mr dave

just because someone does vocals doesn't mean they're good singers. personally i really like cobain's delivery. but that does NOT make him a good singer. he could scream like it was no one's business but to actually sing - not so much. being well liked by his peers doesn't make him a good singer. writing great songs does not make someone a good singer. bob dylan and leonard cohen should not be allowed near microphones.

if anything it seems like subpop were willing to sign anyone who wanted to put something out in the seattle area. there are labels like that in my town too. they don't really give a crap about you or your band so long as you pay the bill to put your record out until you start making money for their business. and still, they've got their main bands with personal friends from high school that come first.

ideally, yeah sure it would be awesome if label heads really took the time to nurture and cultivate their talent but then we'd be calling the bands corporate shills.

fact is - until teen spirit, nirvana was just another seattle band. they had hooks, and a decent record. but cobain was still a junkie. hard drugs = RISK. there's little else that needs to be said on that. had he just been a pothead it probably wouldn't have been such an issue. heroin on the other hand is a big deal.

put yourself in the shoes of a major label A&R guy how do you sell a band with a screaming junkie and sloppy power chords to your boss? geffen basically went in on the tail end of the scene, scooped up the leftovers, scored big and then watched everyone else scrape the grime from the bottom of the barrel. the reason the other bands were being picked up first is because they seemed like safe bets - and they were. i really don't think it was an issue of nirvana trying to remain obscure. i REALLY don't think bleach would be as influential as most people consider it had there not been nevermind to compare it to.

__________________
i am the universe