[demonrail666]

Originally Posted by Glice

No. Just no. [to Herr Rail]

not even ironically?

[Glice]

Originally Posted by demonrail666

not even ironically?

No way no way, mna mna.

[atsonicpark]

Originally Posted by Genteel Death

I don't understand what is wrong with being formulaic, that's the very reason some bands are great.

Because Nirvana were a lot more creative and interesting in many of their songs than something like the straightforward, predictable Nevermind (aside from a few moments). Again, it goes back to ... I found this band sorta boring, and then I heard stuff like the main riff from NEGATIVE CREEP, or I really listened closely to LITHIUM and was like "hm that's kind of a weird/ugly little guitar thing he's doing in the verses there". I guess I was more attracted to the "wrong" aspect of the band (the "Wrong" notes and all that), not so much the... UNPLUGGED IN NEW YORK side. But ultimately, I think that's what makes the band so compelling and important; they were a pop band, but they also had their noisiness, as well as moments when they just rocked, and so on. There were many shades to their sound -- I think if a person were to just focus on most of Nevermind, they wouldn't be able to see all that. But, eh, the fact that so many people from so many walks of life like different aspects of this band is what makes them so compelling, in the end.

[Mortte Jousimo]

Originally Posted by atsonicpark

Because Nirvana were a lot more creative and interesting in many of their songs than something like the straightforward, predictable Nevermind (aside from a few moments). Again, it goes back to ... I found this band sorta boring, and then I heard stuff like the main riff from NEGATIVE CREEP, or I really listened closely to LITHIUM and was like "hm that's kind of a weird/ugly little guitar thing he's doing in the verses there". I guess I was more attracted to the "wrong" aspect of the band (the "Wrong" notes and all that), not so much the... UNPLUGGED IN NEW YORK side. But ultimately, I think that's what makes the band so compelling and important; they were a pop band, but they also had their noisiness, as well as moments when they just rocked, and so on. There were many shades to their sound -- I think if a person were to just focus on most of Nevermind, they wouldn't be able to see all that. But, eh, the fact that so many people from so many walks of life like different aspects of this band is what makes them so compelling, in the end.

I think also, the mostly music is much more interesting, if it is complicated. There are too many artist in world that make boring pop songs. But if you have ability to make interesting pop songs, it is true blessing! I think Cobain had it, Lennon-McCartney had it, Bowie had it, and Morrissey and Robert Smith still have it (any others not come into my mind at this moment)! And in Nirvana case I think they weren´t as good in their complicated songs as for example Sonic Youth.

On the other hand, there is also bands whose complexity seems to be the whole meaning of the band (for example Dream Theater). I don´t like the music that´s meaning is show your skills.

[Mortte Jousimo]

I have to add that of course it makes Nirvana much more interesting band that they made also other kind of stuff as pop songs.

[EVOLghost]

Originally Posted by atsonicpark

How do you all feel about WITH THE LIGHTS OUT? I always see it at pawn shops for a few bucks. I am not really interested in the discs, since I have mp3's of their best rare/b-sides and stuff. I just want to know if the DVD is worth checking out.

the dvd is ok. actually.....I haven't watched it in about 5 years...lol...

all I remember is the lasty song which is a performance of Seasons in the SUn.

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by knox

I disagree. That's Dave Grohl.

That is not fair for so many fucking reasons.. A) dave did all those vocal harmonies which were so subtle and yet are really a Nirvana staple, they represent a huge portion of tunes both live and recorded

b) if you listen to the Nirvana BEFORE Dave came when they went through any whorish drummer they could salvage and then listen to the music (even the same songs but live) AFTER dave, its fucking night and day. Dave brought a more pure punk/hardcore energy and dynamic to Nirvana in his driving, powerful, simple but effective drum work. I can recognize Dave's drumming on anything he works on, shit I had never heard anything at all about Them Crooked Vultures, and I by random coincidence hear a tune one day with my pops and say, "shit is that Dave Grohl on the drums?"

Dave's drum work is what made Nirvana, it shaped the music in its entirety, guitar work (especially as minimalist as Kurt's) is nothing without accompanying drum work. And these drums, especially live, bring out the best in the guitar player, its all fluid. Everything integrally works together, no matter how desperate Kurt was when he let Courtney convince him to change the original Nirvana layout and take 75% for really no reason at all..

Any musician here should be able to attest to the integral and fundamental importance of the fluidity and true collaboration between instrument players, its not like orchestral music where you just sit there are read the sheet.

[Glice]

Originally Posted by SuchFriendsAreDangerous

Any musician here should be able to attest to the integral and fundamental importance of the fluidity and true collaboration between instrument players, its not like orchestral music where you just sit there are read the sheet.

That's a bit of a misunderstanding of orchestral music there, methinks.

Plus, you seem to be working under the misapprehension that drummers are real musicians.

Mwa x

[knox]

Originally Posted by SuchFriendsAreDangerous

That is not fair for so many fucking reasons.. A) dave did all those vocal harmonies which were so subtle and yet are really a Nirvana staple, they represent a huge portion of tunes both live and recorded

b) if you listen to the Nirvana BEFORE Dave came when they went through any whorish drummer they could salvage and then listen to the music (even the same songs but live) AFTER dave, its fucking night and day. Dave brought a more pure punk/hardcore energy and dynamic to Nirvana in his driving, powerful, simple but effective drum work. I can recognize Dave's drumming on anything he works on, shit I had never heard anything at all about Them Crooked Vultures, and I by random coincidence hear a tune one day with my pops and say, "shit is that Dave Grohl on the drums?"

Dave's drum work is what made Nirvana, it shaped the music in its entirety, guitar work (especially as minimalist as Kurt's) is nothing without accompanying drum work. And these drums, especially live, bring out the best in the guitar player, its all fluid. Everything integrally works together, no matter how desperate Kurt was when he let Courtney convince him to change the original Nirvana layout and take 75% for really no reason at all..

Any musician here should be able to attest to the integral and fundamental importance of the fluidity and true collaboration between instrument players, its not like orchestral music where you just sit there are read the sheet.

regardless, he's a cunt.
many other drummers can drum without being cunts (so they say) and starting whiney shitty generic bands with stupid names writing mediocre to unbereable songs about how they miss someone they were never close to.

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by Glice

That's a bit of a misunderstanding of orchestral music there, methinks.


Mwa x

 

some will enter the military, some will learn short hand, and some will disappear in the middle of the night in a special train they're sending in.. its the only way really.. to bring about the Final Solution to the Orchestra question..

[Glice]

Link doesn't seem to go anywhere.

Seriously though, if you've ever seen a bad orchestra play, it's quite clear that there's a great deal more to playing orchestral music than just 'reading'. I think it's a rockist misunderstanding (that I also made prior to learning to read) to assume that the stave sets out a precise metrical relationship to a pulse. Part of the problem is that you rarely hear an orchestra make a wrong move on record (which they'll do in spades live) and the well-known orchestras are whipped something rotten.

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by Glice

Link doesn't seem to go anywhere.

Seriously though, if you've ever seen a bad orchestra play, it's quite clear that there's a great deal more to playing orchestral music than just 'reading'. I think it's a rockist misunderstanding (that I also made prior to learning to read) to assume that the stave sets out a precise metrical relationship to a pulse. Part of the problem is that you rarely hear an orchestra make a wrong move on record (which they'll do in spades live) and the well-known orchestras are whipped something rotten.

the link should go to a wav file of Ringo Starr in Frank Zappa's 200 Motels, which if you haven't seen, you should and then the context will be self-evident

[Glice]

I watched 10 seconds of this. If you make me watch anything else involving Zappa you will be personally responsible for causing a genocide. I just want you to know that.

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by Glice

I watched 10 seconds of this. If you make me watch anything else involving Zappa you will be personally responsible for causing a genocide. I just want you to know that.

200 motels is pure genius, trust me

[atsonicpark]

I'm not so sure about that. It gets really really old really really quickly. Parts of it are funny, and crazy, but honestly, the "making of" and the whole story behind the scenes is a lot more interesting than that mess of a film.

On the other hand, Zappa worked with Bruce Bickford many times -- he is a genius, probably the best claymationist of all time. Type his name into youtube and be blown away.

[ann ashtray]

Dave Grohl gets a lot of shit for no good reason. Dude's talented. His music is a bit straight forward, but it works for him. Fantastic. Also, he's got a fantastic sense of humor. Always a great thing.

[Glice]

I think you'll find, if you look to your little book of 'good reasons to give people shit', goatee features quite prominently. Think about it - when did people start disliking Grohl - when he was in Nirvana (no goatee)? NO! When he had a goatee? YES!

[Derek]

You know what the worst thing is that I find about the Foo Fighters? It's not the shitty, lazy songwriting, oh no. It's the vocals and how they're double-tracked in EVERY song. It sounds terrible and annoying.

[Glice]

Of course, his facial hair pales into insignificance when it comes to the glassability of Zappa's facebortion.

[Glice]

Originally Posted by Derek

Here laddy - You know what the worst thing is that I find about the Foo Fighters? Och, it's that terrible goatee. Hoots, it's shit

Fixed (with regional accent added)