3 ms·

> What is important about Nevermind is the production. The songwriting and the production. Nevermind has really good songs; better than on Bleach. Butch Vig ha

> What is important about Nevermind is the production. The songwriting and the production. Nevermind has really good songs; better than on Bleach. Butch Vig has produced tens of records, many of which were good and popular. Yet Nevermind and Siamese Dreams - made two years after Nevermind - are the impactful standouts because the songs and the sound are jointly incredible. In Utero, produced by pop-unfriendly Steve Albini, and distinctly non-smooth, was also a huge record, but I'd absolutely concede that it may not have broken through if Nevermind hadn't come before.

Maursault 4y ago
Cobain and others considered Nevermind Pop Music. It's wide appeal supports that. The songs largely followed the roughly verse-verse-chorus-verse-bridge-verse-chorus-chorus patterns of all Pop Music. And let's not kid ourselves about In Utero. Regardless of texture, it was expensively produced, had mountains of headroom, and is nothing less than a national quality, high fidelity record. Another example of the point I was making was Superdrag, who's very high fidelity Head Trip in Every Key was produced by industry professional Jerry Finn (his fee alone was $50K). Head Trip was extremely popular, with its singles on heavy radio rotation; Do the Vampire still gets airplay. Their subsequent self-produced record, In the Valley of Dying Stars, which can not be described as high fidelity, basically failed and sadly dropped them back into relative obscurity. I don't think one can find a better or more consistent song smith and performer than John Davis. But there are exceptions, like Dinosaur Jr, who still came to wide loyal popularity even though J Mascis self-produced many imperfectly produced records, but that still sold very well. But though they were never quite produced correctly to national standards, they weren't really low fidelity records, either, though often classified as such. Elliot Smith is another exception, with tracking on his classic analog equipment and bazaar levels of analog compression. Beck's Mellow Gold is another exception, probably saved by professional mastering, it is entirely a basement recording that somehow broke through the high standards long set by major labels and consumers. Generally, you can have a band with a singer that can not sing (such as Fred Schneider or Black Francis) and/or a guitar player that is embarrassingly limited (such as Peter Buck or The Edge in their early days), but if your rhythm section (bassist and drummer) is decent, and the records produced to sufficient quality, the band can do very well. Also, if you have a band that is touring constantly to promote their music, the hard work seems to pay off (The Grateful Dead, REM, DMB, Phish). Everything I have written is just my own opinions, btw. Everyone seems biased towards the idea that an artist is intrinsically great, but most nationally recognized are often put together, so to speak, part of the evolution from obscurity to fame involves changes made often against the artists' ethic or wishes. Elvis and Frank Sinatra didn't do it all by themselves, there was massive support and significant image crafting.
- caf 4y ago
  It was clear that Nirvana had something before Nevermind - when the album blew up they were on an Australian tour at the time, Ken West brought them out to support the Violent Femmes at the Big Day Out. If you're touring internationally then you've hit some kind of success already.
  - Maursault 4y ago
    > If you're touring internationally then you've hit some kind of success already. Not really. Bands will tour Europe and Asia in small clubs, but until they make it in the US, they haven't really made it. Only after a band becomes big in the US can they then become a global sensation. The British Invasion is a good example of this. Beatles had exploded in England, but only after their US tour did they then fill large venues in Europe. Same with the rest of the British Invasion that followed them. What you almost never see is a band take over the rest of the world filling large venues, and then come to the US. If they're touring internationally prior to US recognition, they can only headline in small venues like clubs and small theaters. Likely the only reason Femmes were even in Australia is they had by then saturated their US market and couldn't sell enough tickets domestically to justify the cost of any available venue. I was a Femmes fan, saw them in 1989 promoting 3 in a tiny venue called The Boathouse that literally was a small converted boathouse. Indigo Girls opened for them. The entire show was awful, bad sound, bad performances, and I regretted not going to see REM, playing that same night. REM was playing a coliseum, a huge venue, and I prefer smaller venues and try to avoid big crowds, but anything would have been better than what I was subjected to that night, and reportedly, REM delivered a fantastic show. I like the Violent Femme's records, but unless they played big festivals with lots of other artists, they never performed before a large audience, say, of 5000, and I'd be surprised if they ever saw an audience of 1000. Of course, Nirvana ultimately would find their biggest audiences in Brazil, with 100K+ people night after night, which is difficult to even comprehend.
    - caf 4y ago
      Robbie Williams is an artist that comes to mind who was able to sell out large venues across the world without US success - thinking of the Close Encounters tour: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Close_Encounters_Tour https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Close_Encounters_Tour - but it's certainly hard to think of others.

Maursault 4y ago

Cobain and others considered Nevermind Pop Music. It's wide appeal supports that. The songs largely followed the roughly verse-verse-chorus-verse-bridge-verse-chorus-chorus patterns of all Pop Music. And let's not kid ourselves about In Utero. Regardless of texture, it was expensively produced, had mountains of headroom, and is nothing less than a national quality, high fidelity record. Another example of the point I was making was Superdrag, who's very high fidelity Head Trip in Every Key was produced by industry professional Jerry Finn (his fee alone was $50K). Head Trip was extremely popular, with its singles on heavy radio rotation; Do the Vampire still gets airplay. Their subsequent self-produced record, In the Valley of Dying Stars, which can not be described as high fidelity, basically failed and sadly dropped them back into relative obscurity. I don't think one can find a better or more consistent song smith and performer than John Davis. But there are exceptions, like Dinosaur Jr, who still came to wide loyal popularity even though J Mascis self-produced many imperfectly produced records, but that still sold very well. But though they were never quite produced correctly to national standards, they weren't really low fidelity records, either, though often classified as such. Elliot Smith is another exception, with tracking on his classic analog equipment and bazaar levels of analog compression. Beck's Mellow Gold is another exception, probably saved by professional mastering, it is entirely a basement recording that somehow broke through the high standards long set by major labels and consumers. Generally, you can have a band with a singer that can not sing (such as Fred Schneider or Black Francis) and/or a guitar player that is embarrassingly limited (such as Peter Buck or The Edge in their early days), but if your rhythm section (bassist and drummer) is decent, and the records produced to sufficient quality, the band can do very well. Also, if you have a band that is touring constantly to promote their music, the hard work seems to pay off (The Grateful Dead, REM, DMB, Phish). Everything I have written is just my own opinions, btw. Everyone seems biased towards the idea that an artist is intrinsically great, but most nationally recognized are often put together, so to speak, part of the evolution from obscurity to fame involves changes made often against the artists' ethic or wishes. Elvis and Frank Sinatra didn't do it all by themselves, there was massive support and significant image crafting.

caf 4y ago
It was clear that Nirvana had something before Nevermind - when the album blew up they were on an Australian tour at the time, Ken West brought them out to support the Violent Femmes at the Big Day Out. If you're touring internationally then you've hit some kind of success already.
- Maursault 4y ago
  > If you're touring internationally then you've hit some kind of success already. Not really. Bands will tour Europe and Asia in small clubs, but until they make it in the US, they haven't really made it. Only after a band becomes big in the US can they then become a global sensation. The British Invasion is a good example of this. Beatles had exploded in England, but only after their US tour did they then fill large venues in Europe. Same with the rest of the British Invasion that followed them. What you almost never see is a band take over the rest of the world filling large venues, and then come to the US. If they're touring internationally prior to US recognition, they can only headline in small venues like clubs and small theaters. Likely the only reason Femmes were even in Australia is they had by then saturated their US market and couldn't sell enough tickets domestically to justify the cost of any available venue. I was a Femmes fan, saw them in 1989 promoting 3 in a tiny venue called The Boathouse that literally was a small converted boathouse. Indigo Girls opened for them. The entire show was awful, bad sound, bad performances, and I regretted not going to see REM, playing that same night. REM was playing a coliseum, a huge venue, and I prefer smaller venues and try to avoid big crowds, but anything would have been better than what I was subjected to that night, and reportedly, REM delivered a fantastic show. I like the Violent Femme's records, but unless they played big festivals with lots of other artists, they never performed before a large audience, say, of 5000, and I'd be surprised if they ever saw an audience of 1000. Of course, Nirvana ultimately would find their biggest audiences in Brazil, with 100K+ people night after night, which is difficult to even comprehend.
  - caf 4y ago
    Robbie Williams is an artist that comes to mind who was able to sell out large venues across the world without US success - thinking of the Close Encounters tour: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Close_Encounters_Tour https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Close_Encounters_Tour - but it's certainly hard to think of others.