bjaiken

I like how you are very liberal with my money :laugh3:

1) You are crazy if you think Kurt's voice is more powerful than Eddie's...this is not subjective...you are simply wrong. 2) It doesn't matter whether or not you like Chris's latest song. Stick to the topic. Kurt's voice is drastically weaker than Chris's. 3) Robert Plant and Freddie Mercury also were not listed in order to get your opinion. They were listed because there is no way Kurt Cobain's vocal power is even a fraction of theirs. This is not up for debate. You obviously like Kurt Cobain a lot, and that is fine. But you are not even being objective. EDIT: Remember, the topic is vocal power (or strength), not whose voice you like better.

I like Kid A a lot, but it is an album that has a very divided opinion surrounding it.

Powerful compared to who? Powerful is a relative term. I don't always agree with death_friends' analysis (which is natural), but at least he attempts to establish some type of evaluative criteria. Is Kurt's voice more powerful than mine...yes. Is Kurt's voice more powerful than Eddie Vedder's or Chris Cornell's...no. Is Kurt's voice more powerful than Robert Plant's of Freddie Mercury's...hell no. So far, all he's beaten is me, and that's not saying a whole lot. I don't think he's even in the top 5 amongst his contemporaries in his specific genre.

I'm not. I never ranked one band over the other. I am simply responding to your statement, "but like you bjaiken i would say that Pearl Jam are a far superior band and Eddie the more powerful singer." I only said that Eddie Vedder has a more powerful voice and that I prefer Pearl Jam's music. I feel pretty safe in making those two statements, but I never said one band is superior.

I don't get it. I went on line and was able to pull up 29 tickets (the maximum) together. What constitutes sold old? My definition is "no more tickets available for purchase." And no, I did not purchase the 29 tickets :)

A few quick things: 1) Geography is relevant because you rarely will find a U.K. singer sounding like a U.S. singer (or vice versa). I know it happens, but it's rare. Liam Gallagher sounds like a U.K. singer (in terms of accent), and Kurt Cobain sounds like an American singer. I did not see the comparison, and still don't, but at least it was clarified in terms of "uniqueness." Otherwise, the two are night and day vocally. 2) There is a "cult-like" status that surrounds Kurt Cobain since his death. I am not saying that applies to anyone on this board, in particular. Congratulations if you love Kurt Cobain based solely on his music. That's the way it should be. 3) I don't think Pearl Jam is a superior band to Nirvana. My musical taste just happens to be more toward Pearl Jam. 4) My admiration for Kurt Cobain has little to do with his ability to popularize a type of "underground" music. My admiration for Kurt Cobain has to do with the fact that he almost single handedly killed "hair metal" music, or at least made people feel ridiculous for liking it. I like a few "hair metal" bands (not many), but I will always be thankful for that contribution.

I don't know what the deal is with our local radio station, KROQ. They are listening the concert as sold out, but I can pull up tickets all day long on Ticketmaster.

Haha...I saw that too. The funny thing is that they have listed This Is Your Life as the 12th most played song on their website (up from 27th last week). It looks like they had already made up their mind without the vote.

Well, his voice was fairly unique, but I never thought it was very powerful. Not when you compare it to his contemporaries like Eddie Vedder and Chris Cornell. Those guys were capable of blowing down a house. There are several vocalists who have sounded like Kurt Cobain. Wes Scantlin from Puddle of Mudd is a dead ringer. Not that I'm giving any more credit to Wes Scantlin than I would to Scott Stapp for copying Eddie Vedder (and the list could go on). I don't really see anything wrong with the imitators (in fact, I kind of like some of them) so long as credit continues to go to the innovators. I also have no problem with the writer's comparison. These artists are doing their best to copy what has come before them. I don't exactly think David Cook or Chad Kroger will be remembered for pushing the boundaries of music - rest easy on that one. And Liam Gallagher?...that's a stretch. They're from completley different continents. But it is cool that you have such an enthusiasm for 90s alternative music. Usually these threads end up falling to the bottom of the message board.

I can't continue to have this discussion because it's getting frustrating. Nirvana hit hard, hit fast, and were gone. If you want to talk about commercial success, Pearl Jam's Ten was far more commercially viable than Nevermind. Kurt Cobain, himself, was not a fan of Pearl Jam, as he called them alternative, corporate cock rock (or something to that affect). There is no doubt that Nirvana kicked down the door with Smells Like Teen Spirit, but a lot of the success had to do with being at the right place at the right time. People were ready for a different sound, and Nirvana provided it in a way that others couldn't. Kurt Cobain is quoted as saying that Smells Like Teen Spirit was a blatant attempt to make a Pixies song, and Dave Grohl is on record saying it was almost not released for that very reason. Why the Pixies were unable to break down the door a few years earlier, I will never understand. Again, Nirvana was at the right place, at the right time, with the right sound. There's no doubt that his death does not add to the brilliance of his music, I have already admitted this fact. All I can say is that there is a legacy in his death that was not there during his life. I can only chalk that up to the fact that we, as people, tend to take better notice of brilliance when it is taken away than when it walks amongst us. If you don't believe that his death added to his legacy, I don't know what to tell you. I was in high school during this time and I ate, breathed, and slept this type of music, so I know what I know and no one is going to change my mind, but you are free to your own opinion.

That's what I thought would happen in Los Angeles, but it didn't.

Yeah, he's part of the "Forever 27" club, as his/their image is forever frozen in time at the age of 27.

^ He's not directly comparing them in terms of equals. He's stating how Kurt Cobain's singing style established a vocal template for many other artists. Many of the post-grunge era bands took the sound of bands like Nirvana, Pearl Jam, Soundgarden, Alice in Chains and smoothed out the edges in order to achieve mainstream success. In terms of record sales, it has worked out well for the artists who have chosen to do this, however, they usually take a beating from music critics as well as the fans who loved the original sound.

How did today's onsales do in other parts of the U.S.? I have to say, I don't think they extraordinarily well in Los Angeles. You can still pull up most ticket levels with the exception of GA. Even as large as the Rose Bowl is, I still thought the entire thing would sell out by the end of the day. I now feel like a second night might not be added, or at least until the first night sells more tickets.

Thanks. I scan interference all the time just to get U2 information. I never post on that board because, as a general rule, hardcore U2 fans drive me nuts.

^^ Thanks for the advice. I am not normally obsessed about GA, but I needed it this time for a number of reasons: 1) I finish graduate school in May and perhaps will need to move for my job. GA tickets are the easiest to sell or trade. I would then look to go to the show that is nearest to the city I am living in (if that happens to be the case). 2) GA is the best bang for the buck. $50 to be on the floor is not to bad. 3) I expect this to be a weak ticket market. A lot of people are buying tickets based on speculation. If they add a second night, I would expect ticket prices to go down. I usually buy tickets on the secondary market anyhow. I usually get them at 40-60% of face (and don't have to pay those ticket fees). It has been the only way I have been able to afford to go to all the shows I attend, as concerts are expensive. Perhaps ticket values will remain strong. That's always the chance you take...

Well, no luck on the general sale for Los Angeles. Not like I am surprised. I limited my ticket request to GA only. I am not worried, I have a lot of tricks up my sleeve :) EDIT: Actually, there still are plenty of tickets for sale, as I am pulling them up left and right. I just don't want anything besides GA right now.

That's you. A general statement, by its very definition, is not going to apply to everyone.

I get to join the circus tomorrow as I try to get tickets for Los Angeles. If I don't pull up GA, I am just going to wait. I will try to get my tickets on the secondary market. Plus, I have a feeling they will add another California date, but I am not sure whether it will be in San Francisco, San Diego, or another night in Los Angeles. We'll see...

Three things have gone into immortalizing Kurt Cobain: 1) The fact that he was a brilliant talent 2) The fact that he died young 3) The fact that he died tragically Kurt Cobain's legend has grown since his death, and I don't think you will be able to convince me that #2 and #3 have not played a role. Furthermore, I think our historical perspective of Kurt Cobain has been skewed by this fact, and I don't think that is a good thing. That is my opinion, but I respect the fact that you disagree.

Kurt Cobain was brilliant, and it's a shame Nirvana ended like it did. However, I don't like it when artists who end their life early seem to be immortalized at a level that perhaps they would not have achieved had they lived on, and that's not taking anything away from Cobain. Everyone knows he never wanted attention or accolades.

Can you say apples and oranges?

Wow! I would have loved to see Bruce back in 84. He still puts on a great show, but that was his prime (IMO).

Sunday Bloody Sunday - U2