, you have no idea how vast the vastness of my musical taste is, i suggest it is you that inhabit a narrow musical spere, ooh you saw them at Bradford uni, big whoopedy doo, i had the misfortune to see them in Seattle, Tad blew them away

if that is so then please explain why i own his entire back catalogue?

And there you go. Tad. FFS. And repeating some story of how Cobain acted in a studio. Were you there? Outside whatever 'wide' world of music you inhabit nobody cares about Tad, Soundgarden or anybody else from Seattle - including me and I used to have albums from those and many others of their ilk.

Like I said, the snobbery towards Nirvana is quite unfathomable. I can only put it down to the fact that they were successful. I have several mates who were big into the Indie scene and used to drop bands like a stone once more than a phone-booth full of people had heard of them. Music snobbery is as dull as any other kind.

All I go by nowadays is what music sounds like to me. I find the world of music far more interesting as a result.

So because a person has never liked a certain band through whatever reason then they are a music snob, wow, you state that "All I go by nowadays is what music sounds like to me. I find the world of music far more interesting as a result.", that is all i have ever done so how is that snobbery?

Yeh I'll do it at the same time as the hearing challenged Rock n roll Hall of Fame panel that inducted Cobain. The world will forever regret that YOU were not there to tell them the TROOF (which is known only to you) and stop that travesty. Although even if you had been, I doubt there'd have been enough time to drag you back out of your own arrse, you're that far up it.

How do you bear the burden of being the only person on the planet who knows the TROOF?

If that is all you have done, why have your posts contained so much about Cobain being a fake and a phony, his attitudes towards fans, what he may or may not have gotten up to with groupies, and a recommendation for people to do some research? If all you go by is what the music sounds like, why is Cobain's image and behaviour of so much interest to you, and why would anyone need to do any more research than to listen to the songs?

I can understand if someone says they dont like Nirvana's music but to claim they werent very good is just laughable. They may not have been the most technical band but their music captured emotion and the world lapped it up. Compare them to todays one chord indie bands, of which a new one pops up every minute of every day and they are lightyears ahead.

Regards

King james

You have lost any credability you may have had by mentioning the Rock n roll Hall of Fame

Maybe i have formed my own opinion on him due to the facts that are out there unlike the sheep that believe he is godlike, that is all, thanks

Fair enough

"Credability"!


My last post as I'm bored with your drivel, is to quote the words of one of my heroes, living legend Michael Stipe, who read the induction speech:



I do understand that, in your head, even Stipe's words, and more to the point, his decision to make this speech, count for nothing. Indeed I wouldn't be surprised if you think Stipe's a fraud and no-talent charlatan too. I hope you, your head and your capacitous ass have a good and happy life. Goodbye, and thanks so much for the laughs.

___________________________________________________

Wrong again Bamber Gascoigne

People should form their own opinion, I'm not suggesting otherwise. I simply asked why the image of Cobain was the focus of your criticism if all you go by is the music as you claimed?

You've actually commented very little on the music, focussing largely on Cobain's persona and popularity. You've labelled him a douchebag, a poster boy, a fraud, a fake, and a phony, and criticised him for craving superstardom, praise and adoration (and blowjobs). The only comments about the music were that he was a mediocre musician and very poor guitarist, and that the music was aimed at young teenagers (and I'm not sure how the latter issue is inherently a bad thing, tbh).

So my question was simply; if you only go by what music sounds like to you, why does the rest bother you so much to provoke such venom, and why do you think people should be made aware of such background information to be able to judge his/their music? Couldn't you just not like Nirvana, and other people listen to Nirvana and decide whether or not they do? From what you've written I think it's fairly clear that you [idon't[/i only go by what the music sounds like.

Rory Gallagher, without a shadow of doubt.

Fantastic musician with a fine body of work

Great guitarist. On a similar note, I'd add Stevie Ray Vaughan.

Indead, i will also add the late great Jeff Healey to the mix, as Patrick Swayze once said in the movie Roadhouse "you play pretty good for a blind white boy", he wasn't wrong there

Corny film, great soundtrack. Confidence Man is probably my favourite of his, though.

I was at that gig. I found the ticket stub in my loft last weekend and got well nostalgic. It was an amazing night.

You where at every gig.

Like some sort of weird cuckoo turfing the eggs from the nest.

Were.

Is that you Easty?

R.I.P true legend B.B. King. Too young at 89 and as good as ever

[urlhttps://youtu.be/iUaevnP1LLg[/url

Certainly not young however, the world is a lesser place without the great BB King in it. One of the most important musicians of all time, and at his peak one of the best voices in the business.

I'd recommend "Live at the Regal" as one of the finest albums ever, and probably my favourite live album.

Frank Sidebottom