The Official Nirvana/Kurt Cobain Thread (pop, punk, genre, cover)

[Gates_of_Iscariot]

Bashing on Nirvana is frequently seen everywhere. It seems as though it has turned more in favor to do the above mentioned than judge them for your self. Judging by most of the posters in this threads opinions. I can see two categories, blind support, with out the necessary criticisms or critique, or in depth view, or pure disdain for them, due to borrowed musical sound. I find Nirvana to be an appealing band, though some songs are skippable, and sub par, pour example In bloom, or Polly. Polly is good however, outdone to an extent, as is the case with most songs in the writing manner of Polly.

[Rainard Jalen]

I've noticed of late that this is not anything profound to question, there are plenty of people who'd say they were not. However, the question for me originated somewhere back when I started listening to Pearl Jam. Because I'd been so used to associating Nirvana with basically embodying grunge music, when hearing PJ I thought to myself, hey, this doesn't sound very "grungey" at all really - it just sounds like classic old-school rock with a rougher edge to it and a vocalist with a serious throat infection.

I made a post to that effect here. I was, to my surprise, told that actually it's PEARL JAM that pretty much define grunge. That old rock + a strong male vocalist and dirty/rough recording aesthetic was really, in summary, what "grunge" was. Listening to a few other bands of the early grunge movement, I realized that this claim was pretty much spot on.

In that case, where does this leave Nirvana? They don't really sound like any of those bands. They're much more punky, and furthermore don't seem to derive from old rock at all. The punk influences coupled with the Pixies-esque abrasive melodic style seems to indicate that Nirvana owed their origins more to late 80s indie rock than anything else.

Looking up a bit on the topic I've found that a number of writers tend to separate Nirvana from all that "Seattle-sound" business. I'm half inclined to agree. Where do others stand on the matter?

[sleepy jack]

Grunge is more of a movement than a genre, most of the bands sound nothing alike. Just look at the "big 4" grunge bands: Nirvana, Pearl Jam, Alice in Chains and Soundgarden. The only thing they all really had in common was location, image, timing and they all played some form of distorted rock.

[Rainard Jalen]

Originally Posted by Crowquill

Grunge is more of a movement than a genre, most of the bands sound nothing alike. Just look at the "big 4" grunge bands: Nirvana, Pearl Jam, Alice in Chains and Soundgarden. The only thing they all really had in common was location, image, timing and they all played some form of distorted rock.

Yeah, that is a good point, though if it had to be stated which of those bands had the sound that most resembled the majority of bands in the movement, wouldn't it be Pearl Jam?

And then, even if it was a movement rather than a genre, did Nirvana belong in the movement? Some at the time supposedly would have argued they were misfits, too punky.

Even when looking at the bigger post-grunge bands - I find, for example, that bands like Creed tend to have a lot more in common with Pearl Jam.

Originally Posted by Wayfarer

Green River

Well they were mid-eighties before "grunge" was even spoken of. I think Nirvana deriving from them suggests their college rock influences more than anything else.


I think In Utero was in some ways probably intended to distance from the mainstreamness of the grunge movement and get back some indie cred.

[sleepy jack]

Originally Posted by Rainard Jalen

Yeah, that is a good point, though if it had to be stated which of those bands had the sound that most resembled the majority of bands in the movement, wouldn't it be Pearl Jam?

And then, even if it was a movement rather than a genre, did Nirvana belong in the movement? Some at the time supposedly would have argued they were misfits, too punky.

Even when looking at the bigger post-grunge bands - I find, for example, that bands like Creed tend to have a lot more in common with Pearl Jam.


Well they were mid-eighties before "grunge" was even spoken of. I think Nirvana deriving from them suggests their college rock influences more than anything else.


I think In Utero was in some ways probably intended to distance from the mainstreamness of the grunge movement and get back some indie cred.

Um Nirvana practically embodied the movement, Smells Like Teen Spirit pretty muched kicked it off. I don't know where you're getting you're facts from but grunge bands are all over the sonic map. The reason most post-grunge bands sound like Pearl Jam is because Pearl Jam is the most radio friendly.

[Mockingbird!]

YEs, Nirvana were with out a doubt a grunge band, the best there was

[TheCaster]

Nirvana played a big part in the grundge movement... although they were kinda caught in between 'classic' rock and grunde so yeah

[sleepy jack]

Originally Posted by TheCaster

they were kinda caught in between 'classic' rock and grunde so yeah

Care to explain that one?

[TheCaster]

like when 'classic' or old rock slowed down and broke into punk and grundge nirvana is kinda in the middle of classic and grundge so in some songs theyre more of the old stuff, some are inbetween, and others and grundge

i probably butchered that explaination.. im rather tired

[sleepy jack]

Um, punk was anything but slowed down and Nirvana is more influenced and borrowed from 80s alternative rock acts than The Byrds, Sabbath or any 'classic rock'. I don't even really understand what you're saying.