Do you like Nevermind

I was the perfect age for this album, in high school (class of 90) you either liked Heavy Metal or New Wave although those categories were stupid as bands from Bon Jovi to Yngwie Malmsteen to Slayer were Heavy Metal and New Order to Sisters of Mercy to Ministry were placed under New Wave in our adolescent minds. Hair Metal was so spent, and though U2 and REM were putting out good music, they were established acts. Soundgarden, Faith No More, a few bands were lurking, but then Nirvana hit. They combined New Wave, Punk, and Metal into one sound, and suddenly (at least in the HS/College music culture I was part of) some of the artificial categorizations got blown apart. It's cultural significance was monumental. It is hard to think of a single album with more cultural significance (Never Mind the Bollocks????) though other groups are bigger.

Edited by Negoba - February 23 2009 at 11:56

heyitsthatguy wrote: Nirvana's allright better than every hair metal band in existence at least

WASP would like to have a word with you.

As for Nirvana, I've begun to appreciate them when separated from the way they were hyped the be-all, end-all of rock'n'roll because they definitely weren't but their "1960s garage rock on the worst heroin overdose ever" shtick does have its charm.

As anybody who was a teenager in the 90's, I was exposed to the rays of Nirvana's "Nevermind". Yet, I never heard the whole album and I still haven't bought it. In 1993/1994, I didn't feel like buying it, because there were all the singles on the radio.
When Cobain killed himself, I didn't buy any record from Nirvana: I don't like necrophiliac cults. And I started to see younger people who were young children wearing t-shirts with the portrait of Cobain, I still could not buy anything from Nirvana.

CPicard wrote: As anybody who was a teenager in the 90's, I was exposed to the rays of Nirvana's "Nevermind". Yet, I never heard the whole album and I still haven't bought it. In 1993/1994, I didn't feel like buying it, because there were all the singles on the radio. When Cobain killed himself, I didn't buy any record from Nirvana: I don't like necrophiliac cults. And I started to see younger people who were young children wearing t-shirts with the portrait of Cobain, I still could not buy anything from Nirvana.

I got a copy used in '99, very cheap.  Still if you were to have only one, I'd recommend In Utero, which can also be had used very cheap.

i like it.
Cobain was a talented song writer and penned some of the bands best work in this album (polly, drain you, Lithium, Breed) but i dont love it. 3.5 stars? maybe. i like in Utero better
I am a much bigger fan of Soundgarden and alice in chains and would take ANY one of their albums over anything nirvana ever did.

It's not bad I guess but I don't care for it or their other albums at all.
I think Alice In Chains' Dirt owns it on all accounts. One of my all time favorites...

Not the best record ever, and certainly overplayed, but I do like it.

zappaholic wrote: Not the best record ever, and certainly overplayed, but I do like it.   Plus, without Nirvana, the Foo Fighters might not have happened.

Without The Stooges, the Wipers might not have happened

Without The Velvet Underground, The Stooges might not have happened.


This is fun.

In Utero is better, but I don't care for either. I'd probably go as far to say I hate Nevermind, but grunge overall isn't much of my thing besides AiC and STP.