In Boston, in the early 80s, there was a generic thrash hardcore band. At the time, it was imperative that the band name be 3 words so you could have a 3 initial anagram. Bonus points if your anagram could be confused with a famous trademark.

Hence, this band was known as STP, which stood for (i shit you negative):
"Sharon Tate's Phoetus"

its all true, you can look it up. Right Bob?

Angry_Dragon wrote:"I am, I am, I am, I am" CRAP

Fucking hilarious. Almost a not crap on this basis.

Almost.

DrAwkward wrote:

Minotaur029 wrote:And people who like Nirvana, aren't listening to Nirvana...they're listening to Nirvana as presented by David Geffen.

Uh....ok.

Besides Nevermind what are these people listening to? I guess "Rape Me."

And Marsupialized...if Dr. Awkward wants to talk about Pearl Jam, we'll have a chat about Pearl Jam. If he wants to talk about Quiet Riot, I'll talk about Quiet Riot. If he wants to talk about Faster Pussycat, we'll talk about Faster Pussycat.

If you wanna talk about CocoRosie...well, I won't go there.

People who like Nirvana, like myself, are listening to all of In Utero and Incesticide. I'd include Bleach but i don't own that one because i'm a dirty poser.

DrAwkward wrote:People who like Nirvana, like myself, are listening to all of In Utero and Incesticide. I'd include Bleach but i don't own that one because i'm a dirty poser.

There's much more to Nirvana than just those two great albums though. You kind of have to piece the whole picture together yourself. You should have ed priesner PM you an 80 minute compliation I made that might help you to view that band in a wholly new light.

Bleach is vital. Their evolution is incredibly interesting. I can see why it would be easy to hate Nirvana...but they're pretty much the only major label band...that major label stardom seemed appropriate and somehow necessary for. They didn't turn their backs on their peers in the least as far as I can tell. Nirvana has three distinct stages. The bands that grow and change "organically" are my favorites.

Nevermind is actually still pretty good...I just never listen to that one.

I can't think of another band that is alternately somehow underrated and overrated all at the same time.

Minotaur029 wrote:

DrAwkward wrote:People who like Nirvana, like myself, are listening to all of In Utero and Incesticide. I'd include Bleach but i don't own that one because i'm a dirty poser.

There's much more to Nirvana than just those two great albums though. You kind of have to piece the whole picture together yourself. You should have ed priesner PM you an 80 minute compliation I made that might help you to view that band in a wholly new light.

Bleach is vital. Their evolution is incredibly interesting. I can see why it would be easy to hate Nirvana...but they're pretty much the only major label band...that major label stardom seemed appropriate and somehow necessary for. They didn't turn their backs on their peers in the least as far as I can tell. Nirvana has three distinct stages. The bands that grow and change "organically" are my favorites.

Nevermind is actually still pretty good...I just never listen to that one.

That's all well and good, but i still don't understand your "people who like Nirvana only like David Geffen's presentation of Nirvana." I'm don't need a primer on Nirvana, ya goofball...just because i don't own Bleach doesn't mean i've never listened to it.

Your comment implied, to me, that anyone who likes Nirvana only likes them because of what they became on Geffen, or that the "real" Nirvana were lost on the major label or something. That's why i said "um...ok."

DrAwkward wrote:

Minotaur029 wrote:

DrAwkward wrote:People who like Nirvana, like myself, are listening to all of In Utero and Incesticide. I'd include Bleach but i don't own that one because i'm a dirty poser.

There's much more to Nirvana than just those two great albums though. You kind of have to piece the whole picture together yourself. You should have ed priesner PM you an 80 minute compliation I made that might help you to view that band in a wholly new light.

Bleach is vital. Their evolution is incredibly interesting. I can see why it would be easy to hate Nirvana...but they're pretty much the only major label band...that major label stardom seemed appropriate and somehow necessary for. They didn't turn their backs on their peers in the least as far as I can tell. Nirvana has three distinct stages. The bands that grow and change "organically" are my favorites.

Nevermind is actually still pretty good...I just never listen to that one.

That's all well and good, but i still don't understand your "people who like Nirvana only like David Geffen's presentation of Nirvana." I'm don't need a primer on Nirvana, ya goofball...just because i don't own Bleach doesn't mean i've never listened to it.

Your comment implied, to me, that anyone who likes Nirvana only likes them because of what they became on Geffen, or that the "real" Nirvana were lost on the major label or something. That's why i said "um...ok."

I meant the radio-ready Nirvana that made Geffen a dump truck of money with "Lithium," "Smells Like Teen Spirit," and "Come As You Are."

So, what you're saying is that when i say that even casual music listeners get exposed to and like Nirvana, it somehow doesn't count because they're most likely only listening to Nevermind?

NOT crap.

Tiny Music LP is brilliant.

not crap. incredible musicians (esp. the De Leo Brothers) and fine melodies & arrangements from the third to the last album