Bland lyrics, mediocre instrument skills, lots of songs sound the same..

I honestly don't understand the status that they have. They are considered an icon within the rock genre. They still get massive amounts of air play to this day.

Definitely. Not much real talent in the band.

Yes.

I also don't really get the Beatles (age 51).

No. I wish there was even more Nirvana music that could have been made. Who knows, maybe the next album would have had This Is a Call, I'll Stick Around and Big Me on it, along with Kurt's songs, would have been fantastic I'm sure.

I think their appropriately rated. Rock music in general isn't about the lyrics.

No, they are not. I would say a mark against them is their live performances are very inconsistent depending on what condition Kurt was in. I never had the chance to see them so all I've been able to do is watch performances on YouTube. Given how prevalent heroin use was back in the 90s a lot of the bands from the grunge era had similar problems. Hell, Pantera was completely different when Phil was battling heroin. When your lead singer looks like he doesn't care to be there it's hard for the rest of the band to make up for it.

Andrew Dufresne said:

---

Bland lyrics, mediocre instrument skills, lots of songs sound the same..

I honestly don't understand the status that they have. They are considered an icon within the rock genre. They still get massive amounts of air play to this day.

---

How are they rated?

Andrew Dufresne said:

---

Bland lyrics, mediocre instrument skills, lots of songs sound the same..

I honestly don't understand the status that they have. They are considered an icon within the rock genre. They still get massive amounts of air play to this day.

---

All those critiques were the exact point of the band. They were a response to the glam pop and hair bands of 80s music. By design they had a more punk, hardcore, independent, stripped down sound.

When you look at the impact they had on rock music, culture, fashion, the death of the 80s they are correctly rated.

KISS.

For anyone saying yes:

Cobain freely admitted he wrote lyrics for several songs minutes before going into the studio. They changed music. They killed hair metal.

For a band that only had three studio albums and the unplugged album, they made a massive mark on music history. Kurt Cobain was known as a really strong guitarist despite his song structures being poppy and simple. He created some incredible sounds and the production on Nevermind thanks to Vig was really special. People often over analyze lyrics in general, most songs are about drugs or love and yet a lot of lyrics are just words and phrases with no deeper meaning.

Fun fact, Nirvana was going to record one more album in 1994 then mutually break up. They actually recorded for three days, only Novoselic and Grohl for the first two days. Cobain was there on the final day of recording and they finished one song although with no lyrics. Vig has the song is his safe. They all had different projects they wanted to do, Cobain was trying to work on a album with REM lead singer. Grohl obviously went on to record the entire Foo Fighters album by himself (Incredible story and talent).

Radiohead is.

Saying they "made a mark" or that they "changed the landscape" isn't really a counter to the OP. I feel like that just plays into the opinion.. they were overrated.

Sometimes in art there are bad eras. There are plenty of examples of mediocre things influencing an entire movement.

Your OP is reliant on your opinion that they were mediocre.

Music isn't just about technical skill, or else hundreds of bands would have done what the Beatles did.

Andrew Dufresne said:

---

Bland lyrics, mediocre instrument skills, lots of songs sound the same..

I honestly don't understand the status that they have. They are considered an icon within the rock genre. They still get massive amounts of air play to this day.

---

It's largely the mystique of talent gone too soon.

Same reason people are fascinated by James Dean, Tupac, Amy Winehouse, Selena, etc. The small sample size we got of them was incredibly popular, and we wonder what they could have done with another 10, 20, 30, 50 years of life. Since we won't have answers, we tend to overcelebrate what they did create. Human nature.

As someone who was 17 when Smells LIke Teen Spirit came out, yeah they are icons though.

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

Radiohead is.

---

Nah.

The Porkchop Express said:

---

Andrew Dufresne said:

---

Bland lyrics, mediocre instrument skills, lots of songs sound the same..

I honestly don't understand the status that they have. They are considered an icon within the rock genre. They still get massive amounts of air play to this day.

---

It's largely the mystique of talent gone too soon.

Same reason people are fascinated by James Dean, Tupac, Amy Winehouse, Selena, etc. The small sample size we got of them was incredibly popular, and we wonder what they could have done with another 10, 20, 30, 50 years of life. Since we won't have answers, we tend to overcelebrate what they did create. Human nature.

As someone who was 17 when Smells LIke Teen Spirit came out, yeah they are icons though.

---

Yes. The better question is: How much of their popularity is based on talent vs Cobain's death?

you can just back up to how popular he was before he died. The answer....very.

of course, there is definitely an "advantage" to checking out at/near your peak, as you avoid the inevitable downward slide.

that's why they say live fast, die young, leave a beautiful corpse (2 outta three aint' bad).

The Porkchop Express said:

---

Andrew Dufresne said:

---

Bland lyrics, mediocre instrument skills, lots of songs sound the same..

I honestly don't understand the status that they have. They are considered an icon within the rock genre. They still get massive amounts of air play to this day.

---

It's largely the mystique of talent gone too soon.

Same reason people are fascinated by James Dean, Tupac, Amy Winehouse, Selena, etc. The small sample size we got of them was incredibly popular, and we wonder what they could have done with another 10, 20, 30, 50 years of life. Since we won't have answers, we tend to overcelebrate what they did create. Human nature.

As someone who was 17 when Smells LIke Teen Spirit came out, yeah they are icons though.

---

Quote:

---

[url=https://www.quotes.net/mquote/42806][/url]"Rob, top five musical crimes perpetuated by Stevie Wonder in the '80s and '90s. Go. Sub-question: is it in fact unfair to criticize a formerly great artist for his latter day sins, is it better to burn out or fade away?"

---

Andrew Dufresne said:

---

lots of songs sound the same..

---

There's a difference between having a distinctive sounds and all the songs sounding the same.

I do think an argument can be made, though, that if Kurt hadn't have killed himself, the band would not be viewed in the same light. Kurt going out the way he did, when he did, really just added to everything the band was about.

I don't really care much for their music but their influence on the industry was HUGE. It's going to be damn near impossible for their impact on music to be overrated.

I personally prefer AIC over Nirvana, but think Nirvana was awesome. I don't care how "simple" their music was or about their lyrical content...most of their songs jam. RHCP has some of the dumbest most nonsensical lyrics I have ever heard, and they're still one of my all time fav bands.

Andrew Dufresne said:

---

Bland lyrics, mediocre instrument skills, lots of songs sound the same..

I honestly don't understand the status that they have. They are considered an icon within the rock genre. They still get massive amounts of air play to this day.

---

Respectfully disagree. I can't even think of two that sound all that much alike personally. To me it's like saying "all Rush songs sound the same", because his voice is the same on a lot of songs and guitars are tuned in the same way or something.

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

Radiohead is.

---

Beat me to it.

Andrew Dufresne said:

---

Bland lyrics, mediocre instrument skills, lots of songs sound the same..

I honestly don't understand the status that they have. They are considered an icon within the rock genre. They still get massive amounts of air play to this day.

---

The fact that it was all 30+ years ago still and they still get loads of airtime is pretty hard proof that overrated is definitely not the thing here.

Basically… you personally just don't like them much. Which… fine… but also not that interesting of an observation.

On the spectrum, they are infinitely closer to the greatest band of all time rather than the most overrated. The greatest band of all time, of course, being Radiohead.

U2 is the most overrated band of all time

U2 is a band that would have been well served by wrapping up their careers after the first several albums.

Did grunge ultimately lead to anything long term in the evolution of music, or did you just have the post-grunge Nickelback types afterwards, which then died and terminated that branch of the family tree?

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

I personally prefer AIC over Nirvana, but think Nirvana was awesome. I don't care how "simple" their music was or about their lyrical content...most of their songs jam. RHCP has some of the dumbest most nonsensical lyrics I have ever heard, and they're still one of my all time fav bands.

---

I was thinking about RHCP when I wrote about the lyrics being nonsensical. They are my favorite band and I love all the random lines that they have put in to songs.

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

I personally prefer AIC over Nirvana, but think Nirvana was awesome. I don't care how "simple" their music was or about their lyrical content...most of their songs jam. RHCP has some of the dumbest most nonsensical lyrics I have ever heard, and they're still one of my all time fav bands.

---

Grunge Big 4 Rankings:

1. Alice in Chains
2. Nirvana
3. Pearl Jam
4. Soundgarden

I agree that Nirvana is not overrated. You can't be on the forefront of a sea change in the world of music and be overrated.

And correct -- they had some absolute bangers.

VP at Pierce and Pierce said:

---

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

I personally prefer AIC over Nirvana, but think Nirvana was awesome. I don't care how "simple" their music was or about their lyrical content...most of their songs jam. RHCP has some of the dumbest most nonsensical lyrics I have ever heard, and they're still one of my all time fav bands.

---

I was thinking about RHCP when I wrote about the lyrics being nonsensical. They are my favorite band and I love all the random lines reminders that they are from California that they have put in to songs.

---

FIFY.

I think it's insane to say Nirvana and U2 are overrated.

Radiohead is, of course, very overrated.

NColoradoAG said:

---

U2 is the most overrated band of all time

---

This is another one of those "I don't like them, so they have to be overrated" posts. Newsflash, your opinion isn't that important.