This topic is locked from further discussion.
Well I suppose 'kids' don't buy albums at all. It's more teenagers. I think people who truly love music will always want a physical copy, but do the majority of teenagers still buy CDs? I'm only 19 and I know that after about 2004 I rarely bought physical copies of albums unless it was an artist was a big fan of.i do. im 14. am i still a kid???
hiphopballer
[QUOTE="hiphopballer"]Well I suppose 'kids' don't buy albums at all. It's more teenagers. I think people who truly love music will always want a physical copy, but do the majority of teenagers still buy CDs? I'm only 19 and I know that after about 2004 I rarely bought physical copies of albums unless it was an artist was a big fan of. i still buy if i like all the songs on the albumi do. im 14. am i still a kid???
Willo_10
[QUOTE="hiphopballer"]Well I suppose 'kids' don't buy albums at all. It's more teenagers. I think people who truly love music will always want a physical copy, but do the majority of teenagers still buy CDs? I'm only 19 and I know that after about 2004 I rarely bought physical copies of albums unless it was an artist was a big fan of.i do. im 14. am i still a kid???
Willo_10
20 years old and I love buying physical copies. Also I have all official Nirvana albums :D
Some bands develop a rep and following generations regard them highly. See The Beatles as an example.When I was in high school a ton of kids listened to Nirvana. I honestly didn't get it. I mean, they were good, but some of these kids worshipped the band. Blew my freakin mind.
jubino
[QUOTE="hiphopballer"]Well I suppose 'kids' don't buy albums at all. It's more teenagers. I think people who truly love music will always want a physical copy, but do the majority of teenagers still buy CDs? I'm only 19 and I know that after about 2004 I rarely bought physical copies of albums unless it was an artist was a big fan of. i don't buy physical copies because i can never find the albums i likei do. im 14. am i still a kid???
Willo_10
[QUOTE="Nifty_Shark"]20 years old and I love buying physical copies. Also I have all official Nirvana albums :DWillo_10
I've never picked up or listened to Bleach. Is it worth a look? I'm not a massive fan but I still listen to both Nevermind and In Utero on a regular basis.
The drumming is meh. Like you I didn't listen to Bleach until years of listening to post Bleach stuff. At first I was like "the hell is this BS" but then I understood it a few years later. Oh and I was never a fan of Blew. Really hate that song and Nirvana made sure to play it live a lot too (Blew is the opening on Bleach). Last year was the first time I listened to the album as a whole and I do enjoy it but it's certainly not as friendly from the start as Nevermind and In Utero.[QUOTE="Willo_10"][QUOTE="Nifty_Shark"]20 years old and I love buying physical copies. Also I have all official Nirvana albums :DNifty_Shark
I've never picked up or listened to Bleach. Is it worth a look? I'm not a massive fan but I still listen to both Nevermind and In Utero on a regular basis.
The drumming is meh. Like you I didn't listen to Bleach until years of listening to post Bleach stuff. At first I was like "the hell is this BS" but then I understood it a few years later. Oh and I was never a fan of Blew. Really hate that song and Nirvana made sure to play it live a lot too (Blew is the opening on Bleach). Last year was the first time I listened to the album as a whole and I do enjoy it but it's certainly not as friendly from the start as Nevermind and In Utero. The idea of Dave Grohl not drumming already reduces my expectations, but I'll be sure to have a listen. As you said, it'll probably take me a few listens to get into it, but hey, its still Nirvana. I can't really call myself a real fan until I've listened to Bleach.When I was in high school a ton of kids listened to Nirvana. I honestly didn't get it. I mean, they were good, but some of these kids worshipped the band. Blew my freakin mind.
jubino
Same here. The same could be said of Green Day where I grew up. I was never into those bands but I guess I can sorta "hear" why they were into them.
[QUOTE="hiphopballer"]Well I suppose 'kids' don't buy albums at all. It's more teenagers. I think people who truly love music will always want a physical copy, but do the majority of teenagers still buy CDs? I'm only 19 and I know that after about 2004 I rarely bought physical copies of albums unless it was an artist was a big fan of. What is the point of having a physical copy? Having 500 albums seems pointless when you can have one MP3 player.i do. im 14. am i still a kid???
Willo_10
I don't get why people seem to have Nirvana on the same type of pedestal that they have Led Zepplin on. Nirvana is by no means a bad band, but they really did nothing that deserved such attention.
I agree. I couldn't get into them because they were depressing as hell and their music was pretty rudimentary for rock. I can't even remember a Cobain solo. That means they were either really, really bad, or nonexistent.I don't get why people seem to have Nirvana on the same type of pedestal that they have Led Zepplin on. Nirvana is by no means a bad band, but they really did nothing that deserved such attention.
Serraph105
I think they get worshipped because Cobain died young and was influential (even though he mostly just influenced crap).
I agree. I couldn't get into them because they were depressing as hell and their music was pretty rudimentary for rock. I can't even remember a Cobain solo. That means they were either really, really bad, or nonexistent.[QUOTE="Serraph105"]
I don't get why people seem to have Nirvana on the same type of pedestal that they have Led Zepplin on. Nirvana is by no means a bad band, but they really did nothing that deserved such attention.
EolGul2
I think they get worshipped because Cobain died young and was influential (even though he mostly just influenced crap).
lolwut? He's clearly the master of shredding and soloing
I agree. I couldn't get into them because they were depressing as hell and their music was pretty rudimentary for rock. I can't even remember a Cobain solo. That means they were either really, really bad, or nonexistent.[QUOTE="EolGul2"]
[QUOTE="Serraph105"]
I don't get why people seem to have Nirvana on the same type of pedestal that they have Led Zepplin on. Nirvana is by no means a bad band, but they really did nothing that deserved such attention.
Nifty_Shark
I think they get worshipped because Cobain died young and was influential (even though he mostly just influenced crap).
lolwut? He's clearly the master of shredding and soloing
wow I could barely understand a word of that and there is just something about that music that is very unpleasing to my ears. also what's with the random guy doing nothing but jumping around? Don't get me wrong he didn't make it better or worse, but it was just strange.[QUOTE="Nifty_Shark"][QUOTE="EolGul2"] I agree. I couldn't get into them because they were depressing as hell and their music was pretty rudimentary for rock. I can't even remember a Cobain solo. That means they were either really, really bad, or nonexistent.
I think they get worshipped because Cobain died young and was influential (even though he mostly just influenced crap).
Serraph105
lolwut? He's clearly the master of shredding and soloing
wow I could barely understand a word of that and there is just something about that music that is very unpleasing to my ears. also what's with the random guy doing nothing but jumping around? Don't get me wrong he didn't make it better or worse, but it was just strange.It takes a little training to understand Kurt though honestly that performance is really easy to hear regardless (the lyrics in the last verse wouldn't make much sense though so you may be a confused trying to hear them). Anyway to answer the question of the random dude. Kurt wanted to have a second guitarist performing with them (something he would have for the entire In Utero tour by hiring Pat Smear) for reasons I don't know but probably to take some pressure off from playing to the large Reading audience. This fellow though got absolutely smashed and couldn't play jack even if he tried so the band told him to go on stage and just "dance". Nirvana would never play in the UK again.
Same for me. Probably 70% of the kids in my school don't even know who Nirvana is, and out of those that do, probably only 2% know songs other than SLTSyep, I'm 17 and I listen to them.
jpph
[QUOTE="Willo_10"][QUOTE="hiphopballer"]Well I suppose 'kids' don't buy albums at all. It's more teenagers. I think people who truly love music will always want a physical copy, but do the majority of teenagers still buy CDs? I'm only 19 and I know that after about 2004 I rarely bought physical copies of albums unless it was an artist was a big fan of. What is the point of having a physical copy? Having 500 albums seems pointless when you can have one MP3 player. I'd rather have the physical copies.i do. im 14. am i still a kid???
EolGul2
Some people feel the same about LZ.....different strokes and all.I don't get why people seem to have Nirvana on the same type of pedestal that they have Led Zepplin on. Nirvana is by no means a bad band, but they really did nothing that deserved such attention.
Serraph105
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment