Just a reminder I will never ask you to reach out to me through Telegram or Whatsapp or anything else. If a comment or message doesn't come from one of my verified accounts IT'S NOT ME!
(Homer's auto-dialer message.)Homer: Greetings, friends. Do you wish to look as happy as me? Well, you've got the power inside you right now. So, use it, and send one dollar to Happy Dude, 742 Evergreen Terrace, Springfield. Don't delay, eternal happiness is just a dollar away. You have the power!
Jazz graduate, professional guitar player here- could NOT agree with you anymore on your takes. Feels kinda weird. But ultimately I feel very validated haha. Maybe we’re just getting older? (32)
He had a knack for writing catchy songs and then delivering them in the most “I could give a shit.” way with vocal lines that, if analyzed, would be “wrong” from a traditional theory standpoint, but perfectly suited the song, adding an amount of pain and melancholy that only he could deliver. He had a singular voice that rose above the din and resonated with an entire generation. RIP
You know who else had objectively substandard vocal skills, an acquired-taste voice, wasn't particularly talented with any one instrument, was accounted very authentic but secretly had a very calculated image, infused a then-traditional style with a maudlin personality, and wrote compelling songs to the extent that they were hailed as a voice of their generation? Of course you do; it's Dylan.
@@benjaminwatt2436 agreed. Not just the slickness and sleaze of glam & hair but the coldness and perceived superficiality of primarily electronic 1980s pop. That stuff is more beloved now and has been critically reappraised as having its own value but at the time "grunge" felt "real" in a way not much else did. Of course, that was just the zeitgeist and we may see it as overblown, overdramatic or contrived now but it blew people away by presenting an emotional and cultural package with content that hadn't really been available widely at the time, unless you were especially into the underground music that influenced Kurt, K records, SST stuff...
I really don't enjoy listening to Nirvana, but this is an absolutely impactful legacy that him and Nirvana left on music going forward. Rest in Peace to a legend.
I think everyone has that artist they respect but can't listen too. For me it's 70s highly technical guitarist like Peter Frampton or Erik Clapton. It just goes to show our subjective taste cannot be completely overridden by our logical appreciation.
@@benjaminwatt2436 Agreed other than Clapton being highly technical. 😅 I feel this way about about a lot of players honestly. Modern and classic. I listen to almost every genre but I'm picky with all and almost all genres have some incredible players that I don't care much for listening.
I feel much more listening to the simplicity of Kurt Cobain’s music than I do with the complexity of Jacob Collier’s. Obviously Collier is objectively “better” at music. But I don’t feel anything while listening to him (to be honest it’s the same with Zappa.) The Cobain’s of the world are able to make simplicity emotional, and I appreciate that a lot more than I do complexity for complexities sake
I agree, but I wouldn’t say that Collier is better at music. I think he has a better command of musical concepts and a better ear. Kurt on the other hand, was an absolute dime of a songwriter and had/ has far superior command of emotion and mood.
@@starchores eh, there are some really beautiful emotions in colliers work, Idk I’ve found Kurts stuff a lot easier to listen to while suffering, But colliers work generally connects to quite intense and pure joy for me, which isn’t often a state I can connect to readily, So yeah the emotions in colliers work are intense, but also take a lot of energy and being in a very specific place in your life to really get into. But if you do get into it, it does objectively slap lol
This is the thing, he actually was technically gifted, he could shred and make noise like a motherfucker, he actually chose to play like that because that's just what he wanted Nirvana to be. Don't believe me then go and listen to "the priest they called him" by James S Burrows. To me this shows the value in his music, he had a vision and made it come true to it's fullest extent, even to the point where he was crippling himself riff wise. He could have made something completely different, but he gave us nirvana.
Lets be real he was a terrible guitar player. Obviously he was a good songwriter. Even though I find him extremely overrated that's completely subjective.
There's been an unfair amount of hatred towards Cobain within the guitar community for as long as I can remember. I think he's a good example showing song writing and being proficient with your instrument are not mutually exclusive with each other. I've heard a lot of amazing guitar players make complete rubbish songs and vice versa. Music is not a sport and shouldn't be treated as such.
I honestly think a lot of it comes from people being at least slightly butthurt that their double speed arpeggios and jazzy cord progressions aren't making the charts whereas someone like Kurt could reach Beatles-level success with 3, sometimes even less, notes.
I've seen a lot of hate towards him in metal community and I can see where these people are coming from, Nirvana's music didn't exactly do a lot of favours to metal, whose popularity was already fading. Being a metal guitarist myself I don't hate the guy, but I don't like the pedestal he's put on sometimes, because his music isn't my cup of tea and it has nothing to do with technicality. I respect his songwriting abilities even if I can't stand his music. And I completely agree with music not being a sport.
Kurt was certainly a one in a million songwriter. He wrote melodies that were both incredibly catchy and highly sophisticated. And he did all that using mostly the same few power chords. Just unbelievable if you ask me.
@@thomaswhitt145 Sophisticated doesnt mean technical or complicated.He had a balance in creating music .Its catchy and hummable with it still sometimes reaching advance progressions even if accidental. they are instantly recognizable,raw,. but anyway they arent really judgeable,a band like Nirvana is in a dimension of their own. (excuse the maybe bad English) Just my opinion
@@thomaswhitt145 can you write them though? I can play everything Hendrix ever wrote, does that make me as good as Hendrix? Obviously not. Anyone can copy someone else, that means nothing.
I think he was a genius with how simple he kept his stuff. I think that nobody needs crazy solos or big riffs to be good, but they need a good, loud sound, and have a catchy beat. That's all you need to be good. You can be super sloppy and still be good, just as long as you have fun, and have a good sound.
Yes, Kurt was absolutely a genius. He was a genius melody writer. There's a reason he was able to write very strange chord progressions and still make them into major hits. It's because he used insanely natural melodies to disguise all the key changes. I honestly think you just haven't paid enough attention to what's going on with the harmonic and melodic relationships in his songs.
Cobain did nothing with his "strange chord progressions" that The Beatles hadn't already done 25 years earlier, and The Beatles weren't even considered good musicians by their contemporaries, let alone geniuses. Sure, if you want to call him a "genius" for his cultural impact then sure, who am I to argue? But on a musical level...yeah naah.
@@redskullz1249 if the Beatles and cobain aren’t musical geniuses then who is… and don’t say some orchestra no one gives a fuck about. Part of the whole musical genius thing is possessing creativity, which both had in spades
@@redskullz1249 that doesn’t even make sense. To say cobain did nothing with his “strange chord progressions “ or that the Beatles were inferior musicians is such a strange take. I mean we are talking about two of the most groundbreaking and popular groups ever.
@@redskullz1249 it turns out that there's more to being a genius than being technically good. Writing some innovative with mass appeal is more impressive than shredding. The Beatles were absolutely geniuses too. And yes, Cobain did a lot that hadn't been done by the Beatles. This is the same dude who loves the Chili Peppers. I love his channel, but his tastes kind of suck.
As it pertains to the AI rapper: it wasnt AI. The “AI” title is extremely misleading in this case, the songs were written and recorded by real people, then animated. This is why it was problematic/racist. If you want to know more, Jarvis Johnson has a few really good videos on the topic, including interviews with people involved with the project.
To anyone else reading, it was incredibly problematic because the black rapper who wrote and recorded all the music was told he would get equity in the brand, then the company ghosted him, and cut him out completely while they continued to profit.
I just love it when people dismiss great rhythm players as simple. Players like John Lennon, Tom Petty, Johnny Ramone, Ringo Star, Paul Langlois of the Tragically Hip, and on and on. Compared to shredders, yeah it looks simple...until you try and play what they play, and realize locking in with and propelling a groove is as hard as any skill and needs to be practiced and developed as any 32note run.
Guitarists today are such shredder snobs. They value finger gymnastics over creativity and expression. Steve Vai isn't half the songwriter that Kurt was.
As many people have said "I haven't had time to write you a short letter, so I wrote a long one instead". Sometimes simple is a stylistic choice, not something a lack of ability forces on you.
Yes, Kurt wasn't a musical genius but a genius songwriter, Wich in my opinion is better. Jacob Collier knows all the theory but makes shit music, but sometimes you get the best of both worlds like the examples you gave (Frank Zappa, Stevie Wonder), no hate. :p
this is especially true in the era of social media, you have all these instagram/youtube musicians with incredible technical skill making the blandest music in the world
@Jesus Requena I think his music sucks too lol. It's soulless in my opinion. We all have our own tastes. Idk why people are so gungho on telling people their opinions are wrong.
*Most technical guitarist forget that the whole point in making music is to express yourself, transmit feeling. Must be lame avoid certain sounds because they are "off key" that's why my favorite "Guitarist" is Victor Wooten.*
Expressing myself? Nah nah nah. Check out how cleanly I can play 'Cliche Sweep Arpeggio Number 9' on my Outstagram. Also my SRP Giveaway and my other awesome music on Spoofy. In all seriousness though, you are right. I don't understand the need to show superior technical ability if you can't express yourself while doing it. It's like watching a robot play. It's not as impressive when it feels so mechanical that it seems boring. On the note of playing that is technical but emotional, I really enjoy the Van Halen track 'Respect the Wind' from the Twister soundtrack. Never met anyone else with that opinion though. I guess most either haven't heard it or think I'm talking about 'Humans Being' which is also in the movie. Great track though. Edit: oh and Wooten is absolutely fantastic. Best guitarist hands down. I wanna see him, Marcus Miller, and Les Claypool do a 'Jazz-ish' bass trio concert.
@@monochromushroom9502 *I respect Technical Guitarists and all the time and effort they put studying the instrument, the scales and notes but I TOTALLY despite those who trash others music because it doesn't meet their standards. Porcupine Tree's guitarist talked about this recently and basically praised guitar players that can play one note and break your heart.*
I was listening to Nirvana the other day and suddenly this thought popped into my head 'there was and is just nothing like these songs'. The complex harmonies in his vocals, the avant-garde ish poetry in his lyrics, the occasional weird guitar parts, the simple pop chords, the diy punk attitude; all these shouldn't make sense put together but they do. That to me made Kurt a genius
He was a genius songwriter, and that's it. Not a great singer, performer, or guitarist - just competent enough in those roles to support his overall vision. Taylor swift is the same way. Not an amazing singer technically, an uninspired dancer, voice just okay, relatively poor pianist and guitarist. She just writes good songs and knows how to collaborate and with whom to bring her best out.
@@asafoetidajones8181 His rough voice and the notes he could reach is what made Nirvana also great. Poor vocal technique but it just made Nirvana better
As a performer too. You just couldn't see any other rendition of a Nirvana song without Kurt. His attitude, guttural voice, slack but melodic playing MADE those songs. Kurt came across, almost like a "hick" player, you could see him on a porch, battered acoustic, just twanging away. Love Nirvana, was there when they erupted onto the scene. Bought Nevermind on release. It was exciting. Evidence of how good that time was? I bought Nevermind in HMV, on the train home, I got the album out to look at the art, etc, looked around and saw at least 10 people doing the exact same. People forget how big Nirvana became because of that album. Their impact on music was considerable. They showed that you didn't have to be dressed up and spangled, and have musical intricacy to be a "star", they showed, basically, know your way around a guitar, bass and drums, play to your strengths, don't change yourself, and just turn up.
Not even a great songwriter. He could only write bar chord songs that conveniently always went for discordant notes - because he had ZERO grasp on any music theory to paint in any other musical colours.. Hell, he wasn't even a good PERSON!! He would look down on everyone from the gutter. And let's not forget , that he thought so little of himself that he deleted himself - but not before being a raging heroin addict, and being a Dikk to all his friends, snubbing them all for Courtney Love. But... After being sure to have peeved some fanboys off... What he was good at was... He was a good ARTIST. He really took.us into the self-loathing, angsty depressive place many young men know as we grow up through adolescence, and try to find our place in the world as something of value. Women don't relate as much...they get inherent value at this point. It is the guys who are ignored, hated, scorned or ridiculed...all as we try to navigate our way through our own self deletion tendencies... And THATS what was great about Kurt Cobain.
This is a very accurate statement. Musical genius are people who effortlessly understand music from all angles, ergo composers (Bach, Mozart, Mahler etc.), arrangers (Nelson Riddle), composing or songwriting multiinstrumentalists/arrangers (McCartney, Brian Wilson, Stevie Wonder, Prince, Jacob Collier etc.). On the other hand artists like Bob Dylan, John Lennon, Neil Young, Roger Waters, David Bowie, Bob Marley, Kurt Cobain, 2Pac often exude so much genuine creativity and show an undeniable gift for artistic self expression paired with a strong artistic vision and often supreme lyrical skills, that they deeply connect with their audience in a way that can be genius too, despite obvious limitations in terms of musical skills. I'd call those artists artistic genius.
A genius can make the complex simple. His genius is in songwriting a being able to alchemist emotions into relatable pop music that transformed culture. It was also very unique and only he could make the songs that he did that’s why he is a genius
Kurt Cobain created some of the most historically significant music in American popular music. His songs deeply resonated with millions of people and dramatically changed the musical landscape. You can call that genius if you want.
Nah he even knew he wasn't a great guitarist, but they were something special, especially Dave Grohl. They took their influences and greatly improved on them, IMO.
If you haven’t seen it, go find the movie Frank. It’s about a marginally talented musician briefly taken into the orbit of a charismatic, eccentric Brian Wilson type musical genius. As a non-genius musical hobbyist myself, it’s so relatable that I feel kinda shattered by it. A true cult classic.
It's strange that people who make complicated music are often considered musical geniuses. Often they are just composers. You have to remember that when talking about Cobain, he composed, played and sang. Cobain did something completely unbelievably genius in a very simple way that made people feel strongly about his music, lyrics and his singing voice. As a musical genius, he made these work in a beautiful and simple way that no one has been able to do since. Just listen ”Something in the way” and tell me that song doesn't make you feel like it was made by a musical genius?
@@aarontimm it shows you the absolute depth that the soul can reach. Sure, it’s just two chords, but the feeling of it is what matters. It was literally written when dying under a bridge, and it feels it.
He was undeniably a genius, people who disagree are usually noob metalhead guitar players who think playing lots of notes messily at a high speed is the peak of creativity lol
A little bit of nuance on the AI Rapper: We aren’t really at the point where any AI are fully capable of creating intelligible music by itself. The people creating/editing the AI output (if there actually was any) were not black, and the consensus seemed to be that if you are creating/editing the racially insensitive content, you are effectively saying it.
This. What data the AI model is trained on and what output is accepted from it, are entirely human decisions. I don't know anything about the particular story, but if people chose to produce and release something insensitive then they are entirely responsible, even if AI was the tool they used to create it.
I've made a living, such as it is, playing music for pretty much the entirety of my adult life. I wouldn't recommend it to anyone. Not that it can't be fun and satisfying, but the roadblocks you'll encounter along the way can be more like mountains than bumps. Add to that the fact that a musician is (usually) perpetually either underemployed or about to be unemployed (as soon as that gig is over) and you have a recipe for extreme stress. In what may be the twilight years of my career, I can't say I've regretted my choice but if I had to offer my younger self some advice it would definitely be to pursue a more conventional career path.
I think it’s all bout what you want and what gives meaning to your life. People who aren’t meant to be in the music industry will probably end up going in a different direction anyway.
@@MarcCoteMusic No, that’s just the way it is:( I live in Denmark so over here it’s a little easier for upcoming artists because of the smaller field, and the way the industry works. Well at least, we’re lucky that we have more options in terms of being musicians/songwriters today.
I have been listening to a lot of Beatles lately, and I don’t think any of Ringo’s rock drumming contemporaries could have carried off so many of the huge array of styles Ringo did. Folks, listen to everything from Revolver on, and you will hear a lot of great drumming.
Kurt Cobain was without a doubt artistically genius. All the songs, paintings, video and album concepts, themes, everything about the guy added up to a brilliant artist who was clearly artistically genius.
Dude! Thank you so much for keeping it real! I think it’s so important to step back and ask how our creations reflect us as a society- because they always will! I’m both an activist and a professional musician, so this take means the world to me
In regards to the last question, the high schooler planning on pursuing a music degree, I want to point out that, depending on your goals and interests, there are lots of opportunities that don't require education, both as a musician and in a peripheral role such as audio engineering or booking/promotion (and working those kinds of jobs can be a great way to network in your local scene; I met a ton of people from running sound at a coffee shop's weekly open mic, including bands that have hired me to produce their albums and musicians I've played in bands with). If your career goals are based around jazz or classical (or if you want to become a music teacher), then by all means, school definitely makes sense; but if you want to play/work with pretty much any other genre, it's a pretty big gamble to put yourself in a ton of debt for something that isn't necessary to achieve your goals.
Hey man I'm that kid and yeah I get what you're saying, but the networking and opportunities associated with school for music is a bit too good to pass up. And I get what you're saying re the debt too, but luckily I have parents who are financially stable and willing to help out a little
@@theasherroseman Right on, I was hoping you'd see my comment! And very cool, parental support can make a massive difference, and I admittedly can't comment on how valuable schooling would be for networking and such since I didn't pursue a degree (my mom made me do a few years of community college after high school and then I dropped out lol). If the support from your parents means you don't have to take out student loans, or means you can get away with very little in the way of loans, then this doesn't apply to you, but, seeing how badly many of my friends are getting screwed over by their student loan debt, I'd hate for you to have the same experience, especially with how sporadic and unreliable income can be in the music industry. It could still totally be worth it though, I don't mean to say you definitely shouldn't do it, but I certainly want to encourage you to make sure you understand what your financial obligations are gonna be up front so you don't get hit with unexpected bills later on (especially since, in the United States at least, student debt can't be discharged through bankruptcy, so the only way to escape it is by dying, because the US is an extremely hostile place for anyone who isn't at least moderately wealthy). In any case, I wish you the best of luck in your career! It seems like you're dedicated and passionate about it, and I super respect that.
@@thunder____ Yeah I should be able to get away with very small loans if any at all depending on the school and the cost of tuition. My parents are very supportive (thank god) and basically have just told me to follow my heart my whole life. Turns out my heart lays in guitar and music and I plan on pursuing it as long as I can. RE what Sammy G said at the very end of the video, even with all the negativity I've heard when I've told people about my college plans, I haven't changed my mind even a little. Thank you for the advice tho man!
While I don't know if Kurt Cobain was a genius, he was definitely musically gifted in the sense that he was able to create intricate but memorable melodies in almost of all of his songs. One thing he is known for is conveying sincere emotion in his music, which I think is why lots of people connect to his music (including myself). I'm a huge Nirvana fan, and I enjoyed listening to your take.
The mandolin player Chris Thile is considered Genius level, as he literally won a MacArthur genius grant. But I know what you mean about musicians that talented, sometimes their songs become less about "can I write a great song" and more "how complicated can I make this song to show off how much I know about music".
He was a good songwriter. If he wouldn't have killed himself Nirvana would be relegated to the status of rest of the bands of the era like Pearl Jam and the like. Nirvana didn't create a genre, he softened the visceral punk sound enough to be pop and palatable to the main stream, creating a new fad. Most think it spontaneously generated in Seattle. Kurt is just the poster boy of the era.
I wasn’t around then, but from what I’ve heard from people who was this is incorrect. People talk about Nirvana’s time in the spotlight like it was Beatlemania. I don’t think it’d be possible for them to be on the level of Pearl Jam, just from their surviving fans alone, let alone the hordes of people who are much younger who were introduced to them through their iconography. Theirs was a perfect storm, and Kurt was in the eye of it. He was EXACTLY what the 90s youth culture was looking for at the time, just in the same way as the Beatles were when they first hit. They’d have been hard to kill off that’s for sure.
@@Dielawn69 It absolutely does, I’m just saying that while they wouldn’t be AS big as they are now, they’d certainly be remembered as revolutionary and a cornerstone of music. Kurt Cobain would still be thought of as the voice of a generation.
Ringo fan boy here. I have no idea who Cory Wong is, but your comments about Ringo were spot on. Some people confuse speed and over the top playing (kind of like the GOAT basketball debate) with being an actual good musician who plays to the song and not to be the center of attention. I always enjoy your commentary, although I don't always agree, which keeps it interesting. Regards.
The 63 strat was just that strat. The fallacy of antiquity is 'every (insert favorite guitar model here) from "X" year is awesome!' No, they aren't. Just like today there are great guitars (lucky combinations of wood, etc) and crappy ones built the same day in the same factory.
Bingo. Doesn't matter the year. It's guitar specific. All those 'Holy Grail' guitars are just standouts among their peers. Not every '57 Les Paul is going to be Pearly Gates or Greeney. I have a buddy that has a couple of vintage Gibsons and Fenders and he also owns modern Epiphone and Squire guitars that are just as good. Every batch of instruments is going to have excellent instruments and poor instruments with the majority being average. In 1959, the electric guitar was still fairly young and '59 was a bookmark year for higher than average quality instruments as well as being old enough to not be a complete blow to the wallet. Like buying a used car, it is cheaper to get a previous year model but it's not necessary to buy a vintage auto. Now though, the guitar has been a staple instrument and has been thoroughly explored. There are so many options out there for a great quality instrument that is better than anything the guitar legends of the 60s and 70s dreamed of. They modded and innovated because they had to and some of those innovations became standards later. If Page, Hendrix, Clapton, Moore, Gilmore, etc. had all played Silverstone and Teisco guitars people would be paying thousands upon thousands for those. So, for anyone that's dreaming of owning a vintage Fender or Gibson...work for it. Get to the point where you can get that guitar but in the meantime, work with what you can afford. Get your hands on a model you have been looking at or what is in your budget, if you can, and try out as many as possible. One of them is going to feel right and you can keep going toward that goal. Don't sell a guitar that feels good just to buy a piece of vintage gear unseen or that you haven't held. You might find that when you get a hold of that vintage gear, it's not as great as you heard. At least you will have instruments you know feel good in your hands back at home. Then you just wait for that piece of vintage gear to come up and keep trying them until you find one that does feel right...or decide it isn't for you. You don't have to own a piece of vintage gear to be a serious musician. Happy playing, my friends.
A good instrument is a good instrument, no matter when it was made.. I tend to believe that instrument makers get better and better, and so do their guitars. A friend of mine bought a 59 strat that used to belong to Hank Marvin. I played it and it was awful. So a "classic" that hasn't been well taken care of or set up right isn't a great instrument.
Yup. A friend of mine has a 60 Strat, and it’s just absolutely mind blowing, lightweight, resonant, fast neck. Then once I played a 60 tele. It sounded great, but it was super heavy and the neck felt weird. I think it has a lot to do with how the instrument was cared for over the years.
When I was a kid, all of my friends loved Nirvana. They practically worshipped them. They were "the best band ever". When I finally heard them, my reaction was, "This is it?" The problem is that they were okay. Not great. Not exactly my style. And I might've enjoyed their music...if it wasn't such a huge letdown compared to what my friends had built them up to be.
I love nirvana, its my go-to band and I never get bored of listening to them. That being said, their popularity to younger audience ruined them.. They got more attention than they should have so people treat them in way higher regard.
When people talk about Ringo and say he's a bad drummer, it reminds me of a scene in the show Treme. One of the main characters in teaching music in a middle school, and he plays something (I think Louis Armstrong, but it's been a few years since I watched it). The kids are all like "we could play that," and insist that with practice, they would be able to learn to play what the artist they are listening to is playing. And, the teacher responds "But would you? If it wasn't written down, if someone else didn't do it first, would you be able to come up with that part on your own?" That's how I feel when people say Ringo is bad because he plays some simple stuff that anyone could play. Yeah, I mean, any decently practiced drummer could listen to any Beatles song a few times and, with a kit similar to Ringo's, sit down and play what he does. What makes Ringo so great (in my opinion at least) is that he realized how well those parts would work in the songs and complement the sound the Beatles were making. That said, Ringo definitely isn't the Best drummer the Beatles had.
If anyone’s curious for further context about the “AI rapper” situation, Jarvis Johnson made a few videos on it. tl;dr is it may or may not have actually been AI at all, the team behind it was almost entirely white, and while they did hire out a black rapper for the voice, I think they didn’t pay the guy and basically ghosted him.
Yeah the use of the word "AI" is so ridiculously misleading It's digital blackface. Basically made a vtuber model of a black guy and did a minstrel performance. Really not ok type of stuff and they straight up lied about how they made it to save face
I’d absolutely use the word genius to describe Kurt - if you can create memorable, exciting, moving, catchy, beloved, influential songs then that makes you pretty much by definition a musical genius. Because hardly anybody else can do it, no matter how technically advanced they might be. I love Bach and Coltrane as much as the next man, but credit where it’s due, Cobain was also special.
There were essentially multiple Kurt Cobains in the 90s, all jammed into a few years. Dudes with really unique voices, great riffs behind them, strong melodies. Kurt, Vedder, Layne Staley, Scott Weiland, Billy Corgan, Chris Cornell -- even Gavin Rossdale. You might argue Axl Rose should be in that grouping, though he def had 80s frontman vibe. It's amazing how that style of frontman just completely disappeared or were maybe eaten up by whatever the heck nu-metal was.
I've heard Rick Beato say over n over "Kurt was a musical genius", he says Kurt may not have known or thought but he was, Ricks a encyclopedia of music theory, composition and interpretation. He's one helluva producer n player, He's done videos about Kurt explaining exploring why, but like you I think it's WAY OVER USED
Kurt had a really really good sense of melody and i just love how created something new out of an above average giftedness they were trailblazers and pure artists
If Kurt is a genius then what about Jeff Beck? Or others... His music was quite simple thus impactful. It's easier to appreciate something you don't have to truly understand. He was famous, handsome, rebel, people love that kind of stuff, and idolatries the "genius" I'm not saying he is stupid, I love Nirvana, but the word genius applies at something more intelligent. He did nothing new, Seattle scene was FULL of artist doing punk rock (then called Grunge), he was lucky to hit commercial success
the thing about the ai rapper is that not very much of it was really ai. all the lyrics were written by the creators, so when both of the creators are white and they're writing racial slurs into their songs you can see where people would be upset.
Most people that go on about 'bad music' just haven't accepted that not all art speaks to all people. For example, I don't get dance. I can recognize the great skill involved in the movements but I don't feel anything when watching it. That doesn't make it bad art.
I’m pretty sure Flea admitted when he was younger he thought showing off technique and speed would make him look like a genius. And it can sound cool. But he also admitted that when he got older, he realized as long as it sounds good, it really doesn’t matter the speed or the crazy amt of technique.
I love it that when you talked about the AI rapper you hit on both GIGO (Garbage In, Garbage Out) _and_ the Turing test. it’s that sort of thing that makes me, a current ukulele player (and *massive* geek) who hasn’t played lots of guitar in some time, faithfully follow your channel.
@@suppmydiff3257 I would say that would be correct if it was set up with a low G-string, but the high G-string really makes it stand out as its own instrument
Ok, separate comment cuz this one's important. The thing that you love about vintage gear is far less about the parts, than it is about the age. The way an instrument ages sometimes is an unreplicable component to the tone. I had a '71 Superchet that I'd consider killing to get back.
The thing with the AI rapper is that it is not at all an AI. lyrics were written by the lead of the project, who was absolutely not black. And their defense was that the vocals were performed by a black rapper. So yeah the project was crap all the way through, using "AI" just as a buzzword, probably to try and tie in with the whole metaverse/crypto world. It's what I like to call "mediocre music" , which is like what you defined as "bad music" in the video.. I just don't like to use the words "bad" and "good" for art, as they are too subjective. Instead I like to see music as just music, or mediocre music. Mediocre music would be music that has no real artistic value, or is engineered for profit over art. By that definition music such as Grant Mcdonald's Ram Ranch series and Dave Brubeck's Take Five are on equal footing as "music" , but the Crazy Frog Axel F remix and the coca cola ad by The Who are both considered mediocre. By that definition you end up finding very few mediocre pieces outside commercial use, propaganda, vanity projects or fallacious art projects. I also like to use the word "complex" to define music that have a definite artistitic interest to it though it was not originally intended so, or at least was not percieved by the public as such. (this includes works like Philosophy Of The World by The Shaggs, Trout Mask Replica, A big part of Petr Valek's performances as "The Vape", Muzak discs etc..)
Most don't know that Singer/Guitarist of "Sublime" Bradley Nowell was one of the few in the 27/28 age club that died who was actually a proven IQ genius on paper even by age 12. His parents enrolled him into a M.G.M. (Mentally Gifted Minors) program. To be eligible for the classes you had to have a minimum IQ of 142 on paper, which means by age 25 his IQ was well over 160. I'm currently piecing together an i depth documentary on Sublime to be shared on youtube.
Regarding the music major thing, I have some advice for anybody potentially reading this: You need to choose your school very carefully. Not all of them are created equal. Conservatories, unless you are looking for something specific like musical theater, or if you are already winning awards with your playing, you will never see a return on your investment. Some of them are like 60 grand a year or more! A lot of smaller programs are great, but you do need to do your own research. Some programs will just be a better fit for you than others. You will get out of it what you put into it. It is a lot of work. You often have to make your own opportunities. The degree is just a piece of paper. You need to talk to your professors, advocate for yourself, and speak up. DO NOT go for a performance degree unless you have really thought that career path through. Unless you are the top of your class at a conservatory and have awards and scholarships, generally speaking, performance degrees do not foster enough multidisciplinary skills to be useful as a degree. There are performance programs that, as we speak, still don't include a single marketing or business course. Performance programs also generally don't offer contract/copyright/entertainment law classes, either. TLDR - Whatever you decide to do in higher education, it is important that it is a well-rounded experience so you can adequately make decisions about your career path, and that you have enough options once you graduate. ...Full disclosure, my undergrad degree was in music industry/recording technology, and my masters is in composition. I currently work for both a major conservatory and a major concert hall.
I think you have to look at things more contextually when it comes to Cobain. The entire industry was dominated by corporate spandex, pointy guitar, wheedly-lead, inane lyriced and heavily processed hair-metal, and Kurt came along with pawn shop guitars and a DS-1 (!), gear that no one else wanted because it wasn't "cool," and changed the musical landscape of an entire generation literally overnight. You have to imagine what it takes to do exactly what you want in an environment that is totally contrary to what you're doing to appreciate his genius, I think. On top of that, his songwriting skills and sense of melody were really amazing. The songs might not have been overly complex, but his innate and intuitive pop musical sense was almost unparalleled. How many thousands of kids in basements and garages have played a lot of those same chords, notes, same or similar style even, and not come anywhere close to the sound and finished product he was able to get. Again, like with the flannel shirts and thrift shop clothes he wore and popularized into the 90s fashion, he took stuff that no one else thought was valuable (garage rock/punk chords in a hair metal world) and turned it into pure gold. Finally, I don't know if you've ever seen any of his paintings, but they were really good. His ex-gf Tracy has a few of them, and while the subject matter might not have been highbrow modern-art level conceptually (yet), you can really see the skill and sensitivity involved in the work. So while it might not be the case that he was a musical "genius" in the studied sense of a Mozart or a Beethoven, he was definitely an artistic genius, imo, one who broke all the current "rules" of his time and produced work that was iconoclastic and new. He saw art where others saw nothing, or where they saw nothing but junk, even. And whether it's Mozart or Picasso -- or Cobain -- that's really the mark of a genius.
People really loves to either overrate or underrate musicians when it's all context. Everyone is great when you consider certain aspects but not that much when you consider others. Also there's a lot of variables that play on someone becoming famous and getting recognition or not getting any despite being as good. But we love to idolise people like gods. That's why many people seem to think 'music is dead' 'anything past is better' despite we have the same amount of music and more just not played by your famous bands...or the opposite, downplaying anything old cause it's not as elaborate as the newer stuff as if being a pioneer doesn't deserve credit. We need to love Music itself as something timeless that we all share rather than idolising or hating on the specific musician that just happened to be the channel for that music to come at that time.
Sammy, love your videos and, especially, your attitude. Now, I am Scottish and live in Glasgow. I have been playing bass now and again for nearly 40 years. My question - considering the current climate, I prefer to buy second-hand gear. I used to collect Westone basses. Now I have a Horner Jack bass as well as an Ibanez second-hand beauty. I also have an Ashdown amp that's 15 years old. I also have an amazing Roland keyboard amp from the 80s that is incredible. Ok, I only buy second-hand gear. What is your opinion about buying old gear or upcycling guitars?
He sang, was a main guitarist, started generation x, designed a jag-stang, is still talked about, and topped Michael Jackson on the charts and killed unpassionate music and generic music and also was very raw music.
Im from Montréal, Quebec. I bought your samurai guitarist t-shirt in 2018(?) and once in toy store, was there buying MTG cards, the counter guy referred to my Samurai guitarist shirt yeah he knew it too :)
Vintage guitars can be hit or miss. A friend of mine has a 1960 Strat, and it’s literally the best instrument I have ever played. Then I played a 1960 tele at a guitar show, and it was heavy and the neck was uncomfortable. Recently I bought a 1959 danelectro DC-2. My friend with the Strat told me it would be a total piece of shit, but it’s actually amazing. So lightweight, snappy tone, fast neck, low action. I think it really comes down to how the instrument gets treated in its lifetime.
I'm not on Instagram, sorry. I have a good idea for a video tho! I mean you're a trained guitarist with 1000s of hours of experience, but by this time you're pretty much a youtube specialist too! So, I was thinking maybe a BTS? Your studio set-up, show us the lights, mics, maybe even workflow of how you make the final product. Make-up, hair XD I'd even be interested to see how react after posting a video and what stats you check. I can imagine one could be pretty obsessed with that :D
Word! Of course the Cobain comment brought lots of comments. In my mind I think of Cobain was exactly as he wanted to be, a garage band musician. Now as a song writer, pretty awesome. ( Even though to me most of his lyrics were insipid.) I honestly believe that a lot of folks have confused 'songwriting' with 'musicianship' He was really good at one but not the other.
Kurt came along and was the right person at the right time with the right sound. Nobody could have predicted Nirvana would blow up like they did, least of all Nirvana. Unfortunately that sort of meteoric rise to the top coupled with an early death and a "too cool for school" image gives Kurt a lot more credit than he's due. Certainly not his fault. It is what it is. Musical genius? No. But a good songwriter who just happened to hit it big by being himself.
I agree, if he had been playing early 80s or late 90s Nirvana would not have been a thing. If you look at the pop-music and glam rock of the 80s it makes since that rock was ready to go a darker direction when Nirvana came out
@@benjaminwatt2436 - Yeah that's how time works and you can say that about pretty much any big popular band dude. Yeah Bon Jovi was popular in the 80s but if they came out in 2020 they'd be uncool lame boomer soccer mom rock and nobody would care. Like, yeah, so fucking what? What's even your point?
I know a couple people who have music degrees and I know a bunch of people who learned music on line. In the long run the online music students knowledge paid off and was equally relevant to what they were doing as the music degree students. In some cases equally as successful.
I think his lyrics reveal his genius. Much of it was abstract. People think they make no sense but listen closer and you know what he's saying. He's just not saying it plain as day like most others.
Nirvana made such a huge impact because their sound was the exact oppositve of everything that had been growing stagnant in rock music at the time, and people were ready for something new. They were sick of squealing guitar solos and idiots with poodle mullets writing song after song about coke and strippers, which had been the norm for a whole decade by the time Nevermind dropped. Cobain might not have been a genius, but he shot the locks off and ushered in the next era with Grunge. Even though Grunge itself was relatively short lived, it broadened the scope of what people listened to.
Who was making chord changes like nirvana in that era or before? Particularly the nevermind album? Maybe genius isn’t the right word, but I was there when it hit. NOTHING sounded even remotely like it sonically, or the chord changes and his voice which was a confluence of humanity, talent and,,, I think he was a genius. Probably beyond his own comprehension, but what giants shoulders did he stand on? They came out of nowhere. I’m not a nirvana super fan at all. But they were their own thing with no direct predecessors or descendants. Maybe that’s not genius, but it was unique, without precedent and impossible to recreate. He had something that music publishers paid insane money to capture. The commercial success was not predictable until you hear it. Even now, when you hear songs on nevermind, you can see why it exploded.
kurt had pretty simple musical arrangements but he was a genius songwriter imo. There were a ton of copycats after nirvana blew up and while they were able to pretty easily ape the surface aethetics of the music i dont know if i've heard any bands that came after whose vocal melodies hit quite the same
I totally agree with you down to the b-side of heart shaped box being his best recording and deemed Nirvana unnecessary to me when it became big but i do consider him bigger than Sting to say the least. Also the kazzoo can be really great but maybe this is just a guilty pleasure enjoing live performers.
I absolutely love Nirvana and Kurt Cobain. I personally would call him a genius for his almost otherworldly sense of melody, despite knowing little to no theory. I understand that means little from such a big fan, which is why I just want to share my thought, that whether or not you think Kurt was a "genius," or any other watered down arbitrary label, what truly made him special was his heart and honesty. You can very well listen to my favorite Nirvana song and say it's horrible, but I implore you to try and make point that he didn't always lay it all out for everybody to hear. I don't think we'll see another lyricist like him again, almost reminiscent to David Lynch in the way he prioritized the feeling in his art to any tangible narrative.
