Red Mosquito

The Reading show is decent but probably the 2nd weakest of all the professionally recorded shows. (The Melbourne '92 show takes the taco...hideous performance.)

Wendy Carlos's Twin wrote:The Reading show is decent but probably the 2nd weakest of all the professionally recorded shows. (The Melbourne '92 show takes the taco...hideous performance.)

From a performance standpoint it's not the greatest but I'm sure everybody who was at the show loved it. And frankly, it's nice to hear them a little looser at times. There are a lot of great performances from this show.

bodysnatcher wrote:

matt reeder wrote:Case in point:



They barely rehearsed for what was the definitive concert of their career, and yet nailed this show (a terrible, terrible version of "Love Buzz" not withstanding). There were better concerts but this remains perhaps the defining moment of their career - and they barely rehearsed. They had an effortless brilliance that was timeless. This footage is still thrilling to me something like 20 years after I first heard it.

I think this hits on a lot of Nirvana's allure. Part of their appeal... or schtik... or whatever... was the fact that they were so loose, but tight at the same time. They were spastic, seemingly unrehearsed. They had that air about them that you just didn't really know what was about to happen... that they could become unhinged at any given moment. And maybe that was all on purpose, but I don't think so. I hate the word "dangerous" when people describe music or art, or anything that's not really dangerous at all. But they had something about them that just tightroped that line of uneasiness, but were still extremely appealing. I think that's where Kurt was good.... he could craft a pop song that was so catchy, but masked it in just enough punk attitude that it could draw anyone from 12 years old to 35 years old.

Pretty much. It's interesting to me that Nirvana has endured so much. I teach at our local community college and my students know about my musical tastes. Many of my younger students have never heard a Pearl Jam song but they all know Nirvana. It's weird to me but I get it.

I can't speak for anyone's experience outside of the US, but this story (in the US) is completely colored by the fact that cobain killed himself and Eddie did not. Nirvana's mystique is irrevocably bound up in his death as much, if not more, than the music. You could make that danger argument about any of their peers and all of the music (the one exception perhaps being Chris Cornell as an artist - I would still include soundgarden as a band)

I think this hits on a lot of Green Day's allure. Part of their appeal... or schtik... or whatever... was the fact that they were so loose, but tight at the same time. They were spastic, seemingly unrehearsed. They had that air about them that you just didn't really know what was about to happen... that they could become unhinged at any given moment. And maybe that was all on purpose, but I don't think so. I hate the word "dangerous" when people describe music or art, or anything that's not really dangerous at all. But they had something about them that just tightroped that line of uneasiness, but were still extremely appealing. I think that's where Billie Joe was good.... he could craft a pop song that was so catchy, but masked it in just enough punk attitude that it could draw anyone from 12 years old to 35 years old.

Wait. Was his name Billie Joe? I feel like that's supposed to be right, but that's not really a name.

stip wrote:I can't speak for anyone's experience outside of the US, but this story (in the US) is completely colored by the fact that cobain killed himself and Eddie did not. Nirvana's mystique is irrevocably bound up in his death as much, if not more, than the music. You could make that danger argument about any of their peers and all of the music (the one exception perhaps being Chris Cornell as an artist - I would still include soundgarden as a band)

Nirvana caught my attention and mattered more to me immediately. Pearl Jam didn't bloom into my all time favorite band until Vitalogy. Kurt's death affected me profoundly and I wonder if Pearl Jam would have become what they became for me if Kurt hadn't died. I just don't know.

It's true that Kurt's death helped/enhanced Nirvana insofar as Nirvana never had the chance to disappoint, to release a subpar record or even age into something. Pearl Jam did. They lost some of their shine as a result, probably. Which is understandable.

durdencommatyler wrote:It's true that Kurt's death helped/enhanced Nirvana insofar as Nirvana never had the chance to disappoint, to release a subpar record or even age into something. Pearl Jam did. They lost some of their shine as a result, probably. Which is understandable.

It also blew their album sales out of the water, which absolutely changes the way people look at you in retrospect. It turned them from "the important band" to "the important and maybe the biggest." In Utero's sales were barely above what No Code later achieved before Kurt passed, and Nevermind also soared up pretty hard in the aftermath.

Neither of these albums would be close to Ten and Vitalogy in terms of sales, otherwise. They just didn't have that kind of momentum at the time.

I know I'm stating the obvious but this is hardly something unique to Nirvana. Especially those who die young retain all the mystique and whatever else appeals to a certain demographic. Jim Morrison had higher career peaks after he died than when he was still alive pretty much the same goes for Joplin and Hendrix.

McParadigm wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:It's true that Kurt's death helped/enhanced Nirvana insofar as Nirvana never had the chance to disappoint, to release a subpar record or even age into something. Pearl Jam did. They lost some of their shine as a result, probably. Which is understandable.

It also blew their album sales out of the water, which absolutely changes the way people look at you in retrospect. It turned them from "the important band" to "the important and maybe the biggest." In Utero's sales were barely above what No Code later achieved before Kurt passed, and Nevermind also soared up pretty hard in the aftermath.

Neither of these albums would be close to Ten and Vitalogy in terms of sales, otherwise. They just didn't have that kind of momentum at the time.

Well, maybe, maybe not. It's hard to say that something else might not have come along that shot up those sales. But you're probably right.

Still, Pearl Jam was always built to sell out arenas all over the world, whether Eddie wanted to admit that back at the Off Ramp or not.

I'm not sure Nirvana was built that way. Which is not to say that I think Kurt didn't want to be successful, or that Nirvana couldn't also pack an arena.

Mine wrote:I know I'm stating the obvious but this is hardly something unique to Nirvana. Especially those who die young retain all the mystique and whatever else appeals to a certain demographic. Jim Morrison had higher career peaks after he died than when he was still alive pretty much the same goes for Joplin and Hendrix.

Exactly.

Circumstances also matter to a degree. The more room there is for urban legends and doubt the more magical and mystical and interesting the artist's death becomes, the more weight it carries and the more sales it generates.

I mean christ, even Paul McCartney's "death" sold records.

There is no better example of unnecessary post-death eulogizing than Sublime.

McParadigm wrote:There is no better example of unnecessary post-death eulogizing than Sublime.

it's true

durdencommatyler wrote:

Mine wrote:I know I'm stating the obvious but this is hardly something unique to Nirvana. Especially those who die young retain all the mystique and whatever else appeals to a certain demographic. Jim Morrison had higher career peaks after he died than when he was still alive pretty much the same goes for Joplin and Hendrix.

Exactly.

Circumstances also matter to a degree. The more room there is for urban legends and doubt the more magical and mystical and interesting the artist's death becomes, the more weight it carries and the more sales it generates.

I mean christ, even Paul McCartney's "death" sold records.

i should have thought of that.

There are urban legends for everybody i can think of right now.

McParadigm wrote:There is no better example of unnecessary post-death eulogizing than Sublime.

Post-death eulogizing can be as hypocritical and cynical as public statements or PR strategies go.

i hated Sublime.

cutuphalfdead wrote:it's true

God yes

Ya-ya-eeeee-ya-yaaaaa, ya. Ya.

tragabigzanda wrote:What sucked about Sublime was the jocks and other assholes who all glommed on. It really sucked to have a funny, not bad song like Date Rape come on at a high school party, and hear all the jocks go "Yaaaaa!" and high-five each other, knowing full well that at least a couple would be guilty of date rape later that night.

Rape Maaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyy