Has evryone forgotten what the grunge sound really was ?
nowayimfaithfull
Posts: 2,051
I know half of you are going to say, you have no clue but. Heres a try.
These bands pushed for a classic rock structured song, like Aerosmoth, Kiss, Stones, Zep, ESPECIALLY THE BEATLES.
bUTTTTTTT
They played their songs with punk chords, and even some minor chords. Just like the later beatles music. The bands looked for a non metal sound on their productions a lot of distortion and reveb, comming out like a punk band not a metal band. There is a show in 2000, where Ed starts talking about how bands all over the world tune their instruments, and than boasts how seattle musicians tune their instruments.
They really are proud of their sound. After ten pj went out of their way to capture their well wrote well crafted music in like 1 to 2 recordings in a live atmosphere. The whole band performing it.
Ala rvm. A lot of these bands you guys tend to like the sound of all do there music seperatley in studio, than the singer comes in and lays down his lyrics. I am not saying what is right or wrong, but its what these bands have taken alot of pride in. They faught for their punk sound and image very hard during those years. Now things change and obviously they have experimitted.
But i do not they look back on these recordings as mistakes they missed.
These bands pushed for a classic rock structured song, like Aerosmoth, Kiss, Stones, Zep, ESPECIALLY THE BEATLES.
bUTTTTTTT
They played their songs with punk chords, and even some minor chords. Just like the later beatles music. The bands looked for a non metal sound on their productions a lot of distortion and reveb, comming out like a punk band not a metal band. There is a show in 2000, where Ed starts talking about how bands all over the world tune their instruments, and than boasts how seattle musicians tune their instruments.
They really are proud of their sound. After ten pj went out of their way to capture their well wrote well crafted music in like 1 to 2 recordings in a live atmosphere. The whole band performing it.
Ala rvm. A lot of these bands you guys tend to like the sound of all do there music seperatley in studio, than the singer comes in and lays down his lyrics. I am not saying what is right or wrong, but its what these bands have taken alot of pride in. They faught for their punk sound and image very hard during those years. Now things change and obviously they have experimitted.
But i do not they look back on these recordings as mistakes they missed.
Some people have religion I have Pearl Jam.
no more shows
no more shows
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
-
I think I have a copy of pretty much every grunge album ever released... I mean really obscure bands as well like Cat Butt... but I ripped all my cds onto my computer and put the originals in storage because my apartment is tiny.
I'll never forget what the seattle sound is/was... I grew up listening to it.0 -
Stephen Flow wrote:I think I have a copy of pretty much every grunge album ever released... I mean really obscure bands as well like Cat Butt... but I ripped all my cds onto my computer and put the originals in storage because my apartment is tiny.
I'll never forget what the seattle sound is/was... I grew up listening to it.
Yes remeber grunt ruck, my point I guess is in relation to everyone wanting to change the bands sound. I read some stuff where they act like the band didnt realize their albums had a flat sound. I think they had a cause with these recordings.
Like in grievance, there is a not that mike hits that is straight up punk in the 2 minute mark, I read on here recently that they missed that and forgot to take it out of the song.Some people have religion I have Pearl Jam.
no more shows0 -
In my humble opinion, grunge was/is more about the LOOK and much less about the SOUND. Pearl Jam, Nirvana etc. all have loud, heavy metal, fast paced songs AND softer, more acoustical material that co-exist on all their albums. It was about the grungy, wrinklled, non-shaved look that all the Seattle bands adopted back then that seemed to represent GRUNGE. As if to say it's about the music, fuck what we look like.Boston II 94 Boston II 06 Mansfield I 08 Mansfield II 08 Seattle I 09 Seattle II 09
Hartford 10 Boston 10 Wrigley 13 Worcester I 13 Worcester II 13 Hartford 13
NYC I 16 NYC II 16 Fenway I 16 Fenway II 16 Fenway 1 18 Fenway II 18
E.V. Boston II 08 E.V. Albany II 09 E.V. Providence 11, E.V. Boston 11
Troubled Souls Unite0 -
Grunge was more of a scene, than a genre. Loads of grunge bands sounded different. It also has to be out of Seattle. Sorry, but I'm an elitist.What the fuck is this world?0
-
morgie2 wrote:In my humble opinion, grunge was/is more about the LOOK and much less about the SOUND. Pearl Jam, Nirvana etc. all have loud, heavy metal, fast paced songs AND softer, more acoustical material that co-exist on all their albums. It was about the grungy, wrinklled, non-shaved look that all the Seattle bands adopted back then that seemed to represent GRUNGE. As if to say it's about the music, fuck what we look like.
The word grunge was created by the media, sure, but those bands had a very distinct sound at the time that was signature of the Seattle area.
Sludgy and Fuzzy.0 -
Murderers wrote:Grunge was more of a scene, than a genre. Loads of grunge bands sounded different. It also has to be out of Seattle. Sorry, but I'm an elitist.
I don't know, not all "Seattle" bands were from Seattle proper. If you wanna get that specific.
But I hate when people call bands like Smashing Pumpkins and STP "grunge" because to me they were just alternative rock bands, which is all grunge bands ever were really, it's just that all those bands came from one area in the country.0 -
nowayimfaithfull wrote:Yes remeber grunt ruck, my point I guess is in relation to everyone wanting to change the bands sound. I read some stuff where they act like the band didnt realize their albums had a flat sound. I think they had a cause with these recordings.
Like in grievance, there is a not that mike hits that is straight up punk in the 2 minute mark, I read on here recently that they missed that and forgot to take it out of the song.
Gruntruck
0 -
Just like punk fashion and the punk scene would have never happened without punk music, grunge was a musical direction initially - combining contrasting punk and pop song elements with distorted guitars (nods to the Pixies).
And NOBODY walked around in spandex and makeup (guys) until after Hair Metal started as a musical genre. Ugh.
I'll ride the wave where it takes me...0 -
morgie2 wrote:In my humble opinion, grunge was/is more about the LOOK and much less about the SOUND. Pearl Jam, Nirvana etc. all have loud, heavy metal, fast paced songs AND softer, more acoustical material that co-exist on all their albums. It was about the grungy, wrinklled, non-shaved look that all the Seattle bands adopted back then that seemed to represent GRUNGE. As if to say it's about the music, fuck what we look like.
They were not heavy metal, they really were'nt
They fused together punk/mainstream/classic rock, after Ten they added Eds folk. There is no acoustic on Ten.
Most people in the music world dont care about look, I am talking sound, these bands were on a mission.
This is really not my humble opinion, I am not a musician, I have read alot of old interviews and the five agaist 1 book. And listened to some interviews mainly soundgarden.
I hear you with the look, I am not saying you are wrong, christ mtv and magazines plastered that shit everywhere.
I am going back to the pre ten days, with like early sg, and nirvana, and green river, Also Ed had alot to say about their direction before lets say vitalogy.Some people have religion I have Pearl Jam.
no more shows0 -
Murderers wrote:Grunge was more of a scene, than a genre. Loads of grunge bands sounded different. It also has to be out of Seattle. Sorry, but I'm an elitist.
If I'm not mistaken, Neil Young was/is considered the "Godfather of Grunge" and he's Canadian, not a Seattle-ite.
He wore the clothes, he fit the sound, and look no further than Live Rust or Rust Never Sleeps for proof. His sound fell somewhere between classic/hard rock (Van Halen/Motley Crue) and metal (Black Sabbath) and had the same heavy riff/acoustic tinge feel that someone else talked about. And he's from Canada. Not Seattle. Most Seattle bands wouldn't have really passed for "grunge" anyway, save for The Melvins (who didn't have the commercial success most of the bands out of Seattle had in the early '90s.)4.6.94 Springfield 4.12.94 Boston III (Orpheum) 10.2.96 Hartford 9.16.98 Mansfield II 8.29.00 Mansfield I 7.11.03 Mansfield III 9.29.04 Boston II 5.24.06 Boston I 6.30.08 Mansfield II0 -
Yeah, I know. Nirvana for example.Stephen Flow wrote:I don't know, not all "Seattle" bands were from Seattle proper. If you wanna get that specific.
But I hate when people call bands like Smashing Pumpkins and STP "grunge" because to me they were just alternative rock bands, which is all grunge bands ever were really, it's just that all those bands came from one area in the country.
And yeah; to me the definition of grunge is a band out of the seattle scene from 85-95.What the fuck is this world?0 -
yesss right onnukeboot wrote:Just like punk fashion and the punk scene would have never happened without punk music, grunge was a musical direction initially - combining contrasting punk and pop song elements with distorted guitars (nods to the Pixies).
And NOBODY walked around in spandex and makeup (guys) until after Hair Metal started as a musical genre. Ugh.
would you agree jains addiction too, I read an old jeff interview, where he goes into going to a show and saying yes, this is what we need to do
cool, also heavy metal lacked substance, it seemed at the point where the hair became a point of the music the songs got cheesey.
I think Eds we hate mainstream success outlook preserved their music, where if he got caught up in the so called (look) the music perception of the music might have been distorted. This is where he became a loud agressive punker, and a more melodic writer, no code is a very agreesive but warm and fuzzy album. You can hear the punk, and than feel the beatles.Some people have religion I have Pearl Jam.
no more shows0 -
Murderers wrote:Grunge was more of a scene, than a genre. Loads of grunge bands sounded different. It also has to be out of Seattle. Sorry, but I'm an elitist.
They all had many different influences as well as different sounds. Nirvana was more a punk sound with other influences.
Pearl Jam had more of a classic rock sound with a blues influence thanks to Mike McCready. His playing just bleeds the blues sound.
Alice in Chains was totally different than those bands too.
Totally agree, more of a scene than a sound.I'll ride the wave where it takes me.0 -
Yeah, AiC had strong metal influences. Soundgarden where pretty straight up rock.Stone Is God wrote:They all had many different influences as well as different sounds. Nirvana was more a punk sound with other influences.
Pearl Jam had more of a classic rock sound with a blues influence thanks to Mike McCready. His playing just bleeds the blues sound.
Alice in Chains was totally different than those bands too.
Totally agree, more of a scene than a sound.
I suppose Neil Young, The Melvins, and Meat Puppets where the biggest influences on grunge but they where around long before the term was coined by Mark Arm.What the fuck is this world?0 -
morgie2 wrote:In my humble opinion, grunge was/is more about the LOOK and much less about the SOUND. Pearl Jam, Nirvana etc. all have loud, heavy metal, fast paced songs AND softer, more acoustical material that co-exist on all their albums. It was about the grungy, wrinklled, non-shaved look that all the Seattle bands adopted back then that seemed to represent GRUNGE. As if to say it's about the music, fuck what we look like.
"Grunge" wasn't really a sound so much, just a way to jumble all these new artists into one lump category. The only band I would consider even putting in a category called 'grunge' would be the melvins (and maybe parts of badmotorfinger), and they were doing it long before the early 90's music explosion. Each band had a different sound and influence, and I have to say the only one I can think of that was actually influenced by the melvins was Nirvana. They were more of a pop/punk sound anyway, everything you loved about the Ramones and the Dead Kennedys rolled into one, with some fantastic acoustic tracks you didn't get from either band. the Melvins influence is most tangible on Bleach. Mudhoney was influenced by 60s fuzz/70's punk and glam, Pearl Jam's roots are in classic and glam (green river and MLB, need I say more?) Soundgarden was more of a hard rock/metal band than anything until Superunknown, and you'd never hear me call Alice in Chains a metal band, but they weren't far off.4.6.94 Springfield 4.12.94 Boston III (Orpheum) 10.2.96 Hartford 9.16.98 Mansfield II 8.29.00 Mansfield I 7.11.03 Mansfield III 9.29.04 Boston II 5.24.06 Boston I 6.30.08 Mansfield II0 -
Mahone wrote:If I'm not mistaken, Neil Young was/is considered the "Godfather of Grunge" and he's Canadian, not a Seattle-ite.
He wore the clothes, he fit the sound, and look no further than Live Rust or Rust Never Sleeps for proof. His sound fell somewhere between classic/hard rock (Van Halen/Motley Crue) and metal (Black Sabbath) and had the same heavy riff/acoustic tinge feel that someone else talked about. And he's from Canada. Not Seattle. Most Seattle bands wouldn't have really passed for "grunge" anyway, save for The Melvins (who didn't have the commercial success most of the bands out of Seattle had in the early '90s.)
Yes but you are going from start to finsh.
and vh and motley crue ??????????? and sabbath
thats sounds like guns and roses
neil got his nickname for his tunning. thats all, those crunchy stone riffs, and the i got id leeds
the music scene was bad in the late 80s, we would all agree.
In seattle the scene was punk, there are stories of jeff, cornell, stone, doing gigs and catching alot of shit. With their early bands, they wanted to have the same feel of their counterpart bands but not be afraid of using the music they grew up on in their sound. they caught alot of shit and fights broke out in the audience in some shows
they went out on the road and there were 10 people in the audience for a green river show at cbgbs.
it states on page 23 of five aginst 1 thqat these punk bands weere about speed, and the grunge ones were not.Some people have religion I have Pearl Jam.
no more shows0 -
I guess what people might want to do is read the first chapter of five aginst 1, it really goes into what jeff and stone, and mark arm, ecxt exct, were up too, there is a lot of facts on how serious they took this sound, I cant write all of it.Murderers wrote:Yeah, I know. Nirvana for example.
And yeah; to me the definition of grunge is a band out of the seattle scene from 85-95.
But man they spent years on it.
They were hated in seattle in the late 80 s, Seattle gets the tag becasue the music scene in l.a and other cities was horrible, so when a group of bands fights through their own city non the less, and than the country, and than the world, that deserves its own genre.
There were times in seattle where clubs were closed for booking punk bands, it is a very hearty music city.Some people have religion I have Pearl Jam.
no more shows0 -
Stone Is God wrote:They all had many different influences as well as different sounds. Nirvana was more a punk sound with other influences.
Pearl Jam had more of a classic rock sound with a blues influence thanks to Mike McCready. His playing just bleeds the blues sound.
Alice in Chains was totally different than those bands too.
Totally agree, more of a scene than a sound.
You just contradicted yourself a lil, mikes speed bleeds blues but his sound is punk, even more today.
alice and chains was no differant on their first couple albums,Some people have religion I have Pearl Jam.
no more shows0 -
Murderers wrote:Yeah, AiC had strong metal influences. Soundgarden where pretty straight up rock.
I suppose Neil Young, The Melvins, and Meat Puppets where the biggest influences on grunge but they where around long before the term was coined by Mark Arm.
those bands plus
kiss, zepplin, the beatles, aerosmith
green river was going to use joe perry to produce an album
soundgarden on their first 3 albums had an array of differant tunning, and were not straight up rock, when they lightened up alil their songs became more structered like beatles songs, and a lot of beatles minor riffs.Some people have religion I have Pearl Jam.
no more shows0 -
They where mainly straight up rock. I'm talking about Badmotorfinger really.nowayimfaithfull wrote:those bands plus
kiss, zepplin, the beatles, aerosmith
green river was going to use joe perry to produce an album
soundgarden on their first 3 albums had an array of differant tunning, and were not straight up rock, when they lightened up alil their songs became more structered like beatles songs, and a lot of beatles minor riffs.What the fuck is this world?0
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.9K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110.1K The Porch
- 275 Vitalogy
- 35.1K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.2K Flea Market
- 39.2K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help