Nirvana

PTH2009 · 08-07-2012 1:26pm #1

How come Dave Groul and Krist Novoselic never found a new singer and maybe do a tour or a few shows and even bring out a new album

If Queen can do it surly Nirvana could do it.

Or does Courtney Love own all of Nirvanas catalog and she would have to give the go ahead ??.

Discuss

Joe_Dull · 08-07-2012 2:08pm

I'm assuming they'd rather not completely piss on the memory of actual Nirvana and ruin everything that was ever good about the band for everyone. Wouldn't rule it out if they start to run out of money though (highly unlikely Grohl will ever be broke...).

Malice · 08-07-2012 4:16pm

The obvious answer to me is that they have both been very busy since the demise of Nirvana so they just fundamentally doesn't have the time. Dave Grohl has Foo Fighters and Krist Novoselic has his own bands, movie directing and politics.

MetalDog · 08-07-2012 4:36pm

Because Courtney Love would make money from it and they don't want her to.

viadah · 08-07-2012 6:00pm

From Wikipedia:

'Grohl.....entered Robert Lang Studios in October 1994 to record fifteen of the forty songs he had written. With the exception of a guitar part on "X-Static," played by Greg Dulli of the Afghan Whigs, Grohl played every instrument and sang every vocal on the tracks. "I was supposed to just join another band and be a drummer the rest of my life," Grohl later said. "I thought that I would rather do what no one expected me to do. I enjoy writing music and I enjoy trying to sing, and there's nothing anyone can really do to discourage me." Grohl completed an album's worth of material in five days and handed out cassette copies of the sessions to his friends for feedback.
Grohl hoped to keep his anonymity and release the recordings in a limited run under the title "Foo Fighters", taken from the World War II term "foo fighter", used to refer to unidentified flying objects. However, the demo tape circulated in the music industry, creating interest among record labels. Grohl formed a band to support the album. Initially, he talked to former Nirvana band mate Krist Novoselic about joining the group, but both decided against it. "For Krist and I, it would have felt really natural and really great", Grohl explained. "But for everyone else, it would have been weird, and it would have left me in a really bad position. Then I really would have been under the microscope."'

Dave Grohl didn't want to be 'just the drummer' anymore is how I see it.

Riddle101 · 10-07-2012 7:51pm

My guess is, they just wanted to move on and do their own things. Dave obviously had his own ambitions while Krist has his own projects. As the end of the day the memory of Nirvana still lives on and the other guys have found happiness in other things.

If Queen can do it surly Nirvana could do it.

Problem with Queen though is that it didn't feel like Queen after Freddie Mercury died and John Deacon left. I would have been happy if Queen had ended after Freddie died. But Brian May and Roger Taylor had other ideas. Now Roger wants to create a new Queen apparentely.

seachto7 · 10-07-2012 8:43pm

I think Nirvana was Kurt Cobain pretty much. I know AC DC managed it, but I don't see how it could have worked in Nirvana's case. It would even be more extreme than AIC getting a new singer, as Jerry Cantrell contributed a lot to the vocals as well.

Cruel Sun · 10-07-2012 9:31pm

Kurt Cobain's voice was very unique, it wouldn't have been possible to get a replacement, it just wouldn't be the same.

Grunge was on it's way out as well, Nirvana were going to break up anyway.

Motley Crue · 11-07-2012 9:02am

I think as others have said that (as much as I never liked them myself) Nirvana represented a time and space, a place in history now, which couldn't be recreated. I'm sure that if Nirvana had broken up and Kurt was still alive that the band would have probably reunited for the odd performance but people forget that Dave (as much as he was a member of Nirvana) was still only a hired hand in that band...Nirvana was Kurt's project, his music and his vision, without him it would seem rather pointless. Much like Thin Lizzy does now without Phil (even if they do put on a good show)

Malice · 12-07-2012 9:05pm

Motley Crue wrote: »

people forget that Dave (as much as he was a member of Nirvana) was still only a hired hand in that band

Not quite. Novoselic has writing credits on all three Nirvana studio albums and Grohl has writing credits on all the albums recorded while he was a member of the band.

ThunderApple · 14-07-2012 2:03pm

MetalDog wrote: »

Because Courtney Love would make money from it and they don't want her to.

Might be. Hate this woman, she's so annoying.
And some bands just have to stop. I think the fans have to respect this.

Motley Crue · 14-07-2012 3:01pm

Malice wrote: »

Not quite. Novoselic has writing credits on all three Nirvana studio albums and Grohl has writing credits on all the albums recorded while he was a member of the band.

And just because someone is credited doesn't mean they had an equal share in the writing of that song. It also doesn't mean anything about how the band compose the original ideas that formulated their most successful, both commercially and well remembered, songs.

Nevermind, for example, had 13 songs on it's original release (if you count the hidden song on some copies) and only 3 of those songs were written in collaboration between Kurt and someone else. The other 10 (including songs like 'Come As You Are' and 'In Bloom' were written solely by Cobain)

Likewise, on the bands album Bleach, the original Vinyl issue in 1989 contained 11 songs - only one not written by Cobain, a cover version of the Shocking Blue song Love Buzz. Even the 1992 CD reissue only contains one bonus track co-written by Cobain and Krist, which is de facto his only contribution writing wise to that record.

The bands third and final studio album, In Utero, contained 12 songs - or 13 if you include the bonus track - and Cobain wrote 11 of them by himself.

In these three studio albums, thats 31 songs written solely by Kurt over these releases alone. I think that means, as far as Nirvana is concerned, he was the driving force. And Krist only has credits on all three albums if you include the 1992 CD reissue of Bleach, not if you include it's original 1989 Vinyl release

Malice · 14-07-2012 7:05pm

Motley Crue wrote: »

And just because someone is credited doesn't mean they had an equal share in the writing of that song.

It does however mean that someone wasn't just a hired hand.

Motley Crue · 14-07-2012 9:31pm

Malice wrote: »

It does however mean that someone wasn't just a hired hand.

He is credited with co-writing 2 songs across three studio albums (obviously none on Bleach) but it's just really luck that his only co-writing credit (outside bonus tracks) is the bands most commercially well known song.

I'm not saying he's not a good musician, but there's no denying, he was a hired man in Nirvana, also not saying he wasn't apprichated for his role and of course he was more than just a typical session/live musician (like Pat Smear or Lori Goldston) but he was still hired, much like Ringo Starr, hired to fill a role in a band that already had a driving force. He was a passenger. When he joined the band they'd already wrote most of the songs for Nevermind and were just looking for a label to release it on. I suppose he just didn't get a chance to be anything else.

From Wikipedia, there's a quote about how Ghrol struggled with his role in the band

While his drumming style was a significant element in the band's success, Grohl saw himself as just another in a long line of drummers. In his mind, Nirvana was the band that recorded Bleach; his arrival had altered that sound dramatically, and as he saw it, not necessarily in a positive way. Though Grohl had been writing songs for several years, he declined to introduce his songs to the band for fear of damaging their chemistry. Instead, he compiled and recorded them himself, releasing a cassette called Pocketwatch in 1992 on indie label Simple Machines. Rather than using his own name, Grohl released the cassette under the pseudonym "Late!".

Furthermore, Kurt Cobain is known to have actually disliked the riff from "Scentless Apprentice" which Ghrol wrote, but was at least happy at the chance for Ghrol to perhaps write more for the band. It's a shame really.

Of course, I do admit he did write 'Marigold' solely and this was credited as such on the band's boxset a few years ago.

Malice · 15-07-2012 1:13pm

Motley Crue wrote: »

He was a passenger.

We've established he wasn't just a hired hand so now he's just a passenger? Why seek to downplay his contribution to the band?

Sephiroth_dude · 15-07-2012 5:48pm

Didn't krist "retire/give up music" anyway?

viadah · 15-07-2012 8:20pm

PTH2009 wrote: »

How come Dave Grohl and Krist Novoselic never found a new singer and maybe do a tour or a few shows and even bring out a new album?

When you look at it simply, in a topic that can be spun out and argued in various different ways, neither of them want to, for whatever their reasons. That's always been plainly obvious. And has been pointed out, they couldn't just replace Cobain because he was the primary songwriter, it would be a completely different band whatever they called it. And Kurt Cobain was always the focal point of the band in media, and he is such a sacred cow that any 'reunion' show would be either positively or negatively (and it would be negatively I'm thinking) reflected on the dumb bastard who chose to put himself up there.

The only logical choice of a singer for any kind of cash-in celebratory show of Nirvana's history would be Courtney Love. I'm sure anyone who agrees will also be able to see everything that could possibly be wrong with that scenario.

Delightfully Pessimistic · 16-07-2012 1:25pm

PTH2009 wrote: »

How come Dave Groul and Krist Novoselic never found a new singer and maybe do a tour or a few shows and even bring out a new album.

Discuss

Because they're smart enough to not piss on their legacy. Kurt is irreplaceable.

Motley Crue · 16-07-2012 5:17pm

Malice wrote: »

We've established he wasn't just a hired hand so now he's just a passenger? Why seek to downplay his contribution to the band?

How have we established that? He maintained himself that he struggled with his role in the band. I'm not purposefully seeking to downplay his role but I do think that he wasn't much more than a hired hand, and by his own admission, he seemed to feel that way too.

Malice · 18-07-2012 1:48pm

Motley Crue wrote: »

How have we established that?

Because he has co-writing credits.

Motley Crue · 18-07-2012 6:30pm

Malice wrote: »

Because he has co-writing credits.

Pete Scaturro has two co-writing credits on Chinese Democracy but he was an audio engineer and arranger hired to work on some tracks, not a member of Guns N Roses at any point.

Look, I'm not being critical of Dave's drumming, nor am I trying to suggest he doesn't belong or didn't belong in Nirvana, I'm just trying to say that when he was hired (as a replacement for Dan Peters) he was their seventh drummer, he was aware the band had already completed their second studio album and were just looking to record it...after this the band became extraordinarily famous, their success wasn't foretold and they didn't see it coming - so as a result of being in this situation he was able to contribute to some recording parts and suggest a guitar riff that got him a writing credit. With a primary songwriter who had all this material created he was simply a passenger.

I'm not sure how much input he had on Smells Like Teen Spirit personally, but he himself was aware of the situation, and just because he got a few writing credits doesn't automatically make him an established band member.

18-07-2012 6:42pm

This is ridiculous.

To say Dave Grohl is not an established member of Nirvana is insane.

Pat Smear was not an established member.

Dave Grohl was.

Nirvana would not have been as big without him.

Motley Crue · 18-07-2012 9:49pm

Nikolas Rotten Marshmallow wrote: »

To say Dave Grohl is not an established member of Nirvana is insane.

Not insane, I am not saying he didn't contribute to the band by his very presence there, the facts speak for himself. But I maintain that I believe he was a hired hand and was hired to do a job and did so very well.

Nikolas Rotten Marshmallow wrote: »

Nirvana would not have been as big without him.

Nirvana would have reached the same level of stardom with someone else behind the kit. The drumming on Nevermind isn't exactly inspiring and is not the focal point for why the album/band became so phenomenally popular.

viadah · 19-07-2012 12:52am

Motley Crue wrote: »

Nirvana would have reached the same level of stardom with someone else behind the kit. The drumming on Nevermind isn't exactly inspiring and is not the focal point for why the album/band became so phenomenally popular.

Don't downplay how powerful a performance he put in, it knocks anything Nirvana's drummers had done previously into the shade and gave Nirvana what any three-piece needs - a ****ing solid rhythm section. Drummers don't get the credit they deserve, and working in a rehearsal studio I heard dozens of drummers mangling Grohl's beats, believe me, the attitude and passion of the man made a massive difference. I agree it wasn't the focal point but he brought an energy into the band's sound that they clearly needed.

Malice · 19-07-2012 9:06am

Motley Crue wrote: »

Pete Scaturro has two co-writing credits on Chinese Democracy but he was an audio engineer and arranger hired to work on some tracks, not a member of Guns N Roses at any point.

That is irrelevant to Dave Grohl's position in Nirvana.

Motley Crue wrote:

With a primary songwriter who had all this material created he was simply a passenger.

You've now called him a passenger twice. Maybe I'm working off a different definition but I just cannot see how that can be applied in this case. Is a passenger not someone who is carried by the rest of the band, contributes very little and wouldn't be missed if they were replaced by someone else? As viadah wrote, Grohl's energy and enthusiasm are not easily replicated even if the beats themselves are not all that complicated.

Motley Crue wrote:

just because he got a few writing credits doesn't automatically make him an established band member.

Again you're downplaying his contribution for some reason. Nirvana were formed in 1987 and disbanded in 1994. Grohl was a member of the band for a majority of those years, two of the three studio releases and all of the live releases. If he's not an established band member after that then what would it take for you to grant him that title?

Motley Crue · 19-07-2012 9:30am

Malice wrote: »

That is irrelevant to Dave Grohl's position in Nirvana.

Not if it illustrates that just because someone gets songwriting credits doesn't mean they are an established member of the band. And in this case just because someone was present during the recording of an album and contributed songwriting ideas/theories doesn't mean they're an established member of the band recording that album

Malice wrote: »

If he's not an established band member after that then what would it take for you to grant him that title?

I'll just have to disagree with you once again and leave it at that. Popular consenus dictates that most people obviously agree with you and see Dave G as an established (and whatever other word you want to use) member of Nirvana but I just don't see Dave in the same light, maybe because he was the sixth or seventh drummer on a revolving stool of drummers, maybe because of his lack of presence in the band during their formative years or maybe just because time has made me see him more as the genius behind the Foo Fighters and made me acknowledge that Kurt Cobain was and is Nirvana and there is little disputing that his songwriting and talent (even though I dislike Nirvana) made the man a one man show. If you want to say that I have something against Dave because of this, fine, but I really don't - I just see his talent better used in other areas I guess.

The OP started by asking about a Nirvana style reunion, I can't ever see anything like that happening, because for me without Kurt Cobain there just wouldn't seem a point in a Nirvana reunion - other bands, even Queen, can reunite and there is a spark of hope because their songs are so universally well known through adverts, sponsorship and tv commercials - thin lizzy for example - their songs are so well known because they almost commercialise the idea of being Irish with their music....or other people have since commercialised being Irish by using their music...either way their music is out there in the public domain.

With Nirvana, and what the band stood for, both respecting Cobain's own wishes and what that music means to people...it would just seem wrong to have 'Come As You Are' playing in an ad for the new Toyota or to have a Nirvana evening on the X Factor....Nirvana's music shouldn't be used like that because they'll be respected more for not bowing to a legal cash in and pissing on the memories of their former vocalist. A Nirvana reunion would almost break the unwritten rule that some bands shouldn't have their legacy destroyed by commercialism

Riddle101 · 19-07-2012 12:47pm

Motley Crue wrote: »

Not if it illustrates that just because someone gets songwriting credits doesn't mean they are an established member of the band. And in this case just because someone was present during the recording of an album and contributed songwriting ideas/theories doesn't mean they're an established member of the band recording that album

I'll just have to disagree with you once again and leave it at that. Popular consenus dictates that most people obviously agree with you and see Dave G as an established (and whatever other word you want to use) member of Nirvana but I just don't see Dave in the same light, maybe because he was the sixth or seventh drummer on a revolving stool of drummers, maybe because of his lack of presence in the band during their formative years or maybe just because time has made me see him more as the genius behind the Foo Fighters and made me acknowledge that Kurt Cobain was and is Nirvana and there is little disputing that his songwriting and talent (even though I dislike Nirvana) made the man a one man show. If you want to say that I have something against Dave because of this, fine, but I really don't - I just see his talent better used in other areas I guess.

By your logic, Rob Trujillo isn't an established member of Metallica, because 1)He was the 4th Bass Guitarist of Metallica. 2)Wasn't apart of Metallica during it's formulative years and 3)Has only contributed to one album since joining the band.

Ash.J.Williams · 19-07-2012 12:49pm

PTH2009 wrote: »

How come Dave Groul and Krist Novoselic never found a new singer and maybe do a tour or a few shows and even bring out a new album

If Queen can do it surly Nirvana could do it.

Or does Courtney Love own all of Nirvanas catalog and she would have to give the go ahead ??.

Discuss

because they are good people

Ash.J.Williams · 19-07-2012 12:52pm

Nikolas Rotten Marshmallow wrote: »

This is ridiculous.

To say Dave Grohl is not an established member of Nirvana is insane.

Pat Smear was not an established member.

Dave Grohl was.

Nirvana would not have been as big without him.

Absolutely, Nirvana "needed" grohl ...he was the missing piece they always needed and when he came on board they hit the stratosphere...

Nirvana was not a complete band until he joined...

Ash.J.Williams · 19-07-2012 12:53pm

Riddle101 wrote: »

By your logic, Rob Trujillo isn't an established member of Metallica, because 1)He was the 4th Bass Guitarist of Metallica. 2)Wasn't apart of Metallica during it's formulative years and 3)Has only contributed to one album since joining the band.

to be fair....even kirk is barely an established member at this stage....

"me and james drive the car and kirk and rob are in the back"
lars ulrich...

Rented Mule · 19-07-2012 12:56pm

seachto7 wrote: »

I think Nirvana was Kurt Cobain pretty much. I know AC DC managed it, but I don't see how it could have worked in Nirvana's case. It would even be more extreme than AIC getting a new singer, as Jerry Cantrell contributed a lot to the vocals as well.

The difference with AC/DC is that it is the Angus and Malcom Young band.

Nothing proves that more than the fact that they are on their 3rd lead singer.

Nirvana

Comments