Alex28 said:
Pixies and Mudhoney are far more influential than Nirvana. Nirvana simply made alternate music more mainstream.
That's what you said.."far more influential".
Your wrong..the Pixies meant sh*t to some kid from Kalgoorlie sitting there listening to Nevermind for the first time.
THE PIXIES ..WHO?
Maybe in one small part of the USA, but not here or Offenbach in Germany or Barcelona in Spain.
Nor did the Pixies mean sh*t to any of my mates..and we didn't have a fuggen Nirvana t-shirt.
We started a 3 piece band because of Nirvana..
We played "Molly's lips " , "Anuerysm" and "Negative Creep" ...none of them are off nevermind or In Utero .
Why? because we loved those early songs. ( Molly was a cover )
How old are you Alex,were you even there ? no doco will help you if you weren't.
When Nirvana came here for the first big day out in 92 they were just about to explode all around the world and it was amazing .
When they played the Hordern it was the most powerful feeling of excitement and anticipation I have ever felt at a gig.
The album was about 3 months old here in OZ and every single sweaty kid in that room knew every word to every song.
Influential? F
UCK YEAH!
Mudhoney ....BWHAHAHAHA ordinary at best.
Plenty of Aussie bands at the time blew them off the stage everytime.
Beasts of Bourbon, Tumbleweed and the Hard Ons made mudhoney look like the Archies.
So what wasn't credible about Nirvana's music?
I'm finding it hard to take this seriously or are you just arguing for the sake of it.