More Complete Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Anyway. I'm not here to convince anyone otherwise. I just found it surprising that so many votes went to Dave. To each their own. It's a message board for a sports team. You think people here know anything about music? Seriously though, on a musicians message board (such as Harmony Central for example) I bet votes would lean towards Kurt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigMike619 Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 It's a message board for a sports team. You think people here know anything about music? Seriously though, on a musicians message board (such as Harmony Central for example) I bet votes would lean towards Kurt. I agree, and the ages should also be taken in to account. People around our age actually remember how "GLAM" MTV was and how everything revolved around bubble gum rock. When Seattle "exploded" it was amazing. I remember when teen spirit was played almost every hour at least once. They even had a version of the video that scrolled the words to the song. It was just huge... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matty dread Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 It's a shame we didn't get to see what Cobain could have become. I have a feeling Nirvana wouldn't have lasted much longer anyway, and I could have pictured Cobain spinning off and doing his own thing and probably doing things much different than Nirvana. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big#44 Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 It's a message board for a sports team. You think people here know anything about music? Seriously though, on a musicians message board (such as Harmony Central for example) I bet votes would lean towards Kurt. i think it would be the other way around. musicians respect musicians. kurt couldnt play for crap. musicians listen to more then just the catchy chorus, or the lyrics. they recognize songs by notes and structures..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rdsknbill Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Cobain was a good lyricist with some emotional problems. Grohl is a much better musician. Overall though. Nirvana is overated **** that makes me want to take an ICE PICK to my ****ing ears anytime I hear it.The only song that is worth anything a **** is lake of fire, and that was with the Meat Puppets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
More Complete Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 i think it would be the other way around. musicians respect musicians. kurt couldnt play for crap. musicians listen to more then just the catchy chorus, or the lyrics. they recognize songs by notes and structures..... I am a musician. I would bet that you are not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigMike619 Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Cobain was a good lyricist with some emotional problems. Grohl is a much better musician.Overall though. Nirvana is overated **** that makes me want to take an ICE PICK to my ****ing ears anytime I hear it.The only song that is worth anything a **** is lake of fire, and that was with the Meat Puppets. remind me to bring my nirvana collection to the next tailgate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rdsknbill Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Double damn post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dockeryfan Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 It's a message board for a sports team. You think people here know anything about music? Seriously though, on a musicians message board (such as Harmony Central for example) I bet votes would lean towards Kurt. Yes. The vote would be in favor of Cobain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianforster Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 I love that all the music snobs are assuming that because their golden boy isn't winning that ES knows nothing about music. To many of your surprise, YOU ARE ALL EXTREMESKINS POSTERS AS WELL. Making you a member of the group that many of you are claiming "know nothing about music" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigMike619 Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Double damn post hahaha..i was like "damn, bill meant that **** big time!!" Yes. The vote would be in favor of Cobain. and it would be. you are 100000% correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinz4Life12 Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 cobain is sneaking up slowly in the poll Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'Pablo Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 I love that all the music snobs are assuming that because their golden boy isn't winning that ES knows nothing about music.To many of your surprise, YOU ARE ALL EXTREMESKINS POSTERS AS WELL. Making you a member of the group that many of you are claiming "know nothing about music" Are they music snobs or extremeskins posters? Or do these distinctions need to be mutually exclusive? It seems that you’ve made this overly broad assertion from this quote: It's a message board for a sports team. You think people here know anything about music? Seriously though, on a musicians message board (such as Harmony Central for example) I bet votes would lean towards Kurt. Based on that one rhetorical question, do you honestly believe that this poster meant that EVERYONE on this board is ignorant of music? For what it’s worth, there is a ton of ignorance toward Kurt Cobain on this board: Agreed. I don't think Cobain could come to close with all that Grohl has accomplished.To me Nirvana was always a quick hit that only really lasted because of how Cobain died not their actual music. Nirvana, based on the album sales Mike posted, has eclipsed the Foo Fighters more than 2X over. It may be considered an irrelevant fact, but considering the amount of albums the Foo Fighters have released, their numbers should at least be comparable. Grohl is alternative rock. Nirvana, Foo Fighters, Queens of the Stone Age, he does some stuff with Tenacious D too.Cobain was talented but Grohl was the money member of Nirvana. Grohl’s contributions to Nirvana were limited to one song, “Marigold,” a b-side and two riffs on In Utero. Bleach AND Nevermind were both written prior to Grohl’s arrival. Cobain also wrote everything that Grohl played. Certainly possible. But since he didnt, we're left with radio stations playing average rock songs ad nauseum because he's now seen as some sort of musical genius. Also, there wasnt a whole lot of decent music being made in the early 90s to compare it to.Give me Soundgarden over Nirvana any day of the week. There is just no backing to this statement. Kurt Cobain influenced the likes of Nickelback and AFI? I think those bands would sooner cite Pearl Jam and Green Day, respectively, before paying homage to the “The Martyr.” Gotta be Grohl. He's a composer. Cobain is decomposed. Cobain wrote 99% of Nirvana’s tracks, in their entirety (guitars, bass, drums, and vocals). Grohl, no question. He can sing better than Cobain could, he can drum, which I don't believe Cobain could do, and I'm not sure that Cobain was much of a guitar player either.And whether rock is safe or not, who cares? Foo Fighters make good music. Everlong, Learn to Fly, etc...plenty of good songs. Nirvana was an alright band, but I rarely listen to them anymore. Cobain’s first instrument was the drums. He was also a far better guitarist than was ever displayed with Nirvana. There are a few Zeppelin and Van Halen covers floating around with Kurt on guitar. Cobain was all about simple melodies and constantly cites the Beatles and first wave punk rock as an influence. True, but Grohl was part of that invention. It's hard to tell how much of Nirvana was Grohl and how much of it was Cobain. With the success that Grohl has had I'd guess he was a big part of that invention, don't you think?Besides, the front man always get's the credit for success. Hence Cobains hype. Grohl wrote one song for Nirvana. To take a quote from Grohl’s wiki page, "I was in awe of frontman Kurt Cobain's songs. And intimidated. I thought it was best that I keep my songs to myself." Grohl easily. He is a musician, and he is much more accomplished then I think Cobain ever would have been. Nirvana's first album, while great was what I believe to be little more than a flash in the pan. The album has not aged well, and sounds dated.Now Pearl Jam: Ten on the other hand. :point2sky As has already been pointed out, Nirvana’s first album was Bleach. Also, most of Incesticide was released between Bleach and Nevermind as b-sides and eps. All of this said, I'm in support of Kurt over Dave. Kurt wrote better melodies (IMO), introduced a brand new genre to the mainstream (Alice in Chains was supposed to be first, but they didn't catch on), and I'm a fan of his far more cerebral lyrics (lots of references to Burroughs and Pynchon). However, Dave is probably a better musician. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigMike619 Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Grohl’s contributions to Nirvana were limited to one song, “Marigold,” a b-side and two riffs on In Utero. Bleach AND Nevermind were both written prior to Grohl’s arrival. Cobain also wrote everything that Grohl played. anyone who can speak about marigold gets my support. nice ****ing post dude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianforster Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Are they music snobs or extremeskins posters? Or do these distinctions need to be mutually exclusive? It seems that you’ve made this overly broad assertion from this quote:Based on that one rhetorical question' date=' do you honestly believe that this poster meant that EVERYONE on this board is ignorant of music? For what it’s worth, there is a ton of ignorance toward Kurt Cobain on this board: Nirvana, based on the album sales Mike posted, has eclipsed the Foo Fighters more than 2X over. It may be considered an irrelevant fact, but considering the amount of albums the Foo Fighters have released, their numbers should at least be comparable. Grohl’s contributions to Nirvana were limited to one song, “Marigold,” a b-side and two riffs on In Utero. Bleach AND Nevermind were both written prior to Grohl’s arrival. Cobain also wrote everything that Grohl played. [/quote'] First the music snob one, No I do not believe he was calling everyone on this board ignorant of music. The poster argued that because this is a sports message board, people may not know much about music. He does not know anything about the people he is claiming "know nothing about music" except that they post on a sports message board. The only other thing he could use in his argument is that because they are voting Grohl more talented, they know nothing about music. Both of these arguments hold no ground, my logic terminology is a bit rusty, but I'm sure there is some million dollar word as to why they are fallacies. I think a lot of Nirvana/Cobain's hype comes from his death, and I think this is reflected in his record sales. However, I stand to be corrected if the album sales from Nirvana while Cobain was still alive still trounce those of the Foo. And I am still not buying this Grohl getting no credit for Nirvana songs. Sure Cobain wrote the parts, and maybe Dave played them exactly like Cobain wrote them, but I still don't think this takes away from Daves obvious talent. You don't go from being Cobains proxy to winning Grammy's, there was obviously raw talent there from the beginning. And that is what this thread is about, Talent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
More Complete Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 He does not know anything about the people he is claiming "know nothing about music" except that they post on a sports message board. The only other thing he could use in his argument is that because they are voting Grohl more talented, they know nothing about music. I know that there are fewer musicians on this message board then a message board dedicated to and for musicians. You seemed to have missed this very simple and obvious point. Because Grohl got more votes = these people know nothing about music. Never said it, you made this assumption yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianforster Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 I know that there are fewer musicians on this message board then a message board dedicated to and for musicians. You seemed to have missed this very simple and obvious point. Because Grohl got more votes = these people know nothing about music. Never said it, you made this assumption yourself. Yes I did, I said that was the only other possible explanation that your argument could have. You are alluding to the fact that if this were a musicians messageboard, people would vote Cobain right? If knowledge of music = vote for Cobain no knowledge of music = ? I wonder how I could have came to that conclusion.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
More Complete Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 If knowledge of music = vote for Cobain no knowledge of music = ? I wonder how I could have came to that conclusion.. You came to that conclusion because you obviously felt slighted that I may have possibly inferred that you don't know very much about music. Must have hit a nerve. ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianforster Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 You came to that conclusion because you obviously felt slighted that I may have possibly inferred that you don't know very much about music. Must have hit a nerve. ;-) No I came to the conclusion because it is logical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
More Complete Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 No I came to the conclusion because it is logical. Yes it is, and it huwt your wittle feewings. :laugh: ...or maybe not but your defensive and argument nature has been repeated over and over in this thread for all to see. It's tiring. :2cents: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackest Eyes Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 In terms of talent Dave owns Kurt. Dave Grohl did everything on the first Foo Fighters record. Guitar, bass, drums and vocals. All done in his studio in Fairfax, at least to my knowledge. With that said, I still love Nirvana and think they really helped rock turn a corner in the 90's. Kurt wasn't a great guitarist but he wrote simple, catchy tunes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianforster Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Yes it is, and it huwt your wittle feewings. :laugh:...or maybe not but your defensive and argument nature has been repeated over and over in this thread for all to see. It's tiring. :2cents: The entire point of this thread is debate, mouth breather. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Grohl only did everything on the first Foo album because he didn't trust the rest of the band (didn't he re-record the first album because he wasn't "satisfied" with it - aka he didn't trust anyone?). When they picked up Hawkins - Dave seemed to relax a little. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'Pablo Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 If knowledge of music = vote for Cobain no knowledge of music = ? Using this syllogism, your conclusion does not follow under formal 'logic.' This is a proper application of negative conditionals: If A, then B If not B, then not A Therefore, this is a proper conclusion from the statement above: If one did not vote for Kurt Cobain, he or she does not have any knowledge of music. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianforster Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Grohl only did everything on the first Foo album because he didn't trust the rest of the band (didn't he re-record the first album because he wasn't "satisfied" with it - aka he didn't trust anyone?). When they picked up Hawkins - Dave seemed to relax a little. Hawkins in an interview said that Dave was a complete control freak but in a good way. I am pretty sure the album you are thinking about is Colour and the Shape. The very first album was written and recorded by Dave so the only peoples parts he would be recording over would be his own I think.. The 2nd one though is where he re-recorded the drums without telling Goldsmith (is that his name?) and then Goldsmith quit and Hawkins joined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.