than Nirvana , in the grand scheme of things. But that being said, Nirvana had some great songs. They are just not the "historically significant band" that they are made out to be.

    And I knew p-mike would pick U-2. 

    Call it being psychic. But it's not , it was more of a no -brainer for people who visit this forum frequently. 
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Tcal2. Show Tcal2's posts

    Re: Least Favorite.......with a twist.

    Nirvana killed the Hair Spray Bands and for that alone I will forever be indebted to them.


    I tend to believe they contributed a bit more then many are giving credit for here, not that it matters what I think.  They changed fashion (without trying) incase anyone forgot.  Flannel and ripped jeans.  That alone is rather significant.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mattyhorn. Show Mattyhorn's posts

    Re: Least Favorite.......with a twist.

    In Response to Re: Least Favorite.......with a twist.:
    In Response to Re: Least Favorite.......with a twist. : This is a point that I don't think gets stressed often enough. It's been pointed out that grunge was nothing new, and if you're one of those people who happens to believe that Cobain simply couldn't live with his own genius (as I do not), that's all well and good. But if this guy doesn't stick a shotgun in his mouth, I doubt very much anyone, anywhere is discussing Nirvana as a lynchpin in any serious discussion of rock legacies.
    Posted by p-mike



    Greater point taken...including what sometimes passes for "genius", especially in popular music.  I think he just couldn't handle the attention and undeserved praise.  The obvious irony being that if he had stuck around to actually EARN that praise by writing more songs, then he might have been able to live with it.  So much for that....

    Again, I think they all KNEW that they were just another rock band - one which happened to be lucky enough to hit it big at the right time.  As said here, they weren't even the best band in their limited genre, in their town.  I've always preferred Soundgarden and AIC - whom I had already heard before nevermind came out.  As it stands now, even the Foo Fighters might end up having a more substantive legacy.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from cosmogirl. Show cosmogirl's posts

    Re: Least Favorite.......with a twist.

    The answer is simple:  Pink Floyd came out after I graduated from high school.  Therefore, it is "new music" and not to be taken seriously.  :)

    "Nirvana killed the Hair Spray Bands and for that alone I will forever be indebted to them."

    Tcal, you definitely win the quote of the day award for the above.

    Ironically, Teen Spirit was on the radio yesterday and I kept saying to myself, "I don't get it, I don't get it." 

    I have to admit that I checked out some Motley and other hair bands after seeing them on various Behind the Music episodes and really liked some of it, but at the time, this hippie chick just couldn't take any of them seriously with the make up and high heels. 
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share