Guest The Winter Of My Discontent Report post Posted November 30, 2004 Its actually quite tremendous. Discuss. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Henry Spencer 0 Report post Posted November 30, 2004 It really is. The overexposure of almost the entire first half of the album has kind of obscured that, but they're really a hell of a bunch of songs. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest The Winter Of My Discontent Report post Posted November 30, 2004 It really is. The overexposure of almost the entire first half of the album has kind of obscured that, but they're really a hell of a bunch of songs. I actually prefer the last half of the album. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Detective Comics 0 Report post Posted November 30, 2004 It really is. The overexposure of almost the entire first half of the album has kind of obscured that, but they're really a hell of a bunch of songs. I actually prefer the last half of the album. Agreed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Henry Spencer 0 Report post Posted November 30, 2004 I do too, I'm just saying. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Special K 0 Report post Posted November 30, 2004 I think criticisms of Nirvana basically boil down to them being overexposed. The rock world desperately wanted a 'savior' and saw Nirvana as that. That's not their fault. I've never heard enyone talk shit about the Pixies 9though I'm sure that's inviting someone to do just that) because they escaped mass publicity. If someone who's not your cup of tea has their music become ubiquitous, it irks you. In my case it's Alice in Chains. Certainly not a bad band, but I can't listen to them anymore just because they were played SO MUCH. (I'm a seattlite.) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nevermortal 0 Report post Posted November 30, 2004 For me, their Unplugged album is the best. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Giuseppe Zangara 0 Report post Posted November 30, 2004 I haven't listened to this in years. I should change that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Special K 0 Report post Posted November 30, 2004 I think the Unplugged album is best too, but Nevermind gets occasionally shat upon. I've never heard anyone badmouth Unplugged, even my Dad, who HATES Nirvana. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
B. Brian Brunzell 0 Report post Posted November 30, 2004 Recently at work, I listened to both Nevermind and In Utero. While Nevermind is not a bad album at all, In Utero COMPLETELY blows it away, in terms of lyrics, song structures, etc. I hate to use the tired cliche, but Kurt really wore his heart on his sleeve for that album. It really is all over the place, from the catchy, almost pop-grunge of "Serve the Servants" to the straight up metal riff that is "Scentless Apprentice" to the rather sullen "Pennyroyal Tea." I really can't find too much fault with the album at all. It's produced perfectly, sounding just as raw as every lyric Kurt wrote. In Utero is just a tremendous album overall, blowing away everything in their catalogue as far as studio albums go. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1234-5678 0 Report post Posted November 30, 2004 "Nevermind" is definitely one of those albums you can listen to from start to finish. However, I still find Kurt's lyrics to be somewhat overrated gibberish, with the exception of "About A Girl" and "All Apologies". That was, of course, part of his unique charm though. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Black Lushus 0 Report post Posted November 30, 2004 never could get into Nirvana... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nl5xsk1 0 Report post Posted November 30, 2004 I think the Unplugged album is best too, but Nevermind gets occasionally shat upon. I've never heard anyone badmouth Unplugged, even my Dad, who HATES Nirvana. For real? I've got no problems badmouthing Unplugged. It's unlistenable to me, as I find his voice grating and the songs - like most Nirvana songs - to be painfully overrated. Voice of a generation my ass. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Giuseppe Zangara 0 Report post Posted November 30, 2004 I kinda want to kill anyone who says Nirvana's version of "The Man Who Sold the World" is superior to Bowie's. The Meat Puppets covers from the same set are decent, but I'd rather just listen to the originals. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Man in Blak 0 Report post Posted November 30, 2004 Eh. As far as the Meat Puppet covers go, Nirvana's Unplugged versions are far more palatable and radio friendly and, thus, easier to listen to. Then again, I heard the Nirvana versions first, rendering the originals ("Lake of Fire" especially) as more of a hilarious curiosity than anything else. And I like the songs on Nevermind but, other than "In Bloom", I prefer their non-Nevermind incarnations. The Wishkah version of "Smells Like Teen Spirit" is a good example of this. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Decemberists 0 Report post Posted November 30, 2004 I *hate* Nevermind. Cannot stand it. I just find it dreadfully unlistenable, along with pretty much everything else Cobain did. In Utero though kicks all kind of ass. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Man in Blak 0 Report post Posted November 30, 2004 Sometimes, I wonder if there's a bootleg of Nevermind masters just floating around on the internet, waiting for production that doesn't involve 100 gallons of industry gloss. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Vitamin X Report post Posted November 30, 2004 I'm a Bleach fan, myself. As much as I love Nevermind and In Utero, Bleach is a hell of an album. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Shutterspeed Report post Posted December 1, 2004 Nevermind is obviously an awesome bunch of songs and an amazing listening experience. Unplugged in New York rivals it, and is perhaps the greatest live album that I own. If you've heard it, you'd've heard and noticed the raw passion in Kurt Cobain's voice. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest The Winter Of My Discontent Report post Posted December 1, 2004 Sometimes, I wonder if there's a bootleg of Nevermind masters just floating around on the internet, waiting for production that doesn't involve 100 gallons of industry gloss. That would take everything away from what it was. If Nevermind sounded raw, it totally wouldn't suit the actual songs. Just like if In Utero was polished up nicely, it would lose its effectiveness. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Giuseppe Zangara 0 Report post Posted December 1, 2004 Granted, I haven't heard Nevermind in ages, but you can have well-written pop songs without studio polish. Guided By Voices have proven many times over that strong melodies and hooks can overcome lo-fi grit. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest The Winter Of My Discontent Report post Posted December 1, 2004 Sure But after hearing Nevermind, what it was intended to be, and what it has become, I think it would lose its legacy if rawer versions of the tracks were unearthed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Giuseppe Zangara 0 Report post Posted December 1, 2004 I think you can look past that if a supposed "rough" version of the album proved its worth. One thing I wouldn't be able to look past—and I know that this is my fault entirely—is my trouble with listening to things I liked when I was 12 with a fresh set of ears. I fear nostalgia would be a powerful deceiver. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest The Winter Of My Discontent Report post Posted December 1, 2004 Throughout my musical travels I really hated Nirvana. I thought they were garbage. I cleaned the slate, and was fairly open about what i was listening to. Nostalgia didn't come into play at all...I don't think. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Giuseppe Zangara 0 Report post Posted December 1, 2004 See, in spite of my not listening to Nevermind in years, I can still recall, vividly, the songs from it. The "yeah yeah yeah"s from "Lithium," the chorus of "Territorial Pissings," the first time I heard "Polly" and thought it was just so creepy and cool, etc. All that is still a part of me, almost as if it were in my genes. That album blew my 12-year-old mind; I hadn't heard anything quite like it before. As such, my formative years were spent playing that tape over and over again to the point where I had to get a second copy simply from wearing down the first. That thing—that memory—is something I don't want to relive. Let it stay in the past. The main reason, incidentally, for my not listening to it for so long was due to a brief period in my late teens where I rejected everything that was popular, that the masses at large held dear. When I grew out of that awful phase, I never tried to get into Nirvana again for the aforementioned reason. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest The Winter Of My Discontent Report post Posted December 1, 2004 Ahhhhh, well, thats a decision you need to make. Its still tremendous though. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Giuseppe Zangara 0 Report post Posted December 1, 2004 I should probably check out In Utero again, at least. That one wasn't so earth-shattering. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest The Winter Of My Discontent Report post Posted December 1, 2004 In Utero meant more to me than Nevermind. I was maybe a little too young (grade 4) to have had Nevermind mean something. But in grade 6-7 with In utero, it certainly molded by tastes....into Green day. But still, the album took me from House of Pain to Bad Religion and shit. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
godthedog 0 Report post Posted December 1, 2004 nostalgia is a wonderful thing. i have hours of mix cd's designed specifically sound like playlists from my old favorite radio station. i always get a little rush when i hear "mother mother" right next to "number one blind," and i don't ever want it to go away. and 'in utero' meant way more to me than 'nevermind'. with 'nevermind' i more or less knew what i was getting, but 'in utero' was this completely frightening & overwhelming experience. also the first great album that i hated on the first listen. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Giuseppe Zangara 0 Report post Posted December 1, 2004 I recall being prepared for In Utero by the time it came out; shortly before its release, I started getting into Melvins (thanks, Kurt!), so my ears were ready for anything abrasive. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites