Re: Big swings for pop stardom
Posted: Fri January 31, 2020 5:32 pm
Agreed.verb_to_trust wrote:I don't think Kurt really knew what being huge actually meant but Nevermind was an attempt to get there.
Red Mosquito
Big swings for pop stardom
Page 5 of 7
Re: Big swings for pop stardom
Posted: Fri January 31, 2020 5:32 pm
But is an attempt to be as big as possible the same thing that the OP is asking? If it is, then I agree that it totally counts.
Re: Big swings for pop stardom
Posted: Fri January 31, 2020 5:32 pm
LoathedVermin72 wrote:“About a Girl” is poppier than anything on Nevermind.tragabigzanda wrote:Disagree 100%. Bleach was born of an insular music community and reflected Kurt’s love of much harder music. Nevermind was a big swing for pop stardom and his journals confirm as much.Leatherhead wrote:Yea.Birds in Hell wrote:Yeah, there has to be something more to this than simply making more melodic, accessible music.LoathedVermin72 wrote:trag I think you’re way off the mark in this thread, buddy.
The Nirvana suggestion is insane.
Re: Big swings for pop stardom
Posted: Fri January 31, 2020 5:37 pm
Nirvana feels like a stretch based on what I had in mind but I welcome the debate
Re: Big swings for pop stardom
Posted: Fri January 31, 2020 5:39 pm
Yeah, I don't agree with the Nirvana suggestion at all.
Re: Big swings for pop stardom
Posted: Fri January 31, 2020 5:42 pm
Van Halen - 5150
New singer, synthesizers, sappy song writing. Much crossover appeal.
New singer, synthesizers, sappy song writing. Much crossover appeal.
Re: Big swings for pop stardom
Posted: Fri January 31, 2020 6:01 pm
Re: Big swings for pop stardom
Posted: Fri January 31, 2020 6:08 pm
I do not see how Dookie is a "big stylistic move" at all. Did it increase their audience? Of course. But they just wrote better songs. There's no big stylistic swing from Kerplunk! to Dookie. I guess I could entertain an argument that Nimrod to Warning is a kind of stylistic change but I don't see/hear that as that big of a swing to increase their audience.
Having said all of that, I feel like Nirvana falls in that same category. I don't see a big stylistic swing between Bleach and Nevermind. I do agree that Kurt wanted to be bigger, that he wanted to increase their audience, that he wanted to be huge. So in that sense I can see the argument that Nevermind was a "big swing for pop stardom." However, once we look at the OP, especially the part trag quoted and bolded above, that's where the argument falters for me.
Having said all of that, I feel like Nirvana falls in that same category. I don't see a big stylistic swing between Bleach and Nevermind. I do agree that Kurt wanted to be bigger, that he wanted to increase their audience, that he wanted to be huge. So in that sense I can see the argument that Nevermind was a "big swing for pop stardom." However, once we look at the OP, especially the part trag quoted and bolded above, that's where the argument falters for me.
Re: Big swings for pop stardom
Posted: Fri January 31, 2020 6:10 pm
tragabigzanda wrote:I'd maybe bump Life & Limb for Epic Problemtragabigzanda wrote:Top 10 maybe?
Hello Morning
Close Captioned
The Kill
Place/Position
Do You Like Me?
Latest Disgrace
Recap Modotti
Nightshop
Break
Life & Limb
Re: Big swings for pop stardom
Posted: Fri January 31, 2020 6:11 pm
Re: Big swings for pop stardom
Posted: Fri January 31, 2020 6:20 pm
the lady doth protest too much, methinks
Re: Big swings for pop stardom
Posted: Fri January 31, 2020 6:20 pm
Are you saying that plat himself, who doesn't think your Nirvana example qualifies, is confused on his own concept?tragabigzanda wrote:You guys are so hysterically confused on plat's original concept, and it seems like many of you are confusing a stylistic shift towards continued relevancy with an evolving demographic with a "big swing."
The "established artist" thing is what throws me off with the Nirvana example. After one album, it doesn't feel like there would have been a clear and consistent enough baseline for their sound (and to a lesser extent their image) for one to delineate between a transparent left turn and just regular evolution/growth. Jewel, Liz Phair, etc. had each recorded a few albums, and more or less staked out their turf, when those records came out, which made it abundantly clear what they were trying to do. I don't think Nevermind is the same thing at all; it's just an artist using his existing toolkit to make something that he hoped more people would like.
Re: Big swings for pop stardom
Posted: Fri January 31, 2020 6:25 pm
Kevin Davis, please see your bumped thread in GD.
Re: Big swings for pop stardom
Posted: Fri January 31, 2020 6:30 pm
Re: Big swings for pop stardom
Posted: Fri January 31, 2020 6:31 pm
SEEN!E.H. Ruddock wrote:Kevin Davis, please see your bumped thread in GD.
Re: Big swings for pop stardom
Posted: Fri January 31, 2020 6:34 pm
would fleetwood mac count in 1975 when they brought in lindsey and stevie?..they went total pop
Re: Big swings for pop stardom
Posted: Fri January 31, 2020 6:37 pm
I hadn't even really been focusing on this aspect, but I totally agree with you here, KD.Kevin Davis wrote:Are you saying that plat himself, who doesn't think your Nirvana example qualifies, is confused on his own concept?tragabigzanda wrote:You guys are so hysterically confused on plat's original concept, and it seems like many of you are confusing a stylistic shift towards continued relevancy with an evolving demographic with a "big swing."
The "established artist" thing is what throws me off with the Nirvana example. After one album, it doesn't feel like there would have been a clear and consistent enough baseline for their sound (and to a lesser extent their image) for one to delineate between a transparent left turn and just regular evolution/growth. Jewel, Liz Phair, etc. had each recorded a few albums, and more or less staked out their turf, when those records came out, which made it abundantly clear what they were trying to do. I don't think Nevermind is the same thing at all; it's just an artist using his existing toolkit to make something that he hoped more people would like.
Re: Big swings for pop stardom
Posted: Fri January 31, 2020 6:39 pm
Really? That sounds like it exactly fulfill's plat's concept. An established artist (i.e. "a massive cult following") trying to widen their audience (i.e. "get on the MTV action"). That said, two Dead songs have been suggested here. "Shakedown Street" very much pursues a trendy sound of that period, in a way that differs considerably from their established sound, and the band is clear about its intention. "Touch of Grey" I think was more of a happy accident -- that song had been kicking around for a long time, I don't think it was created with megastardom in mind...tragabigzanda wrote:The Grateful Dead example is bogus, because they were not changing their sound at all. Some A&R's suggestion that a band with a massive cult following try to get in on the MTV action does not fulfill plat's concept.
Re: Big swings for pop stardom
Posted: Fri January 31, 2020 6:45 pm
Eh, the previous album debuted at #1 on the Billboard 200 and they were already media darlings to a degree. This was more due to switching producers after the final Lillywhite sessions fell apart in my opinion.evenslow wrote:
Re: Big swings for pop stardom
Posted: Fri January 31, 2020 6:47 pm
pretty sure bad albums don't count.evenslow wrote:
