Azazello1313 Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 the greatest american band has yet to get together. brentastic fronting, alexg on bass, and cliaz' old avatar on drums. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 Put me on the list of people who absolutely can't stand the Doors. Unless you want to lie around shooting heroine until you kill yourself, then it's the perfect mood music. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 Very well said...they definately changed the MTV culture but were not nearly as revolutionary as many make them out to be... Â Well, hold on a sec. While I agree that there were a handful of bands that could have become Nirvana, they were the band that resonated with the disaffected youth and Kurt Cobain is a certifiable rock icon. Nirvana was the most instrumental band from that era in changing popular culture overnight. Maybe Nirvana won't influence as many musicians as some of their predecessors, but I don't see how they weren't revolutionary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 Well, hold on a sec. While I agree that there were a handful of bands that could have become Nirvana, they were the band that resonated with the disaffected youth and Kurt Cobain is a certifiable rock icon. Nirvana was the most instrumental band from that era in changing popular culture overnight. Maybe Nirvana won't influence as many musicians as some of their predecessors, but I don't see how they weren't revolutionary. Â they were revolutionary in terms of what was popular. in terms of actual music, not so much. i guess it comes down to which one you place more value on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexgaddis Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 the greatest american band has yet to get together. brentastic fronting, alexg on bass, and cliaz' old avatar on drums. The Mindless Noodlers debut album comes out 2010 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 they were revolutionary in terms of what was popular. in terms of actual music, not so much. i guess it comes down to which one you place more value on. Â I would say the latter, but as Sheik mentioned, putting the death nail in Winger/Warrant/Great White coffin was an achievement that we are too quick to forget. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 (edited) Put me on the list of people who absolutely can't stand the Doors. Unless you want to lie around shooting heroine until you kill yourself, then it's the perfect mood music. The Doors have too many good tracks to not be considered. The End is a masterpiece and the same could be said of Riders On The Storm, Light My Fire, LA Woman and Roadhouse Blues, among others. They were also completely different to what had come before and their influence is undeniable. While death is definitely something that can elevate a band to iconic status (see Nirvana and any number of other bands), The Doors were an original that changed at least part of rock music. Whether you like their music or not is simply a matter of taste. Edited July 19, 2007 by Ursa Majoris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 the doors are ok. the main thing i don't like about them is their organist. f'n drives me up a wall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thews40 Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 they were revolutionary in terms of what was popular. in terms of actual music, not so much. i guess it comes down to which one you place more value on. I disagree. As the hair bands were churning out the same ol garbage, grunge was different and Nirvana and Pearl Jam made the music popular. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 the doors are ok. the main thing i don't like about them is their organist. f'n drives me up a wall. Really trendy at the time. I was listening to a 70s compilation yesterday and one of the tracks was Sylvia by Focus, the Dutch band. That's a nice piece but Thijs Van Leer's keyboards and yodeling vocals are.....um...an acquired taste. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 they were revolutionary in terms of what was popular. in terms of actual music, not so much. i guess it comes down to which one you place more value on. I disagree. As the hair bands were churning out the same ol garbage, grunge was different and Nirvana and Pearl Jam made the music popular. Â sounds like you agree to me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godtomsatan Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 (edited) Very well said...they definately changed the MTV culture but were not nearly as revolutionary as many make them out to be... Â I totally disagree. Â After September 1991, the sound of popular music changed. I don't know how you can argue this one at all. It wasn't all Nirvana (Soundgarden, AIC, and Pearl Jam were all as influential), but it was mostly Smells Like Teen Spirit. Wardrobes changed, people wore flannel, torn jeans, thrift store accessorizing became vogue. Men grew goatees, longer hair became acceptable. Hell, dyed hair became acceptable. Movies started being different and edgier. "Alternative" lifestyle started going mainstream. DIY stopped being a punk ethos, but became a mantra for an entire industry that would revolutionize the American economy. Â No coincidence that a year later, Bill Clinton was in the White House? Â Not saying it was NIrvana that was responsible all this, but they were the first massive explosive element off the shift in the American culture of the early 1990s. Edited July 19, 2007 by godtomsatan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexgaddis Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 I totally disagree. After September 1991, the sound of popular music changed. I don't know how you can argue this one at all. It wasn't all Nirvana (Soundgarden, AIC, and Pearl Jam were all as influential), but it was mostly Smells Like Teen Spirit. Wardrobes changed, people wore flannel, torn jeans, thrift store accessorizing became vogue. Men grew goatees, longer hair became acceptable. Hell, dyed hair became acceptable. Movies started being different and edgier. "Alternative" lifestyle started going mainstream. DIY stopped being a punk ethos, but became a mantra for an entire industry that would revolutionize the American economy.  No coincidence that a year later, Bill Clinton is in the White House?  Not saying it was NIrvana that was responsible all this, but they were the first massive explosive element off the shift in the American culture of the early 1990s. You are agreeing with AZ and myself...he was just saying there were bands like Husker Du, the Replacements and Sonic Youth before Nirvana... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 I totally disagree. After September 1991, the sound of popular music changed. I don't know how you can argue this one at all. It wasn't all Nirvana (Soundgarden, AIC, and Pearl Jam were all as influential), but it was mostly Smells Like Teen Spirit. Wardrobes changed, people wore flannel, torn jeans, thrift store accessorizing became vogue. Men grew goatees, longer hair became acceptable. Hell, dyed hair became acceptable. Movies started being different and edgier. "Alternative" lifestyle started going mainstream. DIY stopped being a punk ethos, but became a mantra for an entire industry that would revolutionize the American economy.  No coincidence that a year later, Bill Clinton was in the White House?  Not saying it was NIrvana that was responsible all this, but they were the first massive explosive element off the shift in the American culture of the early 1990s. IMO, grunge was as important a development in rock music as punk in the late 70s. Punk showed that pretty much anyone could form a band, get up on stage and thrash away. Punk returned rock to it's club and small venue roots, as well as being hard edged and exciting. Some of the bands generated by the punk revolution turned out to be damn good - one or two were great. Grunge really did the same thing 15 years later when rock was becoming moribund once more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 You are agreeing with AZ and myself...he was just saying there were bands like Husker Du, the Replacements and Sonic Youth before Nirvana... Â Semantics. I'm not sure that the word, revolutionary, is the best term to describe what you guys are saying. Â Was Nirvana groundbreaking or original when they came out? No. Â Were they instrumental in changing the face of rock music long term? Probably not. Â Were they revolutionary? Hell yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexgaddis Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 Semantics. I'm not sure that the word, revolutionary, is the best term to describe what you guys are saying. Â Was Nirvana groundbreaking or original when they came out? No. Â Were they instrumental in changing the face of rock music long term? Probably not. Â Were they revolutionary? Hell yes. of course...I meant musically... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aqualung Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 Mother Love Bone  Temple of Dog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 Boy, that's tough. I put a lot of stock into how well a band plays live, so I'd say it's a tie between the Dead and Pearl Jam. Nothing beats great live music. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thews40 Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 sounds like you agree to me Not really. My point was that they made the music popular... not that it was already popular. Revolutionary music like Elvis and the Beatles have their own influences, but changing the music scene to something new doesn't happen often. The rock n roll transition from hair bands to grunge happened quickly, and the front runners in making that happen would be Nirvana and Pearl Jam IMO. There has to many bands that had some input, but Nevermind and 10 busted it all loose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 Semantics. I'm not sure that the word, revolutionary, is the best term to describe what you guys are saying. Â Was Nirvana groundbreaking or original when they came out? No. Â Were they instrumental in changing the face of rock music long term? Probably not. Â Were they revolutionary? Hell yes. Â i'm not sure why you think that defining "revolutionary" strictly according to effect on popular culture is so clearly the best way to define it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 I disagree. Pearl Jam didn't influence in nearly the same way Nirvana did. Eddie Vedder is a near perfect gene-splice between Neil Young and Chris Cornell. He's a nearly perfect front man, and a GREAT rock star. But Cobain is a one of a kind rock idol, and a the face of a generation that hundreds of bands tried to copy, and all came up short. He's like a Jimi Hendrix or Janis Joplin or John Lennon - a true icon. I guess what I'm trying to say is, Vedder is like the Monkeys. Kurt is like the Beatles.  Agreed about Cornell (big fan), but completely disagree about your last point. Cobain was an innovator of sorts and wrote phenominal songs with his limited technical ability, but the only thing that he has in common with Lennon and Hendrix is that he's dead. Not to diminish Kurt's impact, but you can't be the greatest front-man of your generation when your freaking drummer can sing and play guitar better than you (and write some pretty decent songs on his own as well).  Van Halen ain't guitar solo alone. In their prime (VH II through 1984), David Lee Roth was supremo badass #1. We ALL wanted to grow up and be as cool as him.  I love me some VH. If they had written semi-intelligent lyrics and avoid the mid/late '80s ghey synthesizer phase, I might've put them at the top. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 i'm not sure why you think that defining "revolutionary" strictly according to effect on popular culture is so clearly the best way to define it. Â Â I'm not. I was responding to a comment from Alex in which he later clarified he was omitting the pop culture effect out of the equation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REZ Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 For me, Springsteen. half the songs on my Ipod are his. I've been into most of those groups at one time or other but he one I always listen to is Springsteen. Fantastic in concert as well. I never really got back into VH after seeing them in concert in 83. The whole band was wasted and couldn't get through one song without f'n it up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 IMO, grunge was as important a development in rock music as punk in the late 70s. Â i disagree with that. grunge was an enormous fad that essentially came and went in the span of a few years. don't get me wrong, as fads go, it was a GOOD fad -- the music was pretty good, and it killed vapid hair metal bands (like van halen ). but punk changed EVERYTHING about rock n' roll from the late 70s forward. THAT is a true "revolution". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polksalet Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 ZZ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.