7 Reasons Why I Still Hate Nirvana And the Grunge Movement

[Anonymous]

I mention Nirvana because this band was the one that made Grunge a popular genre in the early 90s. In my opinion this genre should be underground always and forever. Of course this doesn't mean other Grunge bands are good. They were rubbish as well, but I'm glad they remained underground as they deserve at least. Except Alice In Chains though, but they didn't became a phenomenon unlike Nirvana. Anyway I believe both they didn't deserve the popularity they gained, and they should remain underground.

1) "Edgy" teens still wear Nirvana t-shirts

They think they're being edgy because they happen to know Nirvana's existence, and they wear this humiliated T-shirt with the infamous Nirvana logo. That's not edgy, but very pretentious. And if they knew some things more about music, then they'd be aware that Nirvana is the most overrated band ever, and they'd be smart enough to avoid wearing it.

2) Grunge killed Rock

Grunge isn't Rock. Not Pop as well of course. But many consider it as Evolution Of The Rock Movement. No it's not evolution, but a murder. Look how Rock was a decade ago, and look what Grudge has done to it (see #3 for some more details). They took away any melodic element Rock had just a few years before Grunge movement made it big.

3) Grunge overshadowed the good Rock bands of the late 80s and early 90s

There were bands like Danger Danger, Bad English, Giant or Alias during the late 80s, and the early 90s. Those were the GOOD Rock bands. The bands that followed the footsteps of mid 80s Melodic Rock bands, and didn't throw them on the trash unlike Grunge musicians did. Grudge went backwards and brought back Rock music to the Stone Age with their retarded song structures.

4) Kurt Cobain's death is still being discussed

Even after two decades and some years. Why people care so much about someone who committed suicide two decades ago? Thousands and thousands of people have committed suicide all over those years, but they get forgotten after some point. Kurt Cobain was just one of them. Yeah just one of them, he wasn't as special as some people think. So why people still care about some guy who committed suicide two decades ago?

5) Most overrated band ever

Even more than The Beatles and The Rolling Stones. At least despite the fact they were ridiculously overrated, they had some talent as musicians at least, unlike Nirvana. They were just a bunch of useless musicians, who happened to be at the right place, in the right time, and now they have a legendary status because their signer committed suicide at a young age. I believe if he was still alive, now they'd be forgotten and nobody would care about them anymore.

6) Their riffs are stolen

The link speaks by itself. See here . They became popular by stealing other musicians' riffs. What do you have to say, Nirvana's fanboys and fangirls?

7) They have no memorable songs

Does anybody else remember any other song from them apart from Smells Like Teen Spirit?

Personally not. Even if it was ridiculously overrated, it was the only decent song coming from them. Just decent though, not anything special or impressive as many people WANT to believe. The rest of their whole discography is just rubbish, and I don't remember any other song from them. I have listened their whole discography once, so I'm talking from experience. And this song is not even theirs in fact. As the link I posted above mentions, the riff is stolen by Boston's More Than A Feeling. If it weren't for Boston then Nirvana would never write this song that made them popular.

[dangerDoge]

I would respectfully disagree with this.

Here's why:
1.) "Edgy T-shirt wearers" (posers) are annoying for any genre. I see a bunch of led zeppelin posers who only know the song Stairway to Heaven or whatnot. Led Zepp is a great band. I see Pink Floyd t shirts when they only know maybe comfortably numb. Pink Floyd is a great band. In any case, the posers are annoying-- it isn't the fault of the band or movement. It is the fault of the poser's themselves.

2.) That is heavily a matter of opinion. Some may like grunge much better than classic rock or 80s glam metal or whatever genre you can think of. I consider it an evolution of music because it helped bring about new sounds... Which naturally influences future genres. Grunge had dissonance and slower speed (or tempo) with its music. If not directly, that gives musicians new creative avenues to pursue-- a change in approach. This is generally healthy for music industries.

3.) Again, heavily biased opinion. What makes GOOD vs BAD? Technicality? Pleasing to ears? Enjoyment? Song structures? It is very hard to categorize music on a good-bad spectrum globally. It is all personal spectrums, and personal views are subjective and relative. I like the song you linked and I also like grunge. Just because they are different though does not mean one trumps the other for everyone. I don't like stuff like pop (often because I call to question the skill of the artist) but it is still hard for me to state it is good/bad globally because there is no rigorous standard. You can perhaps assert global standards with proper reasoning, but saying something is good/bad without backup is simply fluff.

4.) Why? Because Nirvana was a big band, people thought he was doing alright, and it was a shock for people. Intentional suicide also has a thing around it because it was just that-- intentional. People like to try and guess the reasons behind his intent. Do I think they should be laid to rest? Absolutely. It's also still completely irrelevant to the argument as Nirvana as a bad band though. It's ignoring the most important aspect-- the music, and focusing on the members.

[dangerDoge]

5.) Attributing their fame solely to Kurt Cobain's death is a cop out excuse, kind of like attributing the Batman movie success to Heath Ledger's death. Nirvana was huge before Cobain's death and their fame is based primarily off of that. The suicide may have boosted the popularity, but that shouldn't discredit all the other stuff they have done.
Also, saying they are useless musicians is not true. Sure-- they aren't friggin heavy metal shredders or Dream Theater crazy, but they're still harder-to-play songs than most punk... Not to mention, they do actually have riffs that are single notes unlike punk chords lol. Another thing is that I believe Nirvana was primarily known for their skill lyrics and songwriting composition ability, not necessarily their playability.

[dangerDoge]

6.) Lemme give the viewpoint of a songwriter. How does one come up with a song? They think of a beat, rhythm, melody, etc. that they like. How does your brain decide what is good and bad? Primarily, it is based off influences from previous music. You may get some badass idea that is completely unheard of before, but chances are the song (albeit even subconsciously) has been influenced by whatever you listened to before. I've had to scrap entire songs written because I'll write them, listen to them, and realize that all I did was tweak a version of a different song and recreate it from my subconscious.
Like if you start singing a song off the top of your head right now, chances are it's either been used before in a song you've done before or it's been strongly influenced by something and borrows bits and pieces from multiple songs. Sometimes, songs fall through the cracks and one doesn't even catch where they even stole it from. George Harrison did this back with "My Sweet Lord."

[dangerDoge]

He stole without even knowing he stole.
Nirvana may have stolen stuff intentionally though. That would be bad, but I would then argue they repurposed it into a different song. They still copyrighted and such, but so did Led Zeppelin. Led Zeppelin stole crap from other people in some of their biggest songs, but they changed it up and achieved fame from that. They still had to pay people money and shtuff for copyright infringement, but their songs were arguably different to an extent.

[dangerDoge]

7.) First off, lemme address the More Than A Feeling accusation. There are 12 notes in western music. G, C, Em, D in Boston's song. G major. F, Bb, Ab, Db. F minor. Different chord progressions. Where is the similarity then? The strumming pattern. They are indeed comparable. Heck, Cobain even said they were similar. But like he also said, it "was such a clichéd riff. It was so close to a Boston riff or The Kingsmen's 'Louie Louie.'" But it is important to note that the chord progression is different, the feel of the song is different, the vocals/instruments are different, and the only real similarity is a strumming pattern... And heck-- it wasn't even a very unique strumming pattern. Hence, I'd argue there is no copyright violation.
As for the memorable song statement, that is another very personal preference. It's like me listening to a Nicki Minaj album. Chances are I'll hate it... But someone out there is listening and loving it.

[dangerDoge]

They probably think all the songs to it are memorable. I could listen to it a hundred times and I still wouldn't find anything memorable most likely. Why? It falls out of what I like in music. It's not in my personal spectrum. That doesn't mean it won't fall into someone else's personal spectrum.

Conclusion: While you may hate Nirvana and the grunge movement, I believe you fail to argue any valid points why the genre is bad. What I see from it is more so "I don't like grunge/Nirvana." That's alright too. You can like whoever you like. However, I would argue that it is not a bad genre/band due to you disliking them with your personal taste.

Disclaimer (so one cannot say I'm a "Nirvana fanboy" and disregard my stuff as bias): I'm not even a huge Nirvana fan. I like their songs and respect their stuff. I'm a progressive metal kind of guy. I like grunge though.

[myTake Owner]

1) Yeah I hate them anyway. For example I like INXS, and when people say "I love them, I love Need You Tonight and Never Tear Us Apart." I just want to smack their face. I'm 100% sure they haven't even listen to their earlier stuff.

2) Most modern "Rock" bands were influenced by Grunge. A bad influence in my opinion. To me, Rock music from mid 90s and on sounds the same to my ears. See the song above I posted, from Danger Danger? How many "Rock" bands follow this pattern nowdays?

3) Because they weren't so pretentious like Grudge maybe? And they didn't have the "attitude"?

4) Well as I told you. If Kurt Cobain was still alive, then Nirvana would be a forgotten band by now. Trust me. They would be just the 1991-1992 phenomenon and nothing more.

5) Honestly I believe Nirvana NEVER deserved their tremendous popularity. NEVER.

6) Did you see the link above, to see how many songs your "friends" stole?

(continue on my next comment)

[myTake Owner]

Progressive Metal? What's that? Personally I don't accept all those metal subgenres that popped up since the 90s. I know the Traditional Metal, the NWOBHM (New Wave Of British Heavy Metal) and the Glam Metal. All those weird Folk Metal, Death Metal, etc mean nothing to me. Or the even weirder "Viking Metal","Medieval Metal", etc. Just Bullshit.

[dangerDoge]

1.) I think we are in agreement on this: Essentially, posers are annoying and if one claims to be a fan of a band... They should be actually a fan.

2.) I'd actually say rock has split into more and more subgenres and each subgenre has gone it's own separate way. There are so many cross genres no one could possible keep track of em all. However, you are entitled to an opinion of what you like/dislike.

3.) Grudge? Was that a misspelling of "grunge" or a band name I don't know about?

4.) It's impossible to really say definitely either way, but I personally believe they would've lived on. (Sorry I guess I don't trust you on this one 😅). They were an influential grunge band and made a rather significant impact on music and who knows how much bigger they would have gotten if Cobain didn't die. I don't think it is such an easy assumption to make that one could say with certainty they'd die out.

[dangerDoge]

5.) Again, that is personal opinion, and you are willing to think that. Naturally, I think the opposite, but I don't this particular argument would be productive.

6.) Lol they aren't my friends and I'm not even a fanboy of them like I said, but all I can do is refer to my original point I made. I looked at the link, and even compared songs. I can hear the resemblance, but I still stand by my original point.

7.) Progressive metal is stuff like Dream Theater (which formed in '86 btw).
https://youtu.be/JEKTNtmKZEw

It tends to have pretty technical/melodic riffs and dives into odd time signatures.
While Dream Theater is still around being consistent to their sound, other bands have formed their own styles with it.

https://youtu.be/qRF0aAGnJOw

[Waffles731]

Its not grunge but post-grunge that generally sucks

[myTake Owner]

Personally I hate all those new subgenres, and in Rock as well. Post-Rock, Math-Rock, etc. I mean back in the day there were no such genres, so I don't get them.

[Waffles731]

your kidding, blues rock, southern rock, psychedelic rock, etc

[myTake Owner]

@Waffles731 I said the newer ones. Personally my favorite Rock subgenres are AOR, Melodic Rock and Glam Metal. So guess which decade is my favorite.

[myTake Owner]

And Grunge didn't bare any similarities with those genres.

[dangerDoge]

You are free to do so, but that doesn't disregard the fact that they are there and gained popularity. They had to gain popularity for some reason, and I believe that it was due to the sound of the music. People liked the songs. That gives at least some credibility to the sake of the movements.

Music evolves. It has always been that way. If we didn't accept evolving music, we'd be stuck on African drums as our songs. However, people constantly strive to create new and different ideas. We may like one genre, subgenre, or era more than another, but our sole opinion can't globally determine the best genre. It can't stop the evolution of music. I guess that is just the way it is, and we can choose to accept it or deny it.

[myTake Owner]

Anyway I believe they didn't deserve this massive popularity. It might be just me, but no matter how hard I tried, I can't embrace Rock music from mid-90s and on. And I'm not some close-minded person because I've listened to a BIG amount of different discographies. I've listened to whole albums, not just a few songs. But still I couldn't.

My favorite decade in Rock music are the 80s, and second half of 70s as well. I like some bands/albums that came out before or after that period, but the main period is this. So it's hard for me to embrace anything after (ESPECIALLY after) this period. Here's an album that I believe it should sell better than extremely overrated "Nevermind" that was released around this period:"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Vsumb52kVk

[Waffles731]

@mytakeowner
As for rock being dead have you heard the drive-by truckers before

[myTake Owner]

@Waffles731 Eh? No I guess.

[Waffles731]

Take a look,
They kick utter and complete ass

[Waffles731]

No, Grunge is good, ITS POST GRUNGE THAT SUCKS

[PrincessofNohr]

I can't say I really care for Nirvana either. I think a lot of their fame came from Cobain being a sort of martyr for music. I do love me some Soundgarden though. Frankly, I hesitate to call them pure "grunge" in the same way Alice in Chains or Pearl Jam are, since their style varied quite a bit between their major albums. Badmotorfinger was the "grungiest" and much more aggressive, Superunknown had a bunch of different styles, and Down on the Upside was darker and more organic.

[teawrecks]

Give it a rest klaatu

[myTake Owner]

Huh... what? Now how I've been found again? You make me believe you're secretly an admin or something.

[Doffydood]

To be fair, it's not hard to tell. :/

[myTake Owner]

@Doffydood But how? How anyone can find me so easily? More than 10 people have spotted me, and I don't even use bad grammar anymore.

That's something I cannot explain.

[Doffydood]

Well no offence, but all of your takes seem to be complaining about something and/or music and/or the 80s-90s period.

[myTake Owner]

@Doffydood But does it matter who I am? Do you get satisfied by digging me out?

[myTake Owner]

If you do then I'll help you to get satisfied more easily then.

[Doffydood]

Not really. I just wanted to point out that hiding behind anonymous doesn't do that much to hide you from people that already know how you write ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[myTake Owner]

@Doffydood I won't stop being anonymous for anyone. I'm almost a Guru now, and I don't have a single post with my name. Why change it and destroy my streak?

[Doffydood]

I'm not going to ask you to stop. :)
You just seemed surprised when @teawrecks spotted you when really it's not that difficult.

[Create-Change]

Is he the person who posted this trash take on nirvana?

[Fouuuu]

1) I don't think people want to be edgy with that...

2) Grunge didn't killed rock, Nirvana killed the old rockstars industry, in the teenage target market ! , making all other bands look like music for your dad... until they got backfire when they became ultra-famous...
After Cobain's death, most of my friends started to listen many differents music genre, for the rock fans like me there were more and more indie/alternative bands to be exposed.

3) Agree, KC death discussion is cringe and useless most of the time, this is the worst and dirty part of the Nirvana fans :/

3) The most overated band depends from who you get those rates, of course rock star bands from the 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's had their most famous ones that you see everywhere untill you realize there were thousands and thousands of bluesrock bands and even more pop stars, the choice is really yours (if you're not sick of these sames genres), but you understand the whole thing when you get there's only 4 record majors who own's most of pop/rock/rap/rnb/trap/edm artists, and they are always on the way on getting more indie labels in their maelstroms :/

6) The riffs are stolen, of course they are, they always been, like most of the blues/rock bands.

7) I don't agree, Rape Me is the perfect exemple of a memorable song for the non-fans, even more today because of the controversial message and how it can have multiples meanings, is it a self statement or a repetitive advert?
Personnaly i think About A Girl, School, Dumb, are their most honest and memorable songs.
And definitely they have memorable Butch Vig and Steve Albini sound, which kinda started the loud wars and overdubs that is still killing mainstream music today.

[Tarvold]

Piss off.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pidokakU4I

All songs are the same, it's all in the delivery, and Cobain is an unrivaled master of his craft.

[myTake Owner]

Kurt Cobain is the most overrated product of the music industry.

[Tarvold]

Here's the thing. When you have an opinion on something subjective that goes against every other professional and amateur's opinion on the planet, it doesn't make you some special snow flake with extra talent. It probably just means that you have bad taste.

[myTake Owner]

Kurt and his gang didn't deserve the fame they had (and still have). And proof of that, is that Kurt committed suicide, because he couldn't handle this sudden fame. So there you have it.

[Tarvold]

You are one twisted cuntbag to use someone's death to mock their legacy.

[myTake Owner]

If he could, then why commit suicide?

[FallOutBoy2001]

Because he was mentally fucked up. Seriously, the reason he shot himself was because he was addicted to heroin and in a ton of pain from a back issue, which made him want to end his life

[Create-Change]

There was nothing of substance or weight to anything you just said. Just cause you say something is bad, doesn't mean it's actually bad, just means that YOU didn't like it. No one takes you seriously, your opinion means nothing, you are a nobody. Next

[Other_Tommy_Wiseau]

Your so fucking lucky I give such 0 fucks about this mytake that I cannot muster up enough fucks to post gifs and memes explaining the levels of fucks I don't give

[Thunderthights]

I'm from the grunge era, but I can't listen to Nirvana, or most of the music from that time, as I find it too depressing. And yes Nivana were overrated. They weren't terrible but they were just ok.

[TrueConfection]

And overplayed!

[Anonymous]

Lmfao you're obsessed. No one else really cares. Maybe get a different hobby.

[myTake Owner]

I'm not fond of the humiliation of music personally. That's why I make a criticism.

[Opinion Owner]

Doesn't read like a criticism to me...

Plus, would you rather listen to grunge or discordant noise from synthesizers billed as dance music? Both are awful, but at least the former has some semblance of a melody.

[myTake Owner]

If you mean modern dance music then no. I hate anything post-2000 in music to be honest.

[Opinion Owner]

Oh god, it was worse in the 60s-90s. It's like they were trying to burst your eardrums with cheese.

[myTake Owner]

I don't get people who like 21st century music more than 70s 80s or 90s. Well Rock music is excluded from the 90s I should note. It was shit. But dance music was fine, as it was in the 70s and 80s as well. Dance music became shit since the 00s in my opinion.

[Opinion Owner]

Oh, so you like listening to cheese? Why not just go to a dairy farm instead?

[JenneteTurner]

Grunge has been around since the 70’s. The only reason why you didn’t hear about it was because it was underground. But it was commercialized in the 90’s.