RoxyRollah

Oops forgot my place, your tea is ready darling. .
Can I put my shoes back on as Im getting rather close to my final trimester. ..

__________________

Janszoon

*ahem* This glass of bourbon isn't going to fill itself.

__________________
A Night in the Life of the Invisible Man

Time & Place

25 Albums You Should Hear Before the Moon Crashes into the Earth and We All Die

last.fm

TheBig3

Blame, celebrate, what's in a word, really?

__________________
I've moved to a new address

Psy-Fi

Good indeed!

__________________

She's a Brick House

Urban Hat€monger ?

non corny hair metal....

__________________

Musicwhore A-Z

Great questions 'Soulflower'. To answer the thread question first, Nirvana simply received the most airplay not only on radio, but on MTV's 'Headbanger's Ball' AND '120 Minutes', respectively. Truth be told, there were only a handful of bands that "crossed over" like that at the time.

Also, a new generation of teens had emerged in 1991 and simply couldn't get behind what the hard rock bands of the 80's were doing. The tide was turning, so naturally the music of the era would follow suit. The music went into a darker direction, and rightfully so. You had the Gulf War, the Rodney King beating/police brutality in general, and the ultra conservative Bush/Quayle years. The social/political climate of the early 90's was our "late 60's", so to speak. Frankly, young people were searching for "the real deal" in popular music and many found it in bands like Nirvana, Pearl Jam, and for myself, Warrior Soul. A band ( from New York by the way..., but who cares? Their scathing social commentary in the songs preceded the "heavier" direction rock would take in the coming decade in my opinion ) that got lost in the shuffle because they were somewhat on the cusp of "hair metal" and "grunge". Two labels that I despise by the way. But I digress ( ).

Having said all that, I think the BANDS of the era "blame" Nirvana more than the "people" do, so to speak. Personally, I blame the RECORD LABELS more than anyone else. Yes, the formula became tiresome, however, that "genre" made a SELECT few in the industry MILLION$! One could argue that "hair metal" suffers the same stigma not unlike disco a decade earlier. Fad or not, time has been kind to the music more than it's given credit for. Some in the radio business have deemed it "the new classic rock", rightly or wrongly.

Be that as it may, YES, the Seattle scene was definitely a breath of fresh air! It was a great time, and the shot in the arm that rock NEEDED at the time without question. While I can't say I was a huge fan of Nirvana, I loved Alice In Chains, Soundgarden, and the Melvins to name a few. Dark or not, the music simply ROCKED, and that's all that mattered to me. As a prodigy of the "hair metal" era, I absolutely embraced the early 90's with ease. Then again, I had just turned 21 a few weeks prior to Nirvana's 'Nevermind' release ( Sept. 1991 ), so clearly I was young enough to enjoy what was to come at that time. No qualms whatsoever from this Gen X-er! Good times, and GREAT thread ( ). Interesting comments everybody both pro and con.

Trollheart

Man, I forgot about the Dogs! Gotta go dig that album up and spin it!

__________________
Trollheart: Signature-free since April 2018

Musicwhore A-Z

Believe it or not 'Soulflower' KISS was a huge influence on MANY of the bands from Seattle. By the same token, some of the 80's rock bands tried to somewhat distance themselves from KISS so as not to be associated with a "70's band". Unfortunately, rightly or wrongly KISS decided to ride the coattails of the same bands that THEY obviously influenced during the "hair metal" era. Go figure ( ). Just thought I'd clarify that. Great thread.

RoxyRollah

I'm so sorry, it won't happen again Janzsy...

__________________

Pet_Sounds

Well, at least you didn't give him beer. That would have been silly and immature.

__________________
Everybody's dying just to get the disease