what kind of music are you into?

[intothevoid]

me 2

Metal grouphug ---->

Loving the new In Flames album:

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onzd6lkLUwA"]YouTube - ‪In flames - Sounds of a playground fading "Full Song"‬‏[/ame]

Not a 'Whoracle' or 'Jester Race' but still awesome

 

[Shatterer of Dreams]

Dirty was the culmination of their first decade. It was the most heavily produced album up to that point. Takes away a bit of the allure, but Kim Gordon's writing on it was incredible.

It's definitely one of the top five albums from the turn of the decade. That, Ritual de lo Habitual, Blood Sugar Sex Magik, Appetite for Destruction, and...

...hmm. Having trouble coming up with another one as singular as those. Primus...Nirvana...Beastie Boys...

Siamese Dream?...........

Goo came out in 1990 so the dedinately trumps Dirty for top 90's album - for me that is. But again great album, fantastic tour and so on.

Edit - apitite was released in the 80's

 

[intothevoid]

Appetite was '87

I'd be a different person today if that album didn't exist - profound

 

[devilof76]

That's why I said turn of the decade. I'm thinking of the period of roughly '87 - '93. Nothing's Shocking was '88. ...And Justice for All was '88. Mother's Milk was '89. Doolittle was '90. Mudhoney in '91. Siamese Dream was '93.

Things completely changed when Appetite for Destruction came out. So much great music rose to the surface. Nevermind was major, but GnR did it first.

 

[Batty]

That's too bad because Sonic Youth are amazing. All of that organized chaos makes a wall of sound that truly is beautiful. Daydream Nation, Sister, and Goo are masterpieces.

QFT.

I love Sonic Youth. I was lucky enough to see them on the Daydream Nation tour back in '88.

 

[Shatterer of Dreams]

That's why I said turn of the decade. I'm thinking of the period of roughly '87 - '93. Nothing's Shocking was '88. ...And Justice for All was '88. Mother's Milk was '89. Doolittle was '90. Mudhoney in '91. Siamese Dream was '93.

Things completely changed when Appetite for Destruction came out. So much great music rose to the surface. Nevermind was major, but GnR did it first.

I see what you are saying. I wouldn't say that Appetites big success was the precursor to Nevermind though because that truly is apples and oranges. Appetite got huge during Metal's heyday and wasn't really a shock that it happened. Not taking anything away from the album at all, but Nevermind was a complete culture shift, and for those who were not already in the underground music scene at the time, came out of nowhere. Which is why Nevermind gets the praise that it does.

Again nothing against Appetite, it goes well beyond "metal" but it was not a cultural shift.

 

[Shatterer of Dreams]

QFT.

I love Sonic Youth. I was lucky enough to see them on the Daydream Nation tour back in '88.

me too!

 

[devilof76]

You guys make me wish I was old.

I see what you are saying. I wouldn't say that Appetites big success was the precursor to Nevermind though because that truly is apples and oranges. Appetite got huge during Metal's heyday and wasn't really a shock that it happened. Not taking anything away from the album at all, but Nevermind was a complete culture shift, and for those who were not already in the underground music scene at the time, came out of nowhere. Which is why Nevermind gets the praise that it does.

Again nothing against Appetite, it goes well beyond "metal" but it was not a cultural shift.

I understand what you're saying, but I'm thinking of things in terms of great rock n roll. Things sucked at the Billboard level for a while before GnR's debut (which personally, was their beginning and end). That album was a turning point.

Nevermind was a turning point for popular music, but not much of a surprise if you had been paying attention to music below the 'pop' line. It also wasn't as awesome as many of its predecessors. What it did was cross the line, and it definitely deserves credit that Appetite for Destruction does not.

 

[Shatterer of Dreams]

Hey I'm not old (only 37) but having older siblings came in handy back in the day (saw a lot of shows that I wouldnt have been able to without the sister).

I can totally agree with your last post!

 

[rawkneehuang]

I like Dirty, quite a bit, but i wouldn't consider it a masterpiece, same with Washing Machine.

I never did buy into Washing Machine too, but Dirty for me was as good as it gets. The way Thurston Moore could play that insane intro for 100% live is just too much.

Dirty was the culmination of their first decade. It was the most heavily produced album up to that point. Takes away a bit of the allure, but Kim Gordon's writing on it was incredible.

It's definitely one of the top five albums from the turn of the decade. That, Ritual de lo Habitual, Blood Sugar Sex Magik, Appetite for Destruction, and...

...hmm. Having trouble coming up with another one as singular as those. Primus...Nirvana...Beastie Boys...

Appetite! Whoa!

QFT.

I love Sonic Youth. I was lucky enough to see them on the Daydream Nation tour back in '88.

Unfortunately for me, the only gigs of Sonic Youth i've seen were on VHS. Till they decided to come to our little island for a spin with Foo Fighters in '95

 

[devilof76]

Hey I'm not old (only 37) but having older siblings came in handy back in the day (saw a lot of shows that I wouldnt have been able to without the sister).

I'm 36, but I'm the oldest so no siblings to hook me up. I was in the middle of nowhere too.

Wait. (looks around) I'm still in the middle of nowhere.

I can totally agree with your last post!

Awesome.

 

[karamazov80]

Pixies deserved the fame that Nirvana got, IMO, but they were just a bit too far ahead of their time. When Nirvana hit, it was the perfect storm--right album, right time. And maybe the fact that Nirvana were moodier and more charismatic in their way played some role. . .

 

[intothevoid]

I know i'll get flamed to bits for this but while I do like Nirvana (as opposed to love), I think they were a terrible influence on a whole generation of musicians because the message Nirvana gave somehow was basically music did not have to be complex to be meaningful or accepted. (I think Nirvana's music while simple, did in fact have meaning).

The generation of post Nirvana rock/grunge/alt rock bands basically took that to mean ok our lyrics can be dumb and our songs can have 3 chords and we'll put 10 simple songs together and create an album - record companies supported this and lo and behold pretty much everything post Nirvana well into the 2000s was dumbed down meaningless and talentless music.

That is my opinion anyway.

 

[devilof76]

You sure that wasn't just the posers changing their tune to fit the new mold? Nirvana may have been simple in terms of what they made their songs out of, but they were complex in terms of their composition.

Record companies will always troll for what fits the lastest trend, and there will always be bands looking to be groomed for one-hit stardom. It happened to the grunge bands too. Once those guys were considered marketable, they were expected to produce the same commercially successful product. It is arguably what drove Cobain to blow his head off.

But there was still amazing music being made through the 90's, just as there was during the 80's when hair bands dominated the corporate bank accounts. A lot of the good music in the 90's got it's chance to be made because of the attention Nirvana drew to music outside of the 80's metal paradigm.

 

[rawkneehuang]

I know i'll get flamed to bits for this but while I do like Nirvana (as opposed to love), I think they were a terrible influence on a whole generation of musicians because the message Nirvana gave somehow was basically music did not have to be complex to be meaningful or accepted. (I think Nirvana's music while simple, did in fact have meaning).

The generation of post Nirvana rock/grunge/alt rock bands basically took that to mean ok our lyrics can be dumb and our songs can have 3 chords and we'll put 10 simple songs together and create an album - record companies supported this and lo and behold pretty much everything post Nirvana well into the 2000s was dumbed down meaningless and talentless music.

That is my opinion anyway.

Nice take on that, have to agree it's pretty true to a certain degree.

On that note, i really miss the days when heavy metal music was full of complexity.. one track alone can be so diverse it could be an album on it's own going by today's standards.. the likes of King Diamond, Metallica (before they chopped off their locks) Manowar, Sabbath.. I miss them all..

 

[intothevoid]

You sure that wasn't just the posers changing their tune to fit the new mold? Nirvana may have been simple in terms of what they made their songs out of, but they were complex in terms of their composition.

Record companies will always troll for what fits the lastest trend, and there will always be bands looking to be groomed for one-hit stardom. It happened to the grunge bands too. Once those guys were considered marketable, they were expected to produce the same commercially successful product. It is arguably what drove Cobain to blow his head off.

But there was still amazing music being made through the 90's, just as there was during the 80's when hair bands dominated the corporate bank accounts. A lot of the good music in the 90's got it's chance to be made because of the attention Nirvana drew to music outside of the 80's metal paradigm.

I agree there was still amazing music to be found in the 90s amidst the overwhelmingly large amounts of tripe (Tool for example).

Regarding posers changing to fit the new mould...hmmm some yes, but my point was more in regards to the new generation of bands. Not the oldies that lost their roots (as rawkneehuang points out - Metallica being major culprits).

 

[rawkneehuang]

Regarding posers changing to fit the new mould...hmmm some yes, but my point was more in regards to the new generation of bands. Not the oldies that lost their roots (as rawkneehuang points out - Metallica being major culprits).

Metallica were totally unrecognizable. I believe that deep down they are still demons but chose to do things that are more commercially viable.

new generations of bands.. hmmm.. i'm so nostalgic that i've never paid attention to a single one.. Maybe i should do a search sometime soon just to keep up.

 

[Shatterer of Dreams]

Pixies deserved the fame that Nirvana got, IMO, but they were just a bit too far ahead of their time. When Nirvana hit, it was the perfect storm--right album, right time. And maybe the fact that Nirvana were moodier and more charismatic in their way played some role. . .

Agreed the Pixies made that mold what it was and to their credit Nirvana constantly said that they ripped off the Pixies. You're probably right about the moodiness, though if you listen to Black Francis' lyrics, they were really dark but they were more crazy than woe is me.

You sure that wasn't just the posers changing their tune to fit the new mold? Nirvana may have been simple in terms of what they made their songs out of, but they were complex in terms of their composition.

Record companies will always troll for what fits the lastest trend, and there will always be bands looking to be groomed for one-hit stardom. It happened to the grunge bands too. Once those guys were considered marketable, they were expected to produce the same commercially successful product. It is arguably what drove Cobain to blow his head off.

But there was still amazing music being made through the 90's, just as there was during the 80's when hair bands dominated the corporate bank accounts. A lot of the good music in the 90's got it's chance to be made because of the attention Nirvana drew to music outside of the 80's metal paradigm.

Yeah Devil is right this happens time and time again, look what happened to punk after that broke, rock and roll and now hip hop is dealing with it. The problem of stupid bands trying to make money off simplicity is not a post Nirvana phenonenom, this just may have been the first time that you were able to notice it because you were old enough to.

 

[intothevoid]

I still love Metallica however. While Load/Reload was not the same band, it was still a good band. Loved Death Magnetic. Still one of the best live experiences one could hope to have.

 

[intothevoid]

Yeah Devil is right this happens time and time again, look what happened to punk after that broke, rock and roll and now hip hop is dealing with it. The problem of stupid bands trying to make money off simplicity is not a post Nirvana phenonenom, this just may have been the first time that you were able to notice it because you were old enough to.

Can't argue with that. I'm speaking from my own growing up experience. I'm 25 btw