Non-Urban Music Happy Birthday Kurt Cobain

#1
http://s32.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=0UTM0M4NFBG0P1K2A36BTEQCBG

I thought I'd bust this out as a tribute to the former frontman of Nirvana who woulda been 38 today.

How many of you have heard a rock song, and thought it was pretty good? The odds are, if it's something recent, had it not been for Nirvana (and some other important bands from the early '90s), the song would have never existed.

Considering that Nirvana's Nevermind, the band's 2nd album, was one of the greatest and most influential albums in music history, I thought I'd mess around w/it and create a version that might be truer to what the band would have liked.

Basically:

Nirvana - Nevermind (Deluxe Edition)

Guitar/Vocals - Kurt Cobain (On All Tracks Except 19), Krist Novoselic (Guitar on 19)
Bass - Krist Novoselic (On All Tracks Except 19), Kurt Cobain (Bass/Vocals on 19)
Drums - Dave Grohl (On All Tracks Except 10, 15), Chad Channing (Drums on Tracks 10, 15)

This is Nevermind, uncut, uncensored, and screwed up--pretty much devoid of Andy Wallace's polishing AND the infamous "Nevermind drop-tuning" so it was "fixed" to be heard, just the way (I believe) Kurdt would have wanted it!

I had to speed up, slow down, cut and combine some songs (1,2,5,6,13,15,19) use alternate versions or mixes that were performed much more enthusiastically (4,8,9,10,11,12) and even add bonus tracks (13-19) that would have been perfect on the album.

Enjoy!


-Z-

PS: Clocks in at barely under 80 minutes (79:54 when I burnt mine), so timewise this is perfect for a regular CD.
 
#8
I think they were overhyped and overexposed to the point that people started to underrate them and call them overrated.

I genuinely think they were one of the best bands ever.
 

Salar

The One, The Only
#12
One of my favouirite bands of all time and like pac one of the most influential in my life.
It's a shame

Happy Bday and RIP
 

Ristol

New York's Ambassador
#14
Nirvana was not a great band. Not really good, if you ask me.

Kurt Cobain was a great songwriter, but for my tastes, he was a bit too outwardly angry. But that's just how he was, I guess. Didn't make for good songs.

His death is more important than his music, since Nirvana were average at best. I've heard talented guitarists say they knew tenth graders who could play circles around Cobain.

But he was compelling. I mean, I never turn off the TV if he's on it, and I'd see a movie about him, if they made one.
 
#16
Ristol986 said:
Nirvana was not a great band. Not really good, if you ask me.

Kurt Cobain was a great songwriter, but for my tastes, he was a bit too outwardly angry. But that's just how he was, I guess. Didn't make for good songs.

His death is more important than his music, since Nirvana were average at best. I've heard talented guitarists say they knew tenth graders who could play circles around Cobain.

But he was compelling. I mean, I never turn off the TV if he's on it, and I'd see a movie about him, if they made one.
No, Nirvana were not the most technical band in the world (except Grohl, who's a world class drummer), but if we only listened to the most talented musicians then we'd be listening to classical music and opera instead of rock or rap.
 

Ristol

New York's Ambassador
#17
Generally, when we discuss music here, we're talking about popular music. Rock, rap, that stuff. Against the climate of popular music in the twentieth century, Nirvana sucked. It's unspoken, really, but we're discussing how talented popular musicians are. When people say John Lennon and Paul McCartney are two of the best musicians ever, they're talking about popular music.

Bottom line: Nirvana, when compared to other bands and talents of their era, don't quite measure up.

I would also hate, hate, hate to type anything to the effect of, this is my opinion. That's an automatic thing, really. Anytime you hear me say a band sucks or that a band is good, you may safely assume that it is my opinion. You may also safely assume that I am talking about popular music.

I mean, you wouldn't compare Beethoven and Bach, would you? I mean come on, one simultaneously ended the Classical Era and spearheaded the Romantic Era; the other's death marked the end of the Baroque Era. They're from different worlds.

But I'm sure you assumed that.
 
#18
Ristol986 said:
Generally, when we discuss music here, we're talking about popular music. Rock, rap, that stuff. Against the climate of popular music in the twentieth century, Nirvana sucked. It's unspoken, really, but we're discussing how talented popular musicians are. When people say John Lennon and Paul McCartney are two of the best musicians ever, they're talking about popular music.

Bottom line: Nirvana, when compared to other bands and talents of their era, don't quite measure up.

I would also hate, hate, hate to type anything to the effect of, this is my opinion. That's an automatic thing, really. Anytime you hear me say a band sucks or that a band is good, you may safely assume that it is my opinion. You may also safely assume that I am talking about popular music.

I mean, you wouldn't compare Beethoven and Bach, would you? I mean come on, one simultaneously ended the Classical Era and spearheaded the Romantic Era; the other's death marked the end of the Baroque Era. They're from different worlds.

But I'm sure you assumed that.

Agreed but they had that attitude which represented rock at the time..in a few years ppl will say 50 cent sucked, but he does represent alot of things in the game right now and the 15 year olds love him, (same as nirvana in a way)
 
#19
Ristol986 said:
Generally, when we discuss music here, we're talking about popular music. Rock, rap, that stuff. Against the climate of popular music in the twentieth century, Nirvana sucked. It's unspoken, really, but we're discussing how talented popular musicians are. When people say John Lennon and Paul McCartney are two of the best musicians ever, they're talking about popular music.

Bottom line: Nirvana, when compared to other bands and talents of their era, don't quite measure up.

I would also hate, hate, hate to type anything to the effect of, this is my opinion. That's an automatic thing, really. Anytime you hear me say a band sucks or that a band is good, you may safely assume that it is my opinion. You may also safely assume that I am talking about popular music.

I mean, you wouldn't compare Beethoven and Bach, would you? I mean come on, one simultaneously ended the Classical Era and spearheaded the Romantic Era; the other's death marked the end of the Baroque Era. They're from different worlds.

But I'm sure you assumed that.
Oh I know it's your opinion, that does go without saying. But I'm just questioning the argument that Nirvana "sucked" because Cobain wasn't Jimi Hendrix and Novoselic wasn't John Paul Jones. What made Nirvana a legendary band was the attitude, the image, the impact. Though he wasn't a great guitarist or singer, Kurt Cobain was a brilliant songwriter. Pearl Jam or Soundgarden might have been technically superior, but they didn't have the same appeal that Nirvana did, and that was all down to Cobain.

If great music is purely about technical ability, then we might as well let robots could make it.
 
#20
no disrespect meant but kurt a fuckin herroin feind, he used to take all types of shit, got no respect for anyone who take that nasty shit, fuckin smackheadz, overrated definately, good at writin songs yeah, but what he blows his own head off n everyone plays homage, all you kurt riders prolly tell me theres a lot more to it, but takin all types of nasty shit, livin under a fuckin bridge, then blowin ya head off don't make you a legend, but RIP kurt
 

Latest posts

Donate

Any donations will be used to help pay for the site costs, and anything donated above will be donated to C-Dub's son on behalf of this community.

Members online

No members online now.
Top