Absolutely overrated. Nirvana's tiny body of work is actually held in higher esteem than the far larger and more impressive catalogues of Prince, Blondie, Nick Cave, etc. I could understand if it was obviously better, but it's not.
[Edited 2/13/08 10:53am]

Personally, I think the term "overrated" is overused. Why not just say, "I don't like them?"

RipHer2Shreds said:

When everyone is teling you something merely good is great, what other word is there to use except "overrated"? Nirvana are almost the text book definition of that word.

RipHer2Shreds said:

Exactly!

I think the reason is because in virtually every single list of best songs/greatest albums/greatest artists/best videos Nirvana are there and god forbid STP, Soundgarden, Nick Cave, Blondie, Guns N Roses, the usual suspects aren't

mynameisnotsusan said:

You think it's reasonable that Nirvana are usually rated above Prince on the all-time-best lists? You think if Dirt Cobain were still alive that they'd be ranked that high? Please.

midnightmover said:

I take it with a grain of salt and I actually enjoy something about all those artists above. I don't take it as gospel or think it's cast in stone but I don't think it's so unreasonable. Arguing against the idea that the recognition Nirvana receive is due to Kurt dying is futile but they were held in genuine reverence while he was alive and they are unquestionaby the most influential band since. That's not because he died, it's because of the music they made.

midnightmover said:

Who says Prince ranks below them? It's all opinion and that opinion is definitely not the majority here. Pretty much any thread in this forum about Nirvana is started to say how awful they are.

just read your sig, sorry, I don't respond to ignorant bait for dumbasses
[Edited 1/7/08 10:15am]

Marketing is a bitch. Kurt Shitstain sucked as much balls as "hair metal." Companies dump money into keeping his junk alive and profitable.

RipHer2Shreds said:

About a hundred critics' and readers' polls say it. That's why we say they're overrated. This is the only place I've ever heard the truth spoken about Nirvana. Everywhere else their "greatness" is taken as a given.

Dance said:

Your talking about the one band that wasn't hyped by record companies. They were scrambling to catch up because it was generated at grass roots and not marketed. I'd love to know how much money Sony threw behind Pearl Jam after Nirvana hit.

mynameisnotsusan said:

This is naive. Yes, they made a big impact while Cobain was alive, but that does not mean they would still be this revered if he were with us today. Prince was hugely acclaimed in the 80s yet when he lost the plot in the 90s the critics decided to ditch him. Suddenly the man they'd hailed as the best artist of the 80s was nowhere to be found on any of their "all time best" lists, and they still haven't reinstated his reputation fully. Usually he'll be lucky to have one entry on a "100 best albums of all time" list and it will be a low one. The reason for that is because he lived long enough to embarrass himself with crappy albums and mad antics. The name "Prince" lost it's aura of godlike genius. However, had he died in 1988 then he would be forever immortalised in his prime and things would be very different. Guns n Roses were far more popular than Nirvana at the time, but they all got old and fat, so it's hard to romanticise them so much. If Cobain were around today he would have almost certainly become an embarrasment by now, and as such, Nirvana would be discretely brushed to one side.
[Edited 1/7/08 11:37am]

At least Nirvana gave us Dave Grohl who gave us the rocking

FOO FIGHTERS!!!!


Later

RipHer2Shreds said:

Indeed. I never understand who does this "rating" service.

midnightmover said:

I find it laughable that you consider folks on the org as truthseekers. Lord knows some hype some real shitty music.

PFunkjazz said:

PFunkjazz said:

I find it laughable that you don't know how to read English. I never said orgers were truth seekers. Please re-read the post. I could explain your error to you, but I'm gonna respect your intelligence enough to hope you can spot it for yourself.

InsatiableCream said:

1,000%. They might not have meant to, but they ruined rock.

Death blows everyone up, u can look at so many that have gone and look at who they were at the time of death and who they were after, everyone becomes more in death than in life. There are so many examples of this, where to begin.



Jimi Hendrix
Jim Morrison
John Lennon
Left Eye
Aaliyah
Notorious Big
2Pac
Selena
Elvis

and many more

But also look at where they were at the time of death, some were already well regarded and some werent that big, but death in any case increases your legacy, but usually its almost always when its suicide,overdose,murders,or crashes, its very rarely someone who dies from disease or just natural causes that gets increased popularity.

midnightmover said:

Damn!! You just ruined a good laugh.

midnightmover said:

Truth? It's opinion.

They may be overrated, yes (so is every legendary group), but Nevermind is one of my favorite albums of all time. And In Utero, one of the most powerful & personal I've ever heard--on par with Plastic Ono Band.

Their short career keeps them from being on par with a Beatles or Stones, but their songs were damn near perfect.

Also, The Beatles

Slave2daGroove said:

mine?

midnightmover said:

thats exactly my point! once an artist dies he or she suddenly becomes this god-like legend.

for example, Jimi Hendrix. a fantastic artist and did get recognition when he was alive. However once he died he suddenly became "the ultimate musician" (btw im a hendrix fan)

Here's how overrated they are.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=209ArurxVG4

I hated that he died where i couldn't listen to their music for about 5 years after. Anyone who appreciates someone more because their dead is an idiot. I thought they were the greatest band in the world when they were alive.

2freaky4church1 said:

that was decent

2freaky4church1 said:

if you think this sucked, you weren't there and you had to be to really get why this was cool...

I don't agree with they were the be all end all but Metallica's first 3 albums and Bleach marked the end of make-up, hairspray and really bad rock/metal...they became popular without radio or MTV...we see what happened once the money started flowing...it was just not the same...