Page 187 of 194 FirstFirst ... 87137177183184185186187188189190191 ... LastLast
Results 2,791 to 2,805 of 2907
  1. #2791
    Ultimate Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    15,069

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TriggerWarning View Post
    Not really different at all. Grunge was just a continuation of the sound that many 80's alternative bands had been making. Take for instance this song by Husker Du, a band that many grunge bands cite as influence, that came out in the mid 80's - if it had been released in 1995 people would have assumed it was another Seattle band. Nirvana just popularized the sound. Besides Husker Du you could cite some early REM stuff, Jesus and the Mary Chain, The Stone Roses, and a number of other 80's bands as being the forefathers of grunge with similar sounds. And they of course evolved out of the new wave sounds of the early 80's.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eoKeH7JYE48
    I think a another good example would be an all-girl band called L7. They were continuously lumped into the "Seattle/Grunge" scene despite being an LA punk band ( but hey, they had a record on Sub-Pop).

  2. #2792
    Ultimate Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    15,069

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray Lensman View Post
    I'll agree with that - grunge wasn't far different than anything that came before it, but it was far different than anything else typically playing on the radio at the time.
    Oh definitely! I remember those days and I remember the shift. I literally remember when although the fans thought of bands like Janes Addiction and Soundgarden as alternative bands, the record companies were trying to sell them as "metal". And depending on were you lived and what station you listened to, they weren't always played next to Warrant. Nirvana broke and then corporate radio was like "Oh! We can sell this 'quirky' stuff."

  3. #2793
    Fantastic Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    433

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TriggerWarning View Post
    Not really different at all.
    Different tonally and emotionally, yes for sure.

  4. #2794
    Astonishing Member WillieMorgan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Northwest UK
    Posts
    3,305

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DrNewGod View Post
    Defining music by decade is deeply flawed idea. The Beatles and Pat Boone, for example, were entertainment contemporaries.
    No it isn't. Musical artists and genres, or many other forms of mainstream pop culture for that matter, are inherently defined by the periods in which they attained peak popularity and acclaim. It doesn't even have to be a specific decade as such. The Beatles and Pat Boone were certainly very different recording artists during the 1960's but it was the former that came to symbolise and define that decade's music and cultural trends more than anyone else did. Bob Dylan is also still mainly defined by his work from the 1960's in the eyes of many. Dylan has recorded many albums since then, some of them very good indeed, but it's his 60's work which still remains his most celebrated. When people think of disco music what decade normally springs to mind first for most of them? The 1970's. There's a reason for that.

    There was an enormous cultural change that took place in the rock music scene in the early 1990's. With hindsight it was something that had been building up from the underground for a few years by that point. You can see it in the success of The Real Thing album by Faith No More, an admittedly brilliant record that was totally out of step with the likes of Poison and Skid Row. Or Nothing's Shocking by Jane's Addiction. Or the gradual rise in popularity of R.E.M.. The release of Nevermind in 1991 was a real catalyst though. It helped to shape the rest of the decade in a way that gave the music of that period a completely different tone and character from the one that preceded it. The 1990's music scene was such a polar opposite of the 1980's that 'defining' them as such is perfectly valid.

    Nevermind released in 1991. Kurt Cobain dead by 1994. If Nirvana don't define the 1990's then I don't know who does.

  5. #2795
    What fresh hell is this? ChadH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Incertisque loci...incerto tempore
    Posts
    2,073

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Star_Jammer View Post
    What an awkward conversation to only talk about the appearance of only oneself; the other participant(s) can't really say anything!
    Possibly. The point is that no one is likely to say something potentially offensive.
    The Cover Contest Weekly Winners Thread So much winning!!

    "When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross." - Sinclair Lewis
    "Being politically incorrect shouldn't be a matter of pride. It's the last gasp of the wrong side of history." - Unknown
    "By all means, compare these s**t-heads to Nazis." - Mike Godwin referring to the protesters in Charlottesville.

  6. #2796
    Boisterously Confused
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    4,594

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WillieMorgan View Post
    No it isn't. Musical artists and genres, or many other forms of mainstream pop culture for that matter, are inherently defined by the periods in which they attained peak popularity and acclaim. It doesn't even have to be a specific decade as such. The Beatles and Pat Boone were certainly very different recording artists during the 1960's but it was the former that came to symbolise and define that decade's music and cultural trends more than anyone else did. Bob Dylan is also still mainly defined by his work from the 1960's in the eyes of many. Dylan has recorded many albums since then, some of them very good indeed, but it's his 60's work which still remains his most celebrated. When people think of disco music what decade normally springs to mind first for most of them? The 1970's. There's a reason for that.

    There was an enormous cultural change that took place in the rock music scene in the early 1990's. With hindsight it was something that had been building up from the underground for a few years by that point. You can see it in the success of The Real Thing album by Faith No More, an admittedly brilliant record that was totally out of step with the likes of Poison and Skid Row. Or Nothing's Shocking by Jane's Addiction. Or the gradual rise in popularity of R.E.M.. The release of Nevermind in 1991 was a real catalyst though. It helped to shape the rest of the decade in a way that gave the music of that period a completely different tone and character from the one that preceded it. The 1990's music scene was such a polar opposite of the 1980's that 'defining' them as such is perfectly valid.

    Nevermind released in 1991. Kurt Cobain dead by 1994. If Nirvana don't define the 1990's then I don't know who does.
    You make excellent points. I still get a bit annoyed when somebody says "the xxx0s sucked." The same era that gave us the worst of Disco (apologies if you loved it) also gave us the glory days of Elton John, Billy Joel, Carly Simon and tons more. I don't know that there's any time that was bad across the board, or good, for that matter.

  7. #2797
    Astonishing Member WillieMorgan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Northwest UK
    Posts
    3,305

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DrNewGod View Post
    You make excellent points. I still get a bit annoyed when somebody says "the xxx0s sucked." The same era that gave us the worst of Disco (apologies if you loved it) also gave us the glory days of Elton John, Billy Joel, Carly Simon and tons more. I don't know that there's any time that was bad across the board, or good, for that matter.
    Cheers for that. I actually nearly went back and amended that last post as I was a bit worried that it was possibly too defensive. I hope that it didn't come across as too argumentative.

    Just to clarify further and add to the the point that you made there, I think some of the stuff we got back then was pretty good. These are all 1990's albums that I think are absolutely great for varying reasons:

    Badmotorfinger - Soundgarden
    August And Everything After - Counting Crows
    Ten - Pearl Jam
    The Holy Bible - Manic Street Preachers
    Urban Hymns - The Verve
    OK Computer - Radiohead

    And I've enjoyed many more. The ire I sometimes direct towards the 90's really stems from seeing bands that I was very fond of rendered obsolete overnight. It wasn't just hair metal that suffered back then. It seemed like a lot of my favourite artists were dropping like flies. Bruce Springsteen had a bad 90's. Guns N Roses imploded and so did Van Halen. Dire Straits did one final album and split. Genesis bit the dust. Pink Floyd too. Rush suffered personal tragedy and went on a long hiatus. Metallica went down a different path that I thought produced dreary music. And so on.

    I still stand by my comments on nu-metal though. I hate those bands with a passion.

  8. #2798
    Ultimate Member Gray Lensman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    10,250

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WillieMorgan View Post
    Cheers for that. I actually nearly went back and amended that last post as I was a bit worried that it was possibly too defensive. I hope that it didn't come across as too argumentative.

    Just to clarify further and add to the the point that you made there, I think some of the stuff we got back then was pretty good. These are all 1990's albums that I think are absolutely great for varying reasons:

    Badmotorfinger - Soundgarden
    August And Everything After - Counting Crows
    Ten - Pearl Jam
    The Holy Bible - Manic Street Preachers
    Urban Hymns - The Verve
    OK Computer - Radiohead

    And I've enjoyed many more. The ire I sometimes direct towards the 90's really stems from seeing bands that I was very fond of rendered obsolete overnight. It wasn't just hair metal that suffered back then. It seemed like a lot of my favourite artists were dropping like flies. Bruce Springsteen had a bad 90's. Guns N Roses imploded and so did Van Halen. Dire Straits did one final album and split. Genesis bit the dust. Pink Floyd too. Rush suffered personal tragedy and went on a long hiatus. Metallica went down a different path that I thought produced dreary music. And so on.

    I still stand by my comments on nu-metal though. I hate those bands with a passion.
    Nu-metal is a pretty large category depending on who you ask. It contains some of the most annoying bands I can remember but also some very good ones are sometimes lumped in with them.
    "Theory: The Phoenix doesn't corrupt the characters, it corrupts the authors." Gambit, King of Thieves

  9. #2799
    Astonishing Member WillieMorgan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Northwest UK
    Posts
    3,305

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray Lensman View Post
    Nu-metal is a pretty large category depending on who you ask. It contains some of the most annoying bands I can remember but also some very good ones are sometimes lumped in with them.
    I can't think of any band that's been included on nu-metal lists that I've had the time of day for I must say. Thing is, I'll openly admit that part of this is generational as much as anything else.

    I was in my mid 20's when the likes of Limp Bizkit (urgh..) really took off. If I'd been a decade younger and listening to these bands up in my bedroom whilst simultaneously raging against my parents and the world in general then I may have been much more well disposed towards it. Not being an angry teenager, these nu-metal songs just came across as incredibly whiny and with an obvious level of corporately mandated 'angst'.

    My teenage years were the hair metal years, hence me having a real soft spot for a scene that many consider vapid. They aren't wrong really but I lived and loved those years.

  10. #2800
    Ultimate Member Gray Lensman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    10,250

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WillieMorgan View Post
    I can't think of any band that's been included on nu-metal lists that I've had the time of day for I must say. Thing is, I'll openly admit that part of this is generational as much as anything else.

    I was in my mid 20's when the likes of Limp Bizkit (urgh..) really took off. If I'd been a decade younger and listening to these bands up in my bedroom whilst simultaneously raging against my parents and the world in general then I may have been much more well disposed towards it. Not being an angry teenager, these nu-metal songs just came across as incredibly whiny and with an obvious level of corporately mandated 'angst'.

    My teenage years were the hair metal years, hence me having a real soft spot for a scene that many consider vapid. They aren't wrong really but I lived and loved those years.
    Limp Bizkit is one of those I qualify as 'most annoying things I have ever heard' - even when they started approaching a decent song, they would immediately kill it with a break where they just chant the band name over and over again. That's one of my musical rules, good bands don't need to tell me their names in the music. I'd like it enough that I would want to find out for myself.

    But typing 'nu-metal' into Google got me a list of bands which included Linkin Park, Disturbed, and several others that I actually liked. But there are few genres where I can't find something I enjoy. Even the heydey of hair metal has a lot of gems, and I remember those bands as the ones on the T-shirts of the people who seemed to devote their childhoods to making mine as miserable as possible (I wasn't able to appreciate ANY hair band until after I got out of high school because of who I associated them with).
    Last edited by Gray Lensman; 07-28-2019 at 12:36 PM.
    "Theory: The Phoenix doesn't corrupt the characters, it corrupts the authors." Gambit, King of Thieves

  11. #2801
    Astonishing Member WillieMorgan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Northwest UK
    Posts
    3,305

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray Lensman View Post
    Limp Bizkit is one of those I qualify as 'most annoying things I have ever heard' - even when they started approaching a decent song, they would immediately kill it with a break where they just chant the band name over and over again. That's one of my musical rules, good bands don't need to tell me their names in the music. I'd like it enough that I would want to find out for myself.

    But typing 'nu-metal' into Google got me a list of bands which included Linkin Park, Disturbed, and several others that I actually liked. But there are few genres where I can't find something I enjoy. Even the heydey of hair metal has a lot of gems, and I remember those bands as the ones on the T-shirts of the people who seemed to devote their childhoods to making mine as miserable as possible (I wasn't able to appreciate ANY hair band until after I got out of high school because of who I associated them with).
    Yeah, personal experiences also influence our tastes as well. At secondary school my arch enemy was a huge Kiss fan. I don't mind hearing their songs on the radio but I've never been a fan of the band and he's at least partly the reason why. I'm sorry you got grief from hair metal fans in school. People can be arseholes sometimes. Thing is, although I'd never actively take part in or give encouragement towards bullying anyone, I'd probably have been a part of that clique, wearing the same T-Shirts.

    I was a funny metal fan back then though. Those musical cliques that existed back then baffled me. I was a fan of both hair metal AND thrash metal. Being a fan of the hair metal bands meant that you got on well with the girls for a start.

  12. #2802
    Fantastic Member TriggerWarning's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Posts
    481

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WillieMorgan View Post
    Nevermind released in 1991. Kurt Cobain dead by 1994. If Nirvana don't define the 1990's then I don't know who does.
    Nirvana is certainly an act you mention when defining the 90's but the 90's are also when music fractured thanks to the internet into tons of subgenres. It was also when the true rise of rap / hip hop began - it had started becoming popular in the 80's but the 90's is when it exploded and took over the charts. And it was the beginning of the end of CD sales as sites like Napster began at the end of the decade.

    I think its very hard to define any decade since then because of how splintered listening has become.

  13. #2803
    Fantastic Member TriggerWarning's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Posts
    481

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray Lensman View Post

    But typing 'nu-metal' into Google got me a list of bands which included Linkin Park, Disturbed, and several others that I actually liked.
    First two I was going to mention. I love Disturbed and like most Linkin Park.

  14. #2804
    Astonishing Member WillieMorgan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Northwest UK
    Posts
    3,305

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TriggerWarning View Post
    Nirvana is certainly an act you mention when defining the 90's but the 90's are also when music fractured thanks to the internet into tons of subgenres. It was also when the true rise of rap / hip hop began - it had started becoming popular in the 80's but the 90's is when it exploded and took over the charts. And it was the beginning of the end of CD sales as sites like Napster began at the end of the decade.

    I think its very hard to define any decade since then because of how splintered listening has become.
    Yep, 100% agree with you there. One of the things that also truly frustrates me about nu-metal is the fact that this was the last metal sub-genre to have truly mass appeal and multi-million level sales performance before the internet came along and effectively made new music completely worthless unless you're the likes of Adele or Ed Sheeran. Even big artists like those suffer from most people listening to their music for free on Youtube.

    What styles have we mentioned so far? Hair metal, grunge, nu-metal, disco and rap/hip hop. None of those scenes would have had a hope in hell in establishing themselves in the current music industry. If it wasn't for live music still being such a commodity I'm not sure how many younger musicians would be able to make a living under the modern status quo. And this is coming from someone who frequently uses Youtube to listen to music for nothing.

  15. #2805
    Fantastic Member TriggerWarning's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Posts
    481

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WillieMorgan View Post
    What styles have we mentioned so far? Hair metal, grunge, nu-metal, disco and rap/hip hop. None of those scenes would have had a hope in hell in establishing themselves in the current music industry. If it wasn't for live music still being such a commodity I'm not sure how many younger musicians would be able to make a living under the modern status quo. And this is coming from someone who frequently uses Youtube to listen to music for nothing.
    Symphonic metal. Groups like Nightwish, Within Temptation, Delain, and the like have done quite well for themselves in this age of music. Though to be fair their popularity is mostly in Europe where Nightwish plays places like Wembley or headline Wacken (a festival like Coachella or Lollapalooza) but here in the US plays clubs that hold about 2000 people. That was actually awesome for me as I've seen Nightwish twice now in the US and been far closer to the band than I'd ever have been in Europe.

    If you aren't familiar with Nightwish or only know them from some old stuff with past lead singers ago they went through quite a change 7 years or so ago when they acquired another new lead singer in Floor Jansen. She is in my opinion the most talented female singer of all time in that she can literally sing anything from opera to death metal and back again and in some Nightwish songs does so. Their prior two lead singers were both very limited as the original couldn't do anything but operatic and the second was a pop type singer.

    Here are two live songs by them that show the range of their stuff. First is Romanticide which is perhaps the closest they have to a straight up metal song:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zz_7OCCQlXs

    Second is a live version of Ghost Love Score. This was considered their original lead singers glory song but Floor basically took it and made it hers. I can't even listen to the original anymore. This song is a good example of Symphonic metal as it features a full orchestra backing, a symphonic chorus backing, and at times sound operatic with a metal background. It also contains what Nightwish fans now call the Floorgasm where she does some things vocally that I doubt many other singers could possibly do. She starts building toward at the 7:48 mark and then for the next 1:30 the song builds and builds until Floorgasm at 9:21.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYjIlHWBAVo

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •