• You're one step from joining Guitar Discussion Forum - The Fret.
    Create a free account to post, follow threads, and never miss an update.  Sign up free →

90's Icon - for better or worse

Guitar Discussion Forum - The Fret

Help Support TheFret.net:

sunvalleylaw

Contributing Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2006
Messages
10,932
Reaction score
1
City & State/Province
Sun Valley, Idaho
Since it was brought up in the RIP Jimmy thread, I submit the following:



This from Pandora:

Prior to Nirvana, alternative music was consigned to specialty sections of record stores, and major labels considered it to be, at the very most, a tax write-off. After the band's second album, 1991's Nevermind, nothing was ever quite the same, for better and for worse. Nirvana popularized punk, post-punk, and indie rock, unintentionally bringing it into the American mainstream like no other band to date. While their sound was equal parts Black Sabbath (as learned by fellow Washington underground rockers the Melvins) and Cheap Trick, Nirvana's aesthetics were strictly indie rock. They covered Vaselines songs, they revived new wave cuts by Devo, and leader Kurt Cobain relentlessly pushed his favorite bands -- whether it was the art punk of the Raincoats or the country-fried hardcore of the Meat Puppets -- as if his favorite records were always more important than his own music. While Nirvana's ideology was indie rock and their melodies were pop, the sonic rush of their records and live shows merged the post-industrial white noise with heavy metal grind. And that's what made the group an unprecedented multi-platinum sensation. Jane's Addiction and Soundgarden may have proven to the vast American heavy metal audience that alternative could rock, and the Pixies may have merged pop sensibilities with indie rock white noise, but Nirvana pulled at all together, creating a sound that was both fiery and melodic. Since Nirvana was rooted in the indie aesthetic but loved pop music, they fought their stardom while courting it, becoming some of the most notorious anti-rock stars in history. The result was a conscious attempt to shed their audience with the abrasive In Utero, which only partially fulfilled the band's goal. But by that point, the fate of the band and Kurt Cobain had been sealed. Suffering from drug addiction and manic depression, Cobain had become destructive and suicidal, though his management and label were able to hide the extent of his problems from the public until April 8, 1994, when he was found dead of a self-inflicted shotgun wound. Cobain may not have been able to weather Nirvana's success, but the band's legacy stands as one of the most influential in rock & roll history.

Didn't like Kurt's choices, but I did like the music. Along with Soundgarden, Alice in Chains, and some others, they remain '90s favorites of this Tacoma native.
 
Steve, good post. I understand what you are trying to say about Cobain, and I agree with you. While he may not have been the most technically proficient guitar player in the world, there is a LOT more to music than that. His influence is undeniable and much appreciated by some of us.

I must admit though, I can't stand Soundgarden or Alice In Chains. Pearl Jam on the other hand, I love thoroughly. Mike McCready is another influential guitar player of the 90's.
 
Yep, that is perfectly ok not to like all of them or agree completely on taste. Fun to discuss and thus discover though. I really do like some Pearl Jam (Crazy Mary has to be my favorite), and a lot of Vedder's solo stuff, but PJ was probably my least favorite at the time of the Seattle grunge bands. I like Cornell's strong vocals in Soundgarden, and A in C's lush sounds.
 
If we're being honest, it's Cornell's vocals that are what I don't care for in Soundgarden. It's the same reason I don't care for Audioslave, which is a shame because as far as modern rock guitar players go, Tom Morello is right up there for me.

On the subject of 90's guitar icons, I would be remiss not to mention Jonny Greenwood as Radiohead began in 1991. Jonny is a constant innovator and has helped redefine what can be done with the instrument.
 
I thought I remembered you saying that one other time about Cornell. I like discussing things with people that don't agree with me. Honesty is desired. I honestly have not spent much time listening to Radiohead, though I know you have. I need to go check more of them out. Actually, I am going to change the music I have going on Pandora right now to a Radiohead song and see what happens.
 
I also find respectful disagreement makes for great conversations. If we all agreed, this would get boring in a hurry. If you have any questions about Radiohead feel free to ask. They have a fairly good-sized catalog, and their sound is fairly dynamic (both within particular albums as well as from one album to the next). I'm happy to play tour guide if required. :D
 
I am bookmarking a few songs as they come on in Pandora as I listen. I may ask some questions as I get more familiar. I will let my ears do the walking for right now, and get back to you. :-)
 
I remember when "Smells Like Teen Spirit" came out. Nirvana effectively killed hair metal and shred dead almost overnight.

There was an interesting interview in the new Guitar World with Mark Varney, who founded Shrapnel Records. He was lamenting the rise of grunge and how it almost killed his record label. He had to diversify in to other areas, jazz I think.

One of the down sides of the grunge revolution was it was suddenly uncool to play the guitar well. Varney said a lot of shred/metal guitarists had to dumb down their skills to make a living.

A few years ago I picked up a Warrant album at a library sale. I was listening to it on the way home and it occurred to me that even though the songs were generic hair/pop metal, the musicians in that band had tremendous facility with their instruments. Not so anymore.

I started listening to music in the early 80s and gravitated towards metal early on. I wasn't a big fan of hair metal or shred at the time, but I developed an appreciation for it later on.

To a certain extent, grunge was about gloom and doom, and that got old quick. None of those bands ever appeared to be having any fun, despite the millions they were earning. Hair metal, OTOH, was all about partying and getting laid. Those guys were determined to have fun, even if it killed them :AOK:

tung
 
I bought "Nevermind" when it first came out. While it didn't have the technical expertise I tended to like, it had the soul of metal. Unfortunately it also pretty much killed off skilled guitar playing. I liked some Pearl Jam, but preferred Soundgarden (particularly "Birth Ritual") and Alice in Chains ("Would").
 
"Soul of metal", yeah, I think it had that. On hard days when I was heading to juvenile court proceedings for clients, this one would satisfy sometimes. You have to understand the futility that sometimes imbues those proceedings (not nearly always, but sometimes).

 
I tend to lag behind when it comes to some music and the grunge was one of those I just didn't get for a long time. Now I think Pearl Jam is very entertaining and I see what the attraction is. Nirvana on the other hand I probably will listen a little closer than there early years, but to me Kirk is a turnoff and although it's unfortunate on how he checked out, I don't see him as any trail blazer or musical influence. Some people reach a false status or put on a pedestal through death and IMHO he is one of them.
 
I have to say grunge and the 90's are about my favorites for music. I really like nirvana, sound gardedn, pearl jam, alice in chains etc. now the airwaves are filled with screamo (blah) and bubble gam rap (double blah)
 
Yeahhh they've come to snuff the roosterrrrrr ahhh yeahhhhhhh

During the grunge era I was building my house so it was always on during the days and late nights. My guitars took a backseat during those years because I was building a house duh so my only solace was grunge.
 
If we're talking about players of "Icon" status ie; Berry, VanHalen, Hendrix, SRV......only two players in the 90's in my mind come close.

Joe Satriani and Slash, and in my opinion they aren't in the same class as the players above. To be a true icon, a player has to change how the instrument is viewed & played. Granted, Satch and Slash are great players but did they redefine the style of play of a generation?
 
I think you see (hear) Nirvana's true talent come out in their MTV Unplugged performance. I still say that it is one of the greatest performances of all time. It really takes me back every time I hear something from that performance.
 
merlin said:
I think you see (hear) Nirvana's true talent come out in their MTV Unplugged performance. I still say that it is one of the greatest performances of all time. It really takes me back every time I hear something from that performance.

I really like that album too. Here is one or two. I always thought I could here the Beatles influence on them in this performance.





Teleman, I guess I was thinking of "Icon" in a cultural, pop context, rather than how you are defining it. I think of rock posters that you see up. You see a lot of Jimi Hendrix, the Beatles, Garcia and the Dead, and you see Cobain and Nirvana a fair amount, though not nearly as much as the others I mentioned. Maybe Slash is catching up, but you don't see a bunch of Satch posters in the clubs and basements, etc. So I don't really disagree with you if you define icon as you say. But I do enjoy grunge. I would rather hear fewer notes played with feeling combined with lyrics that mean something to me than hear tons of notes and see Roth or Hagar dancing around in tights singing about partying. Just my preferences though. Just viewing it differently.

Also I do think that Nirvana and Pearl Jam. etc. did change how the X generation played, and listened to music. Less produced, a big move away from stadium rock effects, lights, show, etc. Back to basics. Kinda like punk as well. It was rebellion, which to me is at the heart of rock. The play also reflected that, and the grungers rang more true with X'ers than metal bands, or Van Halen, Clapton, even with what Zeppelin was doing at the time. Satriani and the rock instrumental guys were a different deal. I am on the cusp. According to the mags, I can claim Boomer or X'er. During the 90's I claimed X'er. I did not like what the boomers were up to then.

As far as moving guitar technique forward, I get what you are saying. But I think stripping it down was part of the point of grunge, as it was with punk. It was definitely anti establishment, which is a part of rock and roll in my mind, and the boomer era musicians were the establishment at that time. I read an interview of Clapton linked here that complained that punk nearly killed music. Well, if the more technically proficient musicians were not grabbing the attention of the kids, I would not blame the musicians that were. The technically proficient were not doing music that seemed as relevant at the time, at least to me. Neil Young hooked on and was saying things that were relevant, and had a great decade. But he is not considered by most that are looking for proficiency to be any kind of guitar hero. But I love the messages.

tunghaichuan said:
One of the down sides of the grunge revolution was it was suddenly uncool to play the guitar well. Varney said a lot of shred/metal guitarists had to dumb down their skills to make a living.

A few years ago I picked up a Warrant album at a library sale. I was listening to it on the way home and it occurred to me that even though the songs were generic hair/pop metal, the musicians in that band had tremendous facility with their instruments.

tung

tung, like I said before, I viewed as a rebel thing. And you point out the problem, that Warrant album was generic hair/pop metal. Didn't say anything to me. I am not sure anyone really had to dumb anything down, just needed to express something more. The Pandora text above has some explanation about how it got so popular.

The proficient of the day did not speak to me. Except for SRV. Now I first became aware of him in the 90s, and he was definitely relevant and riveting to me, and I was not a guitar player yet. He is definitely a 90's icon in my mind as well. His adaptations of Hendrix, and his own techniques certainly have move guitar forward and affected play.
 
Although not known to many people outside guitar playing circles, I would say Buckethead is a 90s icon. He definitely changed the way I wanted to hear guitar music played.

He got his start on the Praxis album Transmutation: Mutatis Mutandis about the same time grunge came to the forefront of popular music. He definitely is not grunge. He mostly combines psycho shred, funk, metal, and general weirdness in his music. What I always liked about his playing was that it has a sense of humor which is mostly lacking in grunge. Sure, sometimes the humor is sick and twisted, but at least it is there.

I find it fascinating that Buckethead was able to build a rabid following during anti-chops/anti-technical guitar playing era of grunge. And he has chops to spare.

tung
 
Tung, I agree with you 100% about Buckethead. His projects are so varied that they really show how exceptionally versatile he is. You also hit the nail right on the head about his injection of humor into his music. It's refreshing.

That said, I also agree with SV Steve about Nirvana, and in general about the appeal of non-virtuoso players. There is more to making appealing music than just technically proficient playing. Nobody was ever going to give Johnny Ramone an award for being a virtuoso on the fretboard and yet he had a massive influence on the way many guitarists who followed played the instrument. Personally, I see grunge as something of an extension of the overall punk music scene. Perhaps not related in a direct line, but as far as the approach in general.

Steve brought up Neil Young. There is also a lot to be said for some of the music from the "lo-fi" bands of the late 1980's/1990's who were inspired by Neil (Dinosaur Jr., Pavement, Built to Spill, etc). These bands played music that was heavy on the guitars and guitar effects, but not necessarily exceptionally skilled playing (though in some cases J. Mascis and Stephen Malkmus played beautifully). Also, not all of the music of these bands is hopeless or depressing like some of their grunge contemporaries.

Different strokes for different folks, but there is a lot of great music out there that was not made by the most skilled players. There are times when I find it a bit more inspiring because it seems a more achievable goal.
 
R_of_G said:
Tung, I agree with you 100% about Buckethead. His projects are so varied that they really show how exceptionally versatile he is. You also hit the nail right on the head about his injection of humor into his music. It's refreshing.

Looking back, he basically kept shred alive through the 90s. Although unlike the repetitive, mechanical predecessors of the 80s, Buckethead brought unpredictability to the table. He often went off in directions that a listener wouldn't expect.

Some people are turned off by all the goofy, weirdo shtick, but I think it is brilliant: once he becomes tired of the Buckethead persona, he can go back to being Brian Carroll.

tung
 
buckethead definitely can play....i like his ballad stuff the best....i wonder how he came up with the whole buckethead gimmick?

ww
 
warren0728 said:
buckethead definitely can play....i like his ballad stuff the best....i wonder how he came up with the whole buckethead gimmick?

I dunno. But some people that actually know him have suggested that it may not be a gimmick. He may just be that weird. Who knows, maybe he can't shed his persona. :confused:

tung
 
tunghaichuan said:
Looking back, he basically kept shred alive through the 90s. Although unlike the repetitive, mechanical predecessors of the 80s, Buckethead brought unpredictability to the table. He often went off in directions that a listener wouldn't expect.

Some people are turned off by all the goofy, weirdo shtick, but I think it is brilliant: once he becomes tired of the Buckethead persona, he can go back to being Brian Carroll.

tung

Once more, I agree on all counts. His abilities are so diverse that I can see him being in pretty high demand (at least in certain circles) if he ever decides to lose the bucket and the mask. Either way, he intrigues me with his playing and I'm always on the lookout for new projects he's involved with.
 
R_of_G said:
Once more, I agree on all counts. His abilities are so diverse that I can see him being in pretty high demand (at least in certain circles) if he ever decides to lose the bucket and the mask. Either way, he intrigues me with his playing and I'm always on the lookout for new projects he's involved with.

To tell the truth, I've been disappointed by a few of his latest solo efforts. It's almost like he's just "phoning it in" so to speak. I used to buy anything he put out, but lately I just don't want to fork over my hard-earned cash for yet another disappointing release. I did like the Praxis album recorded in Tennessee, though. And there is another new Praxis album out now, only available as a Japanese import, but again I'm kind of ambivalent.

tung
 
See, now there ya go. I am aware of those players a bit, but because of my geographic proximity to grunge in the 90s, and the fact I stayed in the "alternative" column rather than anything smacking of shred or metal, I am not sufficiently familiar with Buckethead work in general and this new project R_of_G mentions. Will have to check it out. Other than Seattle bands, for rock and popular music I listened to the Chili Peppers, Janes Addiction etc. back in those days. For virtuosity, I tended to leave the rock field and move on to jazz or classical.
 
Steve,

If you want to try before you buy, check out Buckethead's Giant Robot NTT release. This album was released and quickly went out of print. There were many samples on the album so Buckethead will never be able to release it again. Apparently, anyone who wants to download it has Buckethead's blessing:

http://www.buckethead-coop.com/downloads.html

There are a few other things you can download to get a taste of his music. Admittedly, he's not for everyone, but some of his playing is flat out brilliant.

EDIT: my all-time favorite Buckethead video:



The live version of "Whitewash" from Colma. Colma is a city in California; the entire city is a cemetary.

tung


sunvalleylaw said:
See, now there ya go. I am aware of those players a bit, but because of my geographic proximity to grunge in the 90s, and the fact I stayed in the "alternative" column rather than anything smacking of shred or metal, I am not sufficiently familiar with Buckethead work in general and this new project R_of_G mentions. Will have to check it out. Other than Seattle bands, for rock and popular music I listened to the Chili Peppers, Janes Addiction etc. back in those days. For virtuosity, I tended to leave the rock field and move on to jazz or classical.
 
Last edited:
Seattle Grunge was huge also here in Germany, in 1992 I met one of my best friends who is from Seattle and who was an exchange student at our school at that time. one year long we partied and listened to all the Seattle stuff, I love PJ and also saw them live at the Key Arena in Seattle, I always liked Nirvana and Cobains voice, Soundgarden was cool, especially I liked the Tempel Of The Dog Project and the Afghan Whigs who lived in the city where my friend came from. Guitarists like Mike McCready or even Kurt Cobain woke me up from my 19" eventide rack dreams and brought me back to plug and play and write songs!

When I was in Seattle there were still a bunch of local grunge bands and the scene was still very much alive. I am happy that I was right there when it all happened and that this is my generation - although being a bluesfan through and through, listening to some PJ stuff leads me back memory lane!
 
Back
Top