Quote:
Originally Posted by Viper2
Rock music in the 80's was awesome! There were great bands with awesome talent like AC/DC, Van Halen, Def Leppard, etc. The music was fun and full of energy! Bands actually knew how to play their instruments well.
Then along one day came Nirvana and a new revolution of no-talent boring depressing whiny music started. These "grunge" bands barely even knew how to play their instruments, but somehow got popular. I remember the first time I saw one of Nirvana's videos (whichever that first popular one was), I thought to myself "Is this a joke?" "How did these kids with no-talent actually get a music video?" "This just sounds horrible!". But little did I know that was the beginning of the destruction of rock music.
Opinions?
|
This is pants on heads retarded.
People either champion or detest Nirvana for "killing" hair metal which is something they don't deserve all the credit for in the first place.
Though if you tried to think rationally and remember what kind of bands were big before Nirvana hit the scene you'd know that hair metal at that point was a terrible parody of itself and it was bound to die out anyway. Nirvana gave it a quick and painless death, you should be thankful. And besides, Nirvana were just in the right place at the right time, if it wasn't them, it would have been REM or Pearl Jam.
And in all seriousness, genres don't die, hair metal is still around and these idiots still parade themselves on celebrity reality shows and their songs are still flooding classic rock radio and they still perform for overweight, middle age failures at life who can't appreciate anything made after 1991.
To say any one band "ruined" rock music because they started a new musical movement is incredibly stupid, you could apply that logic to any new musical movement, you could say hair metal killed new wave which killed punk which killed prog which killed psychedelia which killed surf music which killed rock n roll which killed crooning and so on.
There is no "should" or "should not" in rock music, things just happen, music is in a constant state of evolution and only someone who can't look beyond the past would want to keep it in an eternal state of infancy.
I hate people who crap on Nirvana for not being "rock n roll" as they're usually the same people who crap on progressive rock for not being "rock n roll" as if rock n roll is the only kind of music that has a right to exist. It's arrogant as all hell.
Not all rock music has to be about bum sex or having a good time. Though if you don't think bands do that kind of music today you need to get out more. NO ONE has taken post grunge seriously in like a decade, why are you bitching about it now?
Songwriters have the right to write about whatever they feel, if that's not what interests you then fine, but don't bitch about how it's killing "fun time music" when the radio is chop full of music with the pretense of being "fun".
John Lennon wrote songs about depression and self pity, does that make him a hack? No. Nor was Cobain a hack. He may not have been Yngwie Malmsteen on the guitar, but his music meant something to a lot of people and it went a little deeper than just having good music to f*ck to.