sleepy jack

You're not paying attention to what I'm saying are you? It's very unfair to compare any other band to Nirvana's success because Nirvana was the most successful.

__________________

bardonodude

I couldnt agree more, In Utero is such a departure from what they did previously. I love when bands get heavier and less poppy haha, like finch with Say Hello To Sunshine

mr dave

i believe i stated subpop seemed to sign anyone who wanted to release something around seattle. my thing was always about junkie bands getting signed to a major label (sorry if i wasn't super clear). that is, unless subpop has grown to be considered one of the major players...

CQ - when i made the comment about earnings i meant while the bands were all active. nirvana produced immediate results for their label. i'm not talking posthumous revenue from courtney love selling off rights to tunes. they signed in april and were massive by october. from the get go nirvana proved they were more than a seattle band, unfortunately most of the other grunge bands were really just seattle bands.

__________________
i am the universe

sleepy jack

Yeah but even comparing the more successful acts to Nirvana like Pearl Jam, Soundgarden and Alice in Chains is pretty unfair because as Kurt Cobain himself said it was like the new Beatlesmania. Smells Like Teen Spirit was the biggest song of the decade in fact I'd say very few songs even had the impact it had. I can only think of a few, Darling Nikki, God Save the Queen, point is Nirvana were far more successful than their contemporaries so comparison money-wise to them is unfair.

__________________

mr dave

fine don't look at the money. look at the people going to their shows instead as a measure of success. they influenced a LARGE portion of my generation who were supposed to be little more than lazy slackers to get off their couches and go out to a show. more so than all the other seattle bands. especially the other junkie ones.

__________________
i am the universe

sleepy jack

I still really think its unfair compare Nirvana to anyone because they were the biggest band of the 90s. I realize I keep repeating the same thing over and over but not even Pearl Jam compares to them and they were the second biggest grunge band.

__________________

mr dave

since when is life fair? outside of childhood and amateur sports when is fairness truly a factor? besides, how is it unfair to contemplate the perception of mainstream music prior to 1991 from a business perspective? or to consider how nirvana would have come across prior to their success.

i think it cheapens the other bands of that era to have to consider them separately from one of their contemporaries.

__________________
i am the universe

sleepy jack

Um, this is a music debate not life and yeah maybe it does but to go "Oh all those bands that disprove my original point don't count because none were as successful as Nirvana" is pretty stupid considering no other grunge band was as successful as Nirvana.

__________________

Night_Lamp

Close call, but I listen to 'In Utero' more often. I like the downtuning, like on 'Heart-Shaped Box'. I like the sound of the album. Butch Vig is an awesome producer- 'Gish' is great, but I like the dark sound of IU better to suit the music.

__________________
LP'S/CDS - TUBES - HEADPHONES

mr dave

how is that different or less stupid than saying nirvana shouldn't be compared to anyone because they were too famous?

__________________
i am the universe