@@Jeremy-n4e Kurt liked to spin yards and mythologize himself. He also didn’t have any new songs for in utero besides heart, ape, and frances framer. Utero was like nevermind b-sides.
@@TylerDonald-b2x except in this case their actions backed up the sentiment completely. From the way it was marketed, to how they handled singles, they clearly were not concerned about sales or mainstream acceptance of the album.
@@kanpoe7043 is that why they got the hottest and biggest alternative rock producer Scott Litt to remix their singles? Big budget music video? lol. You believe in Kurt’s self conscious myth making. He wanted his band to be the biggest band in the world. 90s was a different era when it wasn’t cool to admit you desired fame, money, and success. It was cool to be a loser so to speak. And that’s the pose Kurt was feigning to the press.
He already knew that he wanted the follow up to be the antithesis of Nevermind. By mid '92 they were kicking around the idea of Albini and Barret Jones along with Endino recording a few tracks. There may not have been many new songs written by that time but the band were performing and demoing some of the older songs that would end up on the album so they already had a pretty good idea of the direction and sound they wanted, and they followed through.
not a lot people know this but when they were touring on the In Utero album, the women used to flock around Pat Smear, not because he was particularly handsome or anything, but because he had the most charisma
This is actually a really ignorant comment and you are obviously very young and weren't around during this time period. Nirvana was still a big band but they had lost popularity. In Utero was #1 but it sold a fraction of what Nevermind did. Nirvana was playing mostly 3 to 5 thousand seat venues in the US during their fall 1993 tour. They were still very popular and could headline alternative rock festivals but they were not a football stadium band like the press makes them out to be.
In Utero was a #1 album but it never sold anywhere near nor was it going to sell near what Nevermind did had Kurt not died. I love Nirvana and was a teen during this time period but this is absolutely true. I am from Milwaukee and Nirvana came for a show in fall 1993 maybe 5 or 6 months before Kurt died and they only drew about 3500 people in a big arena that held maybe 10,000. They were still big and could headline alt rock festivals but they certainly weren't U2 or Rolling Stones level where they were playing football stadiums. Pearl Jam had eclipsed them in popularity by this time. This takes away nothing from them as artists but it's a fact.
I think Nirvana would have gone on to be sort of like Faith No More, they would have become this kind of cult band with a devoted fan base but for the average Joe it would be like "remember that song Epic/Teen Spirit? Yeah who sang that one again?"
Nirvana were arguably the third biggest band in the 90's. After Oasis and Pearl Jam. Today Oasis and Nirvana are much more popular than Pearl Jam though.
@@pentagonoenllamasI think “nevermind” was too much of a cultural cornerstone for that to have happened. But yeah, their music would probably be looked upon less favorably by the broad public
@@blachubear In their prime Pearl Jam were probably the biggest band of the 90s. Today their music has dated more than Oasis & Nirvana. The streaming numbers on Spotify and YT reflect that. Oasis have just sold out 80 and 90,000 capacity stadiums across Europe, Australia, North and South America. 50,000 capacity stadiums in Asia. PJ couldn't sell out 20,000 arenas in Europe.
I was 18 in 1994 & absolutely adored Nirvana. They were NOT losing popularity when In Utero was realized. People heard Heart Shaped Box & were going nuts over it. Many of us appreciated that In Utero wasn’t “Nevermind Part II” This guy had no clue what he’s talking about.
Going by album sales and venues they probably were losing popularity. Pearl Jam and Oasis had a bigger impact in their prime. Kurt died young and the MTV Unplugged gig is iconic.
@@dannyblanchflower1882Oasis was "brit nirvana" in terms of popularity in the uk, but they never replicated that humongous success across the pond in the us. Eventually as millenium passed they started going by the numbers until the split. Pearl Jam was kinda the stones when compared to the beatles, pretty great and rivaled them while still in a similar genre (tho personally not a big fan aside from a few songs; same as GnR, who with Nirvana was like the beach boys to the beatles, rivaled them but only briefly, and also culturally opposite), but eventually their time passed as the 90s left. Same as Radiohead, tho they lasted a bit longer until brooklynite indiewave pretty much caught up with their sound. Green Day had a second wind with American Idiot, if not they would have been left in the 90s, but even that 00s emo/pop punk eventually faded too. Meanwhile both Nirvana and Beatles ended early but keep prescient relevant and engrossing - everyone remembers beatles at sullivan and shea and atop the roof, everyone remembers nirvana's teen spirit video on snl and unplugged - they both have legendary backstories and insane personal/band trouble and egos (not a fan of kurt and dave nor of john and paul as people imho) - and most importantly, they both ended before they got stale, Nirvana literally ending with a bang that left them more memorable to make up for their shorter time compared to Beatles, rather than an eventual acrimonious split that was in the near horizon before the self-offing. (And fwiw i see why in utero didnt sell as well, its good specially the singles and couple other songs but others are more turgid and rough, a bit of a schizo album in tune with kurt's "have my cake and eat it too" mind at the moment, split between comfy fame and punky art and troubled by mental issues and toxic environment and relations and substances; nevermind was more cohesive and catchy while still punk enough (butch vig had worked in harsh 80s industrial music iirc); and even bleach i dig too and at times more than in utero (depends on the day) bc even if rough with less singles it's cohesive and songs are of even quality; while incesticide is as good as a collection of bsides was tho perhaps their closest to how they really were. If anything, in utero's situation is not dissimilar to let it be being good but not as good as abbey road or white album or sgt pepper).
If we judged quality with the ease of an aggregating accountant who knows where we'd be. Pearl Jam were always going to be bigger (sales wise) they were a far more mainstream accessible act. Foo fighters have probably sold a ton too.....but became dad-rock after their promising first album.
I never get tired of Nirvana and own their entire discography. Yeah i like one album more than the other, but at the end of the day there isn't a bad Nirvana album. Sometimes i wonder how the follow up album of In Utero would have sounded like, but that we will never know!
They lost popularity with the trendy people that probably only knew about Teen Spirit & were never true fans of the band anyway. And don't forget this is exactly what Kurt wanted to do. He wanted to be huge but if all this other crap that came with it was going to be part of it then he wanted to loose the false fans that were the difference between big & huge.
@@TylerDonald-b2x so he would have liked the brooklynite hipster indie scene? or green day (specially in the 00s with its emo descendants)? or radiohead? i mean he did like r.e.m., but idk if he would have had the same sound, perhaps something rawer if the unplugged was any indication. and lol idk, he tried to have his cake and eat it too, try to stay raw and rough while also being top of the charts while also feminist and prog (while still cheating on wife and getting cucked) - and add to that the deep seated issues and heavy drug problem - lethal combo.
I don't feel like it's primarily the legend of Kurt's passing that has to do with Nirvana's enduring popularity. There are plenty of musicians who die young who do not ascend in legendary status to the degree in which Kurt's has as a result of their death. Cobain was a one-of-a-kind prolific artist where so many of these other bands (like Pearl Jam and Alice in Chains) were just musicians in comparison. At the risk of sounding like a fanboy, Kurt was a primary force in initiating a cultural zeitgeist through his art and music. None of these other bands were going to do that to the degree that Nirvana did. None of these other bands were writing songs like "Smells Like Teen Spirit." Cobain's synthesis of various genres and his overall artistic sensibilities/aesthetic were unmatched. Just look at the Spotify numbers now. Pearl Jam have about HALF the monthly listeners as Nirvana and they have been touring for 30 more years since Kurt's passing. Pearl Jam is a solid band, but they are a historical footnote in comparison. Nirvana were Gen X's Beatles. Their popularity may have died off, but Kurt himself stated an intention to play a sort of career suicide through In Utero and challenge/ditch part of their fanbase. (Cobain obviously said many things and who knew how many of them were true, but this claim seems to be valid at least in regards to the stylistic choices he made on the album versus that of Nevermind.) The only other alternative rock band that I feel like is comparable to Nirvana in the 90's in terms of musical impact is Radiohead. In terms of cultural impact though, no other 90's rock band even comes close to Nirvana's influence. 30 million monthly listeners on Spotify for a band that has been dead and not toured for 30 years is impressive. Cobain's legacy endures in spite of it all. Sure, the mythology around him enhances this in ways that aren't exactly quantifiable, but the music, in my opinion, is what hooks people in first and foremost, not the folklore. Smells Like Teen Spirit is a timeless rock opera that accesses such primal and elemental reconciliation of the human condition beyond the surface level angst it is often interpreted as being. It is quite rare for songs that are 30 years old to transcend 2 billion listens on spotify, again, especially for a band that has not toured in any way for 30+ years. We're going to be talking about and dissecting Cobain as a culture far longer in a relative sense than artists like Morrison, Joplin or Hendrix. As prolific as all of these aforementioned musicians were, they did not nearly and seemingly "singlehandedly" initiate a sweeping cultural zeitgeist like Cobain and Nirvana did. The late 60's was a far more collective movement that steadily built through various acts whereas Nevermind breaking into the mainstream was a virtually singular force that shook an entire industry. TLDR: Pearl Jam may have had moments of being seemingly more popular than Nirvana, but they were never the bigger band in terms of cultural impact and the timeline as history has shaken out proves that to be true. Nirvana is still a global sensation in spite of being a bygone band of 30+ years while Pearl Jam has continued touring much of that time, yet Nirvana's legacy still reigns supreme in quite a substantial way that I feel transcends the folklore and infamy of Kurt's passing.
"The only other alternative rock band that I feel like is comparable to Nirvana in the 90's in terms of musical impact is Radiohead. " Faith No More had a massive musical impact despite having little cultural impact. Basically an entire music genre had bands listing them as a massive influence. The amount of bands that specifically cite them is really high; Korn, Deftones, Incubus, Limp Bizkit, System Of A Down, Slipknot(Corey Taylor specifically cites seeing FNM playing on MTV was life changing) and there are far more smaller bands. In 2003, Kerrang listed “Angel dust” as the most influential album in all times(I wouldn't go that far but just saying it underrated by the mainstream and has massive cult status).
@@83442handle Yeah, that's a valid point of commentary. Just to clarify though, what I am referring to when I use the phrase "the musical world" or "musical impact" is the greater listening populous, not the world of musicians. Like, Faith No More is a great example of the whole phenomena of "your favorite musician's favorite musician." And in the case of Faith No More within the late 80's to early 90's, I feel within a certain context that holds very much to be true. What I am positing though is that within the realm of the greater music listening world, which includes both musicians and non-musicians, Nirvana was the singular most impactful rock and alternative band of their class both in terms of global popularity and cultural impact. And that Radiohead or (now that I reflected on the topic a bit further) Green Day are the only other rock/alternative bands of that era to come close in terms of widespread popularity to touch Nirvana's impact on general listeners. In Radiohead's case, they don't come close to the level of cultural impact that Nirvana registered as a result of the zeitgeist manifesto that was Nevermind, whereas Green Day I would say had a much greater cultural impact than Radiohead. (And then, just for fun, we can say though that Radiohead is king of that era when it comes to the intersections of both global popularity and being "your favorite musician's favorite musician.") I would argue though that Green Day's greater cultural impact came more so with the inception of American Idiot and the impact that had on the millennial generation rather than Dookie's impact on generation X, their generation of birth. Dookie was widely popular amongst generation x, but again, these distinctions of global popularity versus cultural impact are important as Dookie was like baby Nirvana in major keys which people were stoked about, but American Idiot was a more sophisticated and deliberate concept album that radicalized many young millennials in ways similar to how Nevermind (also a concept album which I feel is lost on certain people) radicalized many young gen x'ers. I would still say though that Nevermind blows American Idiot out of the water in terms of cultural impact and the next greatest zeitgeist to occur (when we consider all genres) post Nevermind was hands down Eminem's early 2000's era, though it's hard to say whether or not that was The Marshall Mathers LP or The Eminem Show in regard to specific albums. (Within my age bracket, as someone born in 1993, I would argue it was the Eminem Show which coincided with the release of 8 Mile and Lose Yourself.) Faith No More on the other hand was a blip on the radar in comparison to these aforementioned groups in terms of both global popularity and cultural impact but yes had quite a considerable impact within the category of "your favorite musician's favorite musician" in a certain context. What I am personally most fascinated by though is when the seeming holy trinity of global popularity, cultural impact, and the phenomena of "your favorite musician's favorite musician" converge within one artist or group. And I feel that Nirvana is that band to this day for many people in some large part whenever a host of new young players pick up an instrument and listen to Smells Like Teen Spirit or spelunk down the confines of Nevermind for the first time. That is the kind of music I am most captivated by. When the music transcends just being popular art and becomes a sort of historical monument that each new generation of burgeoning enthusiasts in many ways dare I say must traverse as a rite of passage to greater understand the arch of both artistic and musical civilization. Nirvana was one of those bands. Kurt Cobain was one of those artists. Like Van Gogh, Kurt has an indelible signature upon the collective psyche of artistic progression within the greater roadmap of at least western culture. As much as I might enjoy artists like Faith No More that had more of an underground impact that planted the seeds for groups like Nirvana to flourish on behalf of the foundation that their predecessors established, I am more personally interested in overground great works that have had a wider generational influence. We all have our different roles in life that contribute to the development of both the micro and macro cultures we find ourselves within and I personally am more of a macro-oriented individual.
It's a combination of things ultimately. Nirvana had all the ingredients but prior to April 1994, they didn't fully execute it, and that suicide was ultimately like lighter fluid to set them on fire to some degree beyond imagination. I do think his death in the way that it happened and when it happened played a pivotal role for this, but it's obviously not the sole reason. Essentially it was a perfect storm; Frontman of one of the biggest bands of a music genre that has angst-filled/dark themes dies via suicide with a gun at the peak of that music genre. There is an interesting interview on here with Billy Corgan from Feb 1994, so it's two months prior to Kurt's death so there are no rose-colored glasses talking about Nirvana after his death and they actually talk about Nirvana and Pearl Jam popularity at that time. Interviewer asked Corgan to clarify on who the two biggest bands were in that scene, and he said Nirvana and Pearl Jam for public perception in America and the interviewer asked him if he was surprised about the Pearl Jam having the fastest selling album. Corgan said "no because Nirvana created a hunger in the American public and they didn't fill it by not touring. Nevermind will be a classic album and will be looked up on as a moment in time when everything changed and that won't go away but there was such a hunger for them to go out and do the Beatles thing to create that excitement and when they didn't Pearl Jam just walked through that door" I thought that was a really interesting perspective he gave about Nirvana not doing the Beetles thing and Pearl Jam stepping in to fulfill that hunger when Grunge broke. Example: I live in one of the biggest U.S. cities and Nirvana played mine 1 time before Nevermind even charted at a tiny club in late '91 and they then didn't come back until late '93. Anyway, Kurt's death in the way it happened via gun and not some accidental OD ended up being such a cultural watershed moment for Gen X that basically fulfilled that Beatles roles Corgan mentioned earlier and propelled Nirvana beyond immigration. It's a combination of all things that lead to where we are now with Nirvana. Everything from Nirvana setting the zeitgeist with Nevermind to Kurt's death with a gun when Grunge was at it's peak. Layne died basically in the most un- glamorous way possible...rotting away for years and then overdosing to be found dead many years after Grunge had gone by so the story was ultimately not a big one. AIC was never as big as Nirvana so not claiming Layne killing himself makes him the same status, but it would be different. Kurt went out like in his suicide note "better to burn out than to fade away". But again, like I said its more than that because Nirvana had the Beatles ingredients for all of this to happen, but his death is what really allowed that fully realize. Just hard to predict what would happen without it since his death did really boost their popularity. They sold more albums in just the 3 years after he died than before.... by a significant amount.
@@Rim00909E yeah it’s interesting. It’s really dark when you think about it, the Robert Johnson crossroad phenomenon. It’s all about imagery and authenticity, which means self sacrifice. Look at the black metal scene. Every big band has a history
I bought it on day one and thought it was great because it wasn't Nevermind (even though that was great too). I would have loved to have had one more Nirvana album.
@@p0llenp0nyif they didn’t chart that would be because of being cancelled or some controversy. Being number one for one week as a big band isn’t significant. Albums stay at number one for months. Truth is other grunge bands were outselling Nirvana and in utero was a commercial disappointment.
I lived through the rise of Nirvana and it's surreal to see how they've become iconic. Initially, I struggled to understand the hype - other bands were more popular at the time. But Nirvana had a fiercely loyal fan base that remained devoted, even after Kurt's passing. To this day, these fans still seek justice for him, a testament to the lasting impact of their music. Personally, it wasn't until I listened to Bleach that I truly began to appreciate their raw energy and talent. I was also lucky enough to own a copy of In Utero back in '93 - it's amazing how their music has stood the test of time.
Both In Utero and Vs. were a bit of a disappointment and a step back from the point of view of the suburban and small town burnouts in Upstate NY when I was in high school. Not that they were bad records. Just not as good as Nevermind and Ten. That was the prevailing view. But that doesn't mean they didn't get listened to on repeat just not as much.
This is part of the "Kurt was murdered theory." The record company wanted to make a lot of money and knew by that point that Kurt was not going to play ball with their plans. He was worth more to them dead than alive and, apparently, it's not the first time a record company has had a musician killed for this exact reason. There have always been ties to mafia since the beginning of the music industry. If you Google "kurt cobain death clause" you can find a lot about this topic. I also remember there was a band called Psychotica in the 90s that seemed to come from nowhere to join the Lollapalooza line-up. It turns out that's exactly what happened. I worked with a woman in the late 90sand early 00s who knew them and told me about how the lead singer was on the run from the mob and performing everywhere under different names to try to earn back the money he still owed his record company (ie. the advance they gave him to record and promote the band which included payola to get on the 1996 Lollapalooza line-up). I guess he managed to scrape up the money because he's not dead and Psychotica was able to reform in 2009 to record a new album. Psychotica was a failure, so the money was no doubt worth more to the record company. In Kurt's case, his death boosted their record sales for In Utero and any other posthumous releases, just like with Jimi Hendrix, Michael Jackson, etc.
I got In Utero from a friend of mine who bought it on the release date and hated it. So he gave it to me the next day. In my high school Pearl Jam was much much much bigger by that time. People who weren't born yet have a funny way of remembering things. ;o)
I’m guessing most in the comments weren’t around back then? This video is very factual and people trying to be dismissive of PJ is ridiculous, they weren’t pop, they were huge, they went against so much BS, they still get hated on today by nirvana fans because Eddie isn’t a MAGtard…. IMO they and Eddie did and were everything Kurt aspired to be ….eddies a great guy and one of the last men standing from that generation
@ lmao girl who gives a F about what you hear lmaooo you’re a nobody..as if you’re some world renowned music expert 😂😂😂🙄be gone from my post and create your own 🙄🤡😂😂😂😂😂😂
Pearl Jam was never as energetic, edgy or noisy as Nirvana! Pearl Jam was more like classic rock, Pearl Jam didn’t take risks and they made boring music.
@ well that’s your opinion, at their peak their sales, airplay , concert attendance and more FACTUALLY contradict your OPINIONS 😂🎯💯 even in this video compare IU 200000 copies sold to their 900,000, duh…not good with math or just plain ignorant? People were over Kurt before his death then BOOM, he has fans like you who act like he was a God online 😂😂😂😂😂
Rubbish, 'In Utero' was Number 1 in the US and the UK and their popularity was growing, they were the biggest band in the world, their incredible performance on MTV Unplugged, was massive, and was as good as an album release, bringing them new fans and increasing the interest from their fan base. They could have played and filled stadiums on their European tour, but chose to play smaller more intimate venues, that sold out quickly and they then added more dates at the same venues. Music magazines, knew that having the band on the cover, would considerably increase their sales. But if you compare their popularity in the decades after KC's death, it's true they weren't as popular and weren't considered to be the iconic band they are today.
I kind of agree with the video. Sure, they we still big, could fill out stadiums etc, but when in Utero came out, there was a feeling like things had moved on, and 'Nirvana hadn't - it felt like never-minds poorer cousin, no growth, change; more a 'heard it before' vibe'. The only song that got radio play was heart shaped box and it felt 'minor compared to 'all' the hits from 'nevermind'. Pearl Jam and 'especially' Sound Garden felt fresher as they were changing and growing (esp the latter with black hole sun etc). There is no doubt that Kurt's death 'definitely' catapulted their popularity (forever), and unplugged was 'thrashed' to death after her died. I hate to say it, but Kurt taking his own life, and in the way he did it, had the weird effect of authenticating his lyrics. The 'wo is me', let me eat your cancer', 'I hate myself diatribe was getting a bit tired, hard to tell if he meant it or it was just just a 'leeetle' bit of a pose. but then he did what he did, and suddenly, wo!.. all the lyrics took a very differdnt feel ... and forever since
@brigwood7658 I disagree, but your opinion is valid. 'In Utero' was released to critical acclaim, even though nothing they released was ever going to live up to 'nevermind', but the music world's attention was still fully focused on Nirvana's every move. For me, Pearl jam was for a different audience, 'Ten' sounds dated and will not have the same place in musical history as 'nevermind' or 'in utero'. You only have to listen to 'you know you're right' to hear Cobain, still have a lot to say, musically and he haven't lost any of his songwriting brilliance. The world wasn't bored of Nirvana in in 1993 and still isn't bored with them now.
Am glad this has been uploaded. I was a huge Nirvana fan living in the UK and a huge fan of grunge music in general, but it was becoming clear that they were losing popularity and Pearl Jam were overtaking them. I think Kurt was determined to make a much heavier album but In Utero had hardly any good songs imo. Most were just depressing. When I heard about his suicide I actually thought it was because of Pearl Jam becoming more popular than them as he was supposed to hate Eddie Vedder and it would have hurt him.
I was a teenager when he died and loved alternative music here is,what I remember and this is in all honesty. People were starting to get tired of kurt . He was a whinny little pre Madonna star but had a cooler then every other mainstream band attitude. Nirvana didn't have that cool vibe in 94 that they had in 92. After kurt died however he/Nirvana were elevated to almost icon status instantly. I believe that Nirvana was most popular in 95/96 actually. That's when everyone started wearing those kurt cobain rip stirts.
It was all mtv driven then and Nevermind was the perfect mtv space rocket they rode to instant diamond sales. In Utero definitely wasn't that type of record even though it had high artistic value.
I was in 6th grade in April 1994, already a big Nirvana fan, and they were as big as ever when he died. It wasn't the same as 91 cause a band only explodes onto the scene once and that initial impact can never be duplicated. It's like saying the Beatles lost popularity after 1964. not exactly
Nirvana hadnt lost popularity before Kurt died, if anything there popularity has continued to grow and grow ever since nevermind, mainstream fans may not have connected quite so well with there later albums, incesticide or in utero but they still had a great reception and sales and heartshaped box did very well and is one of their biggest hits, also they had the mtv unplugged performance and album which is legendary, they did very well for themselves music and popularity wise
Kurt intended to scare away the mainstream media. Look at the first two songs off In Utero Serve The Servants and Scentless Apprentice. That should tell you enough. Nirvana took a hiatus in March 92 arguably during their peak, came back out for the summer and they were off again. They made sparadic appearance here and there over the next year. However it was very clear Kurt's mindset changed from Reading 91 to Reading 92. In 93 Kurt did almost everything in his power to keep the mainstream away from Nirvana.
In Utero reached number 1 in its first week without being available at Wal Mart or Kmart as they didn't have the edited versions of the album art done yet..... I wonder how that affected sales....WalMart was pretty much the biggest thing going at the time...Kmart not at all. Nirvana had only done 6 shows in 1993 prior to the album coming out and 3 of those were in January (and those three were not in North America) so no wonder sales were cooling off for them.... Pearl Jam on the other hand did both a North American and European tour prior to their albums release date....9 of the shows were with Neil Young so they were playing to the boomer crowd which would have got them on Classic Rock radio along side Alternative stations that were already playing them at that point...their touring had also taken them to 9 different countries total.... its no wonder Pearl Jams numbers were bigger regardless of how the two albums sounded.....but between the two albums there was only one music video made and that was Heart Shaped Box.....so would almost lead you to think that if the larger audience had begun to move on from the two bands....the two bands had also moved on from trying to hard to gain or maintain a wide audience.
Nirvana was the biggest band in the world at the time of Cobain's passing. I grew up during that time. I was 16 when Kurt died. Everyone knew In Utero wasnt going to produce the numbers that Nevermind did, including Nirvana themselves. It was a totally different sounding album that was only going to attract the hardcore fans, and thats exactly what it did.
I mean, its hard to top Nevermind, right? I was in High School when this was going down, so I remember it well. Nirvana was “less popular” than they were, but were still quite popular. In fact, In Utero wasnt super well-received at first, but caught on quite a bit later. There was also their Live in NY Unugged performance & album right around the same time, which was HUGE. Bigger than the In Utero album.
When I saw PJ's "Alive" video for the first time in 1992, I thought "here we go, this is a corporate record label's idea of a grunge band". Looking at their history, going back to Green River (with pre-Mudhoney Mark Arm), I realise that they certainly had an authentic grunge pedigree. But I still have to agree with Kurt who said PJ was a "safe, corporate rock band".
Basically true. NIN, Weezer, Offspring, Green Day and all the rap that included Snoop and TLC were all the fresh new thing. Not to mention Oasis were about to become the biggest band around
It's understandable that Nirvana lost popularity and that Pearl Jam became bigger than them at the time. In Utero was a very polarizing album for the mainstream audience and the fact that it reached #1 was more due to the expectation they had of hearing Nevermind 2, which turned out to be the opposite and they found a rawer album, which leads me to believe that perhaps because of this situation of loss of popularity they did the MTV Unplugged. On the other hand, Pearl Jam was a band that knew how to put on a good live show and reminded you of bands like Led Zeppelin or The Jimi Hendrix Experience and that was more appealing to the audience, and you can even see that they were more popular because they have more references in the media, an example being the Adam Sandler sketch on SNL, in addition to the amount of copies that came out that sounded like Pearl Jam. I'm not saying that one is better than the other, but by 1993/94, Nirvana's moment had already passed.
Grunge was gonna die out regardless. Good music but all those guys were whiny junkies. Signed mainstream deals yet whined about being famous. Meanwhile the 80s metal bands embraced it.
I like Nirvana and dug them before they got so huge but I have to admit there was always a certain vibe around them (Kurt in particular) that rubbed me the wrong way. In latter years I would say I can pinpoint a lot of the "sjw/woke" garbage to that vibe which is pure toxic cancer.
I don't hate Nirvana but didn't care much for them when they exploded (or now). By that time I was more into the British scene & I'd long been a fan of Nine Inch Nails, and Jane's Addiction and saw Nirvana as a welcome addition to the club. But to say Pearl Jam was bigger... I don't buy it. When Nirvana hit, suddenly everyone was wearing flannel and ugly sweaters. They, like The Beatles, were a cultural phenomenon. And though I hate putting Nirvana anywhere near The Beatles (who I didn't care for at the time), there's no denying their impact. Pearl Jam? Nah, not even close.
Most Nirvana fans loved In Utero when it was released. And most people consider it their best album. So them being less popular just doesn’t sound right to me.
Did you just completely forget that Walmart and Kmart which were the BIGGEST retailers at the time for CDs did not carry in utero initially due to the “graphic” cover art?? Or does this fact just not matter lol. Nirvana would’ve done 2 mill easy
They did, and you're obviously too young to have been there. In Utero was nit nearly the sensation that Nevermind had been. By that point, Pearl Jam had overtaken Nirvina as the biggest band in the world. Nirvana was still huge, but not like they were two years prior
They did, and you're obviously too young to have been there. In Utero was nit nearly the sensation that Nevermind had been. By that point, Pearl Jam had overtaken Nirvina as the biggest band in the world. Nirvana was still huge, but not like they were two years prior
VS was more radio friendly (unit) than In Utero… In Utero was more aggressive, edgier and noisier than any Pearl Jam song. Pearl Jam is just boring classic rock band. Nirvana was the band that opened the door for me to indie bands in the mid 90’s like Bed Head, Shellac, Dinosaur jr. and even MBV…
Nirvana wasn’t losing popularity. In utero debuted at number 1. The MTV unplugged was a massive success. What a dumb bullsh*t video. And they were on a worldwide sold out tour.
I don't agree. In Utero wasn't Nevermind and true Nirvana fans understood that. If Kurt had survived and the band has produced another album, it probably might have been even better ....but at this point everything is just conjecture ....
Well unfortunately this is true , Nirvana was losing popularity…Nirvana fans then weren’t these nirvana fans now who are fans cuz the man’s dead….he was not “saint Kurt” then ….these fans also knew Kurt didn’t want to make another Nevermind so it was basically a meh situation, with heart shaped box as their go to…even on radio and mtv
There was a compilation album called No Alternative and people bought it ONLY because Nirvana had a “hidden” song on it…. But I digress, the city I grew up in had a “alternative” radio station in ‘90.
Nirvana were so ubiquitous after Nevermind that it kinda became uncool to like them for a while, but there was always a respect for them. Pearl Jam were really more like a mainstream band - caremalised grunge. They were popular, yes, but I remember the people whole liked Pearl Jam were usually only into Nevermind and didn't understand Bleach or In Utero. They were mainstream type of people. Nirvana fans were more likely to be into Big Black, Sonic Youth and Pixies. Pearl Jam fans were more likely to secretly have a Nickleback and Spin Doctors CD somewhere.
Lol, lots of context missing here. In Utero sold under 200k its first week, but it was still the number 1 selling album in the US. Comparisons to Lannigan and Homme are just silly. Kurt’s songwriting abilities were beyond both of them. A path similar to Chris Cornell would have been more likely. By the time VS was released, Pearl Jam was like a mainstream pop group, which Nirvana went out of their way to avoid. Cobain had become disillusioned with the fame he thought he always wanted, and was retreating from the spotlight while PJ chased it. That was the main difference.
You’re wrong on PJ…and a #1 billboard album from a band of nirvanas caliber falling off the spot after one week was very telling…also many nirvana fans including myself were over Kurt’s dramatics ….good music, but he was annoying
20 дней назад+1
I think if Kurt had lived he was going to take a step back in Nirvana and probably do drone/experimental stuff on his own for a few years.
@@DrownSodaMejia And why it fell off was explained. They changed their sound from Nevermind, and widespread appreciation for it didn’t happen until years later. It was also marketed in a limited way, with no effort to contact top-40 markets. No US released singles, and heart shaped box was only sent to college and rock associated radio stations. Some huge chains stores, like K-Mart refused to sell it because of the album artwork. The band targeted alternative markets exclusively, with Kurt flat out saying he anticipated the album would sell less than a quarter of what Nevermind did. Again, context, what’s that? And no, I’m not wrong about Pearl Jam. There were girls swooning over Vedder like he was in a boy band or something. That band became pop sensations in the early 90’s..
@@selfan2005 They made music videos for songs on VS. And they only stopped doing videos temporarily, in large part because of the backlash and interpretations over Jeremy. Vedder came out and said he was tired of overexposure, but people behind the band have since come out and shared how pissed he was over the Jeremy uproar.
Inutero may have lost some fair weather fans, but it saved face and solidified their intent to make art over cash, cultivating long-term fans. Fuck popularity, In 1994 Peal Jam , A.I.C. were more popular, while were at it so was Mary J.B.. they made different music. Pearl Jam were rock, Nirvana, was alternative.
Yes. If he had not killed himself, Nirvana would just be another has been band with a string of irrelevant albums, filling out concerts with boomers reliving their youth. Maybe they would be headliners on the rock n roll cruise ship or something too
Kurt was saying in 1992 that they were going to make a record that was going to weed out their fanbase.
Goals 😅
@@Jeremy-n4e Kurt liked to spin yards and mythologize himself. He also didn’t have any new songs for in utero besides heart, ape, and frances framer. Utero was like nevermind b-sides.
@@TylerDonald-b2x except in this case their actions backed up the sentiment completely. From the way it was marketed, to how they handled singles, they clearly were not concerned about sales or mainstream acceptance of the album.
@@kanpoe7043 is that why they got the hottest and biggest alternative rock producer Scott Litt to remix their singles? Big budget music video? lol. You believe in Kurt’s self conscious myth making. He wanted his band to be the biggest band in the world. 90s was a different era when it wasn’t cool to admit you desired fame, money, and success. It was cool to be a loser so to speak. And that’s the pose Kurt was feigning to the press.
He already knew that he wanted the follow up to be the antithesis of Nevermind. By mid '92 they were kicking around the idea of Albini and Barret Jones along with Endino recording a few tracks. There may not have been many new songs written by that time but the band were performing and demoing some of the older songs that would end up on the album so they already had a pretty good idea of the direction and sound they wanted, and they followed through.
So true, In Utero reached #1 because Nirvana was losing popularity
lol
not a lot people know this but when they were touring on the In Utero album, the women used to flock around Pat Smear, not because he was particularly handsome or anything, but because he had the most charisma
In Utero sold about 183k copies in the first week. Vs by Pearl Jam, which was released a month later, sold almost 1M in the first week.
This is actually a really ignorant comment and you are obviously very young and weren't around during this time period. Nirvana was still a big band but they had lost popularity. In Utero was #1 but it sold a fraction of what Nevermind did.
Nirvana was playing mostly 3 to 5 thousand seat venues in the US during their fall 1993 tour. They were still very popular and could headline alternative rock festivals but they were not a football stadium band like the press makes them out to be.
@@CupofCloud Sounds like BS.
I found that the more kurt opened his mouth and shared his views the less I liked of him and nirvana.
In Utero was a #1 album but it never sold anywhere near nor was it going to sell near what Nevermind did had Kurt not died.
I love Nirvana and was a teen during this time period but this is absolutely true. I am from Milwaukee and Nirvana came for a show in fall 1993 maybe 5 or 6 months before Kurt died and they only drew about 3500 people in a big arena that held maybe 10,000. They were still big and could headline alt rock festivals but they certainly weren't U2 or Rolling Stones level where they were playing football stadiums. Pearl Jam had eclipsed them in popularity by this time. This takes away nothing from them as artists but it's a fact.
I think Nirvana would have gone on to be sort of like Faith No More, they would have become this kind of cult band with a devoted fan base but for the average Joe it would be like "remember that song Epic/Teen Spirit? Yeah who sang that one again?"
Nirvana were arguably the third biggest band in the 90's. After Oasis and Pearl Jam. Today Oasis and Nirvana are much more popular than Pearl Jam though.
@@pentagonoenllamasI think “nevermind” was too much of a cultural cornerstone for that to have happened. But yeah, their music would probably be looked upon less favorably by the broad public
@@dannyblanchflower1882 Pearl Jam is still around & can sell out arenas and stadiums. Plus PJ won after sticking it out through out the lean years.
@@blachubear In their prime Pearl Jam were probably the biggest band of the 90s. Today their music has dated more than Oasis & Nirvana. The streaming numbers on Spotify and YT reflect that. Oasis have just sold out 80 and 90,000 capacity stadiums across Europe, Australia, North and South America. 50,000 capacity stadiums in Asia. PJ couldn't sell out 20,000 arenas in Europe.
I was 18 in 1994 & absolutely adored Nirvana.
They were NOT losing popularity when In Utero was realized. People heard Heart Shaped Box & were going nuts over it.
Many of us appreciated that In Utero wasn’t “Nevermind Part II”
This guy had no clue what he’s talking about.
Going by album sales and venues they probably were losing popularity. Pearl Jam and Oasis had a bigger impact in their prime. Kurt died young and the MTV Unplugged gig is iconic.
In utero had only 1 single to promote the album so obviously it'll sell way less.
@@HristinaNicole Didn't they release 2? All Apologies / Rape Me and Pennyroyal Tea after he died.
@dannyblanchflower1882 yeah but this video is about before Kurt died.
@@dannyblanchflower1882Oasis was "brit nirvana" in terms of popularity in the uk, but they never replicated that humongous success across the pond in the us. Eventually as millenium passed they started going by the numbers until the split.
Pearl Jam was kinda the stones when compared to the beatles, pretty great and rivaled them while still in a similar genre (tho personally not a big fan aside from a few songs; same as GnR, who with Nirvana was like the beach boys to the beatles, rivaled them but only briefly, and also culturally opposite), but eventually their time passed as the 90s left. Same as Radiohead, tho they lasted a bit longer until brooklynite indiewave pretty much caught up with their sound. Green Day had a second wind with American Idiot, if not they would have been left in the 90s, but even that 00s emo/pop punk eventually faded too. Meanwhile both Nirvana and Beatles ended early but keep prescient relevant and engrossing - everyone remembers beatles at sullivan and shea and atop the roof, everyone remembers nirvana's teen spirit video on snl and unplugged - they both have legendary backstories and insane personal/band trouble and egos (not a fan of kurt and dave nor of john and paul as people imho) - and most importantly, they both ended before they got stale, Nirvana literally ending with a bang that left them more memorable to make up for their shorter time compared to Beatles, rather than an eventual acrimonious split that was in the near horizon before the self-offing.
(And fwiw i see why in utero didnt sell as well, its good specially the singles and couple other songs but others are more turgid and rough, a bit of a schizo album in tune with kurt's "have my cake and eat it too" mind at the moment, split between comfy fame and punky art and troubled by mental issues and toxic environment and relations and substances; nevermind was more cohesive and catchy while still punk enough (butch vig had worked in harsh 80s industrial music iirc); and even bleach i dig too and at times more than in utero (depends on the day) bc even if rough with less singles it's cohesive and songs are of even quality; while incesticide is as good as a collection of bsides was tho perhaps their closest to how they really were. If anything, in utero's situation is not dissimilar to let it be being good but not as good as abbey road or white album or sgt pepper).
If we judged quality with the ease of an aggregating accountant who knows where we'd be. Pearl Jam were always going to be bigger (sales wise) they were a far more mainstream accessible act. Foo fighters have probably sold a ton too.....but became dad-rock after their promising first album.
I never get tired of Nirvana and own their entire discography. Yeah i like one album more than the other, but at the end of the day there isn't a bad Nirvana album. Sometimes i wonder how the follow up album of In Utero would have sounded like, but that we will never know!
They lost popularity with the trendy people that probably only knew about Teen Spirit & were never true fans of the band anyway. And don't forget this is exactly what Kurt wanted to do. He wanted to be huge but if all this other crap that came with it was going to be part of it then he wanted to loose the false fans that were the difference between big & huge.
Myth
Edit: it also wasn’t “false fans”. He had a problem with a large fraction of the typical white male rock audience that was sexist and racist
KC was a standard punk elitist...and a hypocrite by default!
@@TylerDonald-b2x so he would have liked the brooklynite hipster indie scene? or green day (specially in the 00s with its emo descendants)? or radiohead? i mean he did like r.e.m., but idk if he would have had the same sound, perhaps something rawer if the unplugged was any indication. and lol idk, he tried to have his cake and eat it too, try to stay raw and rough while also being top of the charts while also feminist and prog (while still cheating on wife and getting cucked) - and add to that the deep seated issues and heavy drug problem - lethal combo.
@TylerDonald-b2x The audience Cobain THOUGHT was sexist and racist, because he was an elitist asshole who hated white men
I don't feel like it's primarily the legend of Kurt's passing that has to do with Nirvana's enduring popularity. There are plenty of musicians who die young who do not ascend in legendary status to the degree in which Kurt's has as a result of their death. Cobain was a one-of-a-kind prolific artist where so many of these other bands (like Pearl Jam and Alice in Chains) were just musicians in comparison.
At the risk of sounding like a fanboy, Kurt was a primary force in initiating a cultural zeitgeist through his art and music. None of these other bands were going to do that to the degree that Nirvana did. None of these other bands were writing songs like "Smells Like Teen Spirit." Cobain's synthesis of various genres and his overall artistic sensibilities/aesthetic were unmatched.
Just look at the Spotify numbers now. Pearl Jam have about HALF the monthly listeners as Nirvana and they have been touring for 30 more years since Kurt's passing.
Pearl Jam is a solid band, but they are a historical footnote in comparison. Nirvana were Gen X's Beatles.
Their popularity may have died off, but Kurt himself stated an intention to play a sort of career suicide through In Utero and challenge/ditch part of their fanbase. (Cobain obviously said many things and who knew how many of them were true, but this claim seems to be valid at least in regards to the stylistic choices he made on the album versus that of Nevermind.)
The only other alternative rock band that I feel like is comparable to Nirvana in the 90's in terms of musical impact is Radiohead. In terms of cultural impact though, no other 90's rock band even comes close to Nirvana's influence. 30 million monthly listeners on Spotify for a band that has been dead and not toured for 30 years is impressive. Cobain's legacy endures in spite of it all. Sure, the mythology around him enhances this in ways that aren't exactly quantifiable, but the music, in my opinion, is what hooks people in first and foremost, not the folklore.
Smells Like Teen Spirit is a timeless rock opera that accesses such primal and elemental reconciliation of the human condition beyond the surface level angst it is often interpreted as being. It is quite rare for songs that are 30 years old to transcend 2 billion listens on spotify, again, especially for a band that has not toured in any way for 30+ years.
We're going to be talking about and dissecting Cobain as a culture far longer in a relative sense than artists like Morrison, Joplin or Hendrix. As prolific as all of these aforementioned musicians were, they did not nearly and seemingly "singlehandedly" initiate a sweeping cultural zeitgeist like Cobain and Nirvana did. The late 60's was a far more collective movement that steadily built through various acts whereas Nevermind breaking into the mainstream was a virtually singular force that shook an entire industry.
TLDR: Pearl Jam may have had moments of being seemingly more popular than Nirvana, but they were never the bigger band in terms of cultural impact and the timeline as history has shaken out proves that to be true. Nirvana is still a global sensation in spite of being a bygone band of 30+ years while Pearl Jam has continued touring much of that time, yet Nirvana's legacy still reigns supreme in quite a substantial way that I feel transcends the folklore and infamy of Kurt's passing.
Exactly! I think you have to see the bigger picture with these sort of analysis.
"The only other alternative rock band that I feel like is comparable to Nirvana in the 90's in terms of musical impact is Radiohead. "
Faith No More had a massive musical impact despite having little cultural impact. Basically an entire music genre had bands listing them as a massive influence. The amount of bands that specifically cite them is really high; Korn, Deftones, Incubus, Limp Bizkit, System Of A Down, Slipknot(Corey Taylor specifically cites seeing FNM playing on MTV was life changing) and there are far more smaller bands. In 2003, Kerrang listed “Angel dust” as the most influential album in all times(I wouldn't go that far but just saying it underrated by the mainstream and has massive cult status).
@@83442handle Yeah, that's a valid point of commentary. Just to clarify though, what I am referring to when I use the phrase "the musical world" or "musical impact" is the greater listening populous, not the world of musicians.
Like, Faith No More is a great example of the whole phenomena of "your favorite musician's favorite musician." And in the case of Faith No More within the late 80's to early 90's, I feel within a certain context that holds very much to be true.
What I am positing though is that within the realm of the greater music listening world, which includes both musicians and non-musicians, Nirvana was the singular most impactful rock and alternative band of their class both in terms of global popularity and cultural impact.
And that Radiohead or (now that I reflected on the topic a bit further) Green Day are the only other rock/alternative bands of that era to come close in terms of widespread popularity to touch Nirvana's impact on general listeners.
In Radiohead's case, they don't come close to the level of cultural impact that Nirvana registered as a result of the zeitgeist manifesto that was Nevermind, whereas Green Day I would say had a much greater cultural impact than Radiohead.
(And then, just for fun, we can say though that Radiohead is king of that era when it comes to the intersections of both global popularity and being "your favorite musician's favorite musician.")
I would argue though that Green Day's greater cultural impact came more so with the inception of American Idiot and the impact that had on the millennial generation rather than Dookie's impact on generation X, their generation of birth.
Dookie was widely popular amongst generation x, but again, these distinctions of global popularity versus cultural impact are important as Dookie was like baby Nirvana in major keys which people were stoked about, but American Idiot was a more sophisticated and deliberate concept album that radicalized many young millennials in ways similar to how Nevermind (also a concept album which I feel is lost on certain people) radicalized many young gen x'ers.
I would still say though that Nevermind blows American Idiot out of the water in terms of cultural impact and the next greatest zeitgeist to occur (when we consider all genres) post Nevermind was hands down Eminem's early 2000's era, though it's hard to say whether or not that was The Marshall Mathers LP or The Eminem Show in regard to specific albums.
(Within my age bracket, as someone born in 1993, I would argue it was the Eminem Show which coincided with the release of 8 Mile and Lose Yourself.)
Faith No More on the other hand was a blip on the radar in comparison to these aforementioned groups in terms of both global popularity and cultural impact but yes had quite a considerable impact within the category of "your favorite musician's favorite musician" in a certain context.
What I am personally most fascinated by though is when the seeming holy trinity of global popularity, cultural impact, and the phenomena of "your favorite musician's favorite musician" converge within one artist or group.
And I feel that Nirvana is that band to this day for many people in some large part whenever a host of new young players pick up an instrument and listen to Smells Like Teen Spirit or spelunk down the confines of Nevermind for the first time.
That is the kind of music I am most captivated by.
When the music transcends just being popular art and becomes a sort of historical monument that each new generation of burgeoning enthusiasts in many ways dare I say must traverse as a rite of passage to greater understand the arch of both artistic and musical civilization.
Nirvana was one of those bands. Kurt Cobain was one of those artists.
Like Van Gogh, Kurt has an indelible signature upon the collective psyche of artistic progression within the greater roadmap of at least western culture.
As much as I might enjoy artists like Faith No More that had more of an underground impact that planted the seeds for groups like Nirvana to flourish on behalf of the foundation that their predecessors established, I am more personally interested in overground great works that have had a wider generational influence.
We all have our different roles in life that contribute to the development of both the micro and macro cultures we find ourselves within and I personally am more of a macro-oriented individual.
It's a combination of things ultimately. Nirvana had all the ingredients but prior to April 1994, they didn't fully execute it, and that suicide was ultimately like lighter fluid to set them on fire to some degree beyond imagination. I do think his death in the way that it happened and when it happened played a pivotal role for this, but it's obviously not the sole reason. Essentially it was a perfect storm; Frontman of one of the biggest bands of a music genre that has angst-filled/dark themes dies via suicide with a gun at the peak of that music genre.
There is an interesting interview on here with Billy Corgan from Feb 1994, so it's two months prior to Kurt's death so there are no rose-colored glasses talking about Nirvana after his death and they actually talk about Nirvana and Pearl Jam popularity at that time. Interviewer asked Corgan to clarify on who the two biggest bands were in that scene, and he said Nirvana and Pearl Jam for public perception in America and the interviewer asked him if he was surprised about the Pearl Jam having the fastest selling album. Corgan said "no because Nirvana created a hunger in the American public and they didn't fill it by not touring. Nevermind will be a classic album and will be looked up on as a moment in time when everything changed and that won't go away but there was such a hunger for them to go out and do the Beatles thing to create that excitement and when they didn't Pearl Jam just walked through that door"
I thought that was a really interesting perspective he gave about Nirvana not doing the Beetles thing and Pearl Jam stepping in to fulfill that hunger when Grunge broke. Example: I live in one of the biggest U.S. cities and Nirvana played mine 1 time before Nevermind even charted at a tiny club in late '91 and they then didn't come back until late '93.
Anyway, Kurt's death in the way it happened via gun and not some accidental OD ended up being such a cultural watershed moment for Gen X that basically fulfilled that Beatles roles Corgan mentioned earlier and propelled Nirvana beyond immigration.
It's a combination of all things that lead to where we are now with Nirvana. Everything from Nirvana setting the zeitgeist with Nevermind to Kurt's death with a gun when Grunge was at it's peak. Layne died basically in the most un- glamorous way possible...rotting away for years and then overdosing to be found dead many years after Grunge had gone by so the story was ultimately not a big one. AIC was never as big as Nirvana so not claiming Layne killing himself makes him the same status, but it would be different. Kurt went out like in his suicide note "better to burn out than to fade away". But again, like I said its more than that because Nirvana had the Beatles ingredients for all of this to happen, but his death is what really allowed that fully realize. Just hard to predict what would happen without it since his death did really boost their popularity. They sold more albums in just the 3 years after he died than before.... by a significant amount.
@@Rim00909E yeah it’s interesting. It’s really dark when you think about it, the Robert Johnson crossroad phenomenon.
It’s all about imagery and authenticity, which means self sacrifice.
Look at the black metal scene. Every big band has a history
I bought it on day one and thought it was great because it wasn't Nevermind (even though that was great too). I would have loved to have had one more Nirvana album.
Our little group has always been and always will until the end.
Didn’t In Utero debut at number 1? I don’t think people were getting tired of it
Yeah In Utero was everywhere at the time. All of my friends bought it. This guy has no idea.
He said first week 200 thousand tho. That's underwhelming for what you would have expected from them at the time.
@@mikehemens9359 If people were truly sick of them they wouldn't have even charted lol
@@p0llenp0nyif they didn’t chart that would be because of being cancelled or some controversy. Being number one for one week as a big band isn’t significant. Albums stay at number one for months. Truth is other grunge bands were outselling Nirvana and in utero was a commercial disappointment.
@@TylerDonald-b2x I get that they couldn't top Nevermind but to say that people were sick of them is a bit of a stretch.
I lived through the rise of Nirvana and it's surreal to see how they've become iconic. Initially, I struggled to understand the hype - other bands were more popular at the time. But Nirvana had a fiercely loyal fan base that remained devoted, even after Kurt's passing. To this day, these fans still seek justice for him, a testament to the lasting impact of their music. Personally, it wasn't until I listened to Bleach that I truly began to appreciate their raw energy and talent. I was also lucky enough to own a copy of In Utero back in '93 - it's amazing how their music has stood the test of time.
@@janlevani8824 Well said!!
Both In Utero and Vs. were a bit of a disappointment and a step back from the point of view of the suburban and small town burnouts in Upstate NY when I was in high school. Not that they were bad records. Just not as good as Nevermind and Ten. That was the prevailing view. But that doesn't mean they didn't get listened to on repeat just not as much.
Similar with GnR, most at the time didn't like UYI as much as Appetite but the UYI albums were still liked and played heavily.
I never liked ten. VS was the only Pearl Jam album I can listen too.
This is part of the "Kurt was murdered theory." The record company wanted to make a lot of money and knew by that point that Kurt was not going to play ball with their plans. He was worth more to them dead than alive and, apparently, it's not the first time a record company has had a musician killed for this exact reason. There have always been ties to mafia since the beginning of the music industry. If you Google "kurt cobain death clause" you can find a lot about this topic. I also remember there was a band called Psychotica in the 90s that seemed to come from nowhere to join the Lollapalooza line-up. It turns out that's exactly what happened. I worked with a woman in the late 90sand early 00s who knew them and told me about how the lead singer was on the run from the mob and performing everywhere under different names to try to earn back the money he still owed his record company (ie. the advance they gave him to record and promote the band which included payola to get on the 1996 Lollapalooza line-up). I guess he managed to scrape up the money because he's not dead and Psychotica was able to reform in 2009 to record a new album. Psychotica was a failure, so the money was no doubt worth more to the record company. In Kurt's case, his death boosted their record sales for In Utero and any other posthumous releases, just like with Jimi Hendrix, Michael Jackson, etc.
I believe that because by 1993, I was starting to like Hip-Hop and listened to it throughout the 90's. Nirvana was a Punk band BTW.
I got In Utero from a friend of mine who bought it on the release date and hated it. So he gave it to me the next day. In my high school Pearl Jam was much much much bigger by that time. People who weren't born yet have a funny way of remembering things. ;o)
I’m guessing most in the comments weren’t around back then? This video is very factual and people trying to be dismissive of PJ is ridiculous, they weren’t pop, they were huge, they went against so much BS, they still get hated on today by nirvana fans because Eddie isn’t a MAGtard…. IMO they and Eddie did and were everything Kurt aspired to be ….eddies a great guy and one of the last men standing from that generation
Nirvana fanboys are the worst. They are like religious believers.
Seriously I never heard a Pearl jam song
@ lmao girl who gives a F about what you hear lmaooo you’re a nobody..as if you’re some world renowned music expert 😂😂😂🙄be gone from my post and create your own 🙄🤡😂😂😂😂😂😂
Pearl Jam was never as energetic, edgy or noisy as Nirvana! Pearl Jam was more like classic rock, Pearl Jam didn’t take risks and they made boring music.
@ well that’s your opinion, at their peak their sales, airplay , concert attendance and more FACTUALLY contradict your OPINIONS 😂🎯💯 even in this video compare IU 200000 copies sold to their 900,000, duh…not good with math or just plain ignorant? People were over Kurt before his death then BOOM, he has fans like you who act like he was a God online 😂😂😂😂😂
Rubbish, 'In Utero' was Number 1 in the US and the UK and their popularity was growing, they were the biggest band in the world, their incredible performance on MTV Unplugged, was massive, and was as good as an album release, bringing them new fans and increasing the interest from their fan base. They could have played and filled stadiums on their European tour, but chose to play smaller more intimate venues, that sold out quickly and they then added more dates at the same venues. Music magazines, knew that having the band on the cover, would considerably increase their sales. But if you compare their popularity in the decades after KC's death, it's true they weren't as popular and weren't considered to be the iconic band they are today.
I kind of agree with the video. Sure, they we still big, could fill out stadiums etc, but when in Utero came out, there was a feeling like things had moved on, and 'Nirvana hadn't - it felt like never-minds poorer cousin, no growth, change; more a 'heard it before' vibe'. The only song that got radio play was heart shaped box and it felt 'minor compared to 'all' the hits from 'nevermind'. Pearl Jam and 'especially' Sound Garden felt fresher as they were changing and growing (esp the latter with black hole sun etc). There is no doubt that Kurt's death 'definitely' catapulted their popularity (forever), and unplugged was 'thrashed' to death after her died. I hate to say it, but Kurt taking his own life, and in the way he did it, had the weird effect of authenticating his lyrics. The 'wo is me', let me eat your cancer', 'I hate myself diatribe was getting a bit tired, hard to tell if he meant it or it was just just a 'leeetle' bit of a pose. but then he did what he did, and suddenly, wo!.. all the lyrics took a very differdnt feel ... and forever since
@brigwood7658 I disagree, but your opinion is valid. 'In Utero' was released to critical acclaim, even though nothing they released was ever going to live up to 'nevermind', but the music world's attention was still fully focused on Nirvana's every move. For me, Pearl jam was for a different audience, 'Ten' sounds dated and will not have the same place in musical history as 'nevermind' or 'in utero'.
You only have to listen to 'you know you're right' to hear Cobain, still have a lot to say, musically and he haven't lost any of his songwriting brilliance.
The world wasn't bored of Nirvana in in 1993 and still isn't bored with them now.
Metallica & G n R were bigger. Though I do love Nirvana
Am glad this has been uploaded. I was a huge Nirvana fan living in the UK and a huge fan of grunge music in general, but it was becoming clear that they were losing popularity and Pearl Jam were overtaking them. I think Kurt was determined to make a much heavier album but In Utero had hardly any good songs imo. Most were just depressing. When I heard about his suicide I actually thought it was because of Pearl Jam becoming more popular than them as he was supposed to hate Eddie Vedder and it would have hurt him.
Not in France! I can tell you that ! At the time it was crazy ! In Utero was everywhere
I was a teenager when he died and loved alternative music here is,what I remember and this is in all honesty.
People were starting to get tired of kurt . He was a whinny little pre Madonna star but had a cooler then every other mainstream band attitude. Nirvana didn't have that cool vibe in 94 that they had in 92. After kurt died however he/Nirvana were elevated to almost icon status instantly. I believe that Nirvana was most popular in 95/96 actually. That's when everyone started wearing those kurt cobain rip stirts.
Accurate
It was all mtv driven then and Nevermind was the perfect mtv space rocket they rode to instant diamond sales. In Utero definitely wasn't that type of record even though it had high artistic value.
I remember differently. I thought In Utero was a step up in some ways. Nirvana were still huge enough to devastate a generation with our loss of Kurt.
I was in 6th grade in April 1994, already a big Nirvana fan, and they were as big as ever when he died. It wasn't the same as 91 cause a band only explodes onto the scene once and that initial impact can never be duplicated. It's like saying the Beatles lost popularity after 1964. not exactly
I was getting more into Marilyn Manson. Type O Negative Danzig and Gwar. Around In Utero. After he died people got into them again.
Nirvana hadnt lost popularity before Kurt died, if anything there popularity has continued to grow and grow ever since nevermind, mainstream fans may not have connected quite so well with there later albums, incesticide or in utero but they still had a great reception and sales and heartshaped box did very well and is one of their biggest hits, also they had the mtv unplugged performance and album which is legendary, they did very well for themselves music and popularity wise
Kurt intended to scare away the mainstream media. Look at the first two songs off In Utero Serve The Servants and Scentless Apprentice. That should tell you enough.
Nirvana took a hiatus in March 92 arguably during their peak, came back out for the summer and they were off again. They made sparadic appearance here and there over the next year. However it was very clear Kurt's mindset changed from Reading 91 to Reading 92. In 93 Kurt did almost everything in his power to keep the mainstream away from Nirvana.
In Utero reached number 1 in its first week without being available at Wal Mart or Kmart as they didn't have the edited versions of the album art done yet..... I wonder how that affected sales....WalMart was pretty much the biggest thing going at the time...Kmart not at all. Nirvana had only done 6 shows in 1993 prior to the album coming out and 3 of those were in January (and those three were not in North America) so no wonder sales were cooling off for them.... Pearl Jam on the other hand did both a North American and European tour prior to their albums release date....9 of the shows were with Neil Young so they were playing to the boomer crowd which would have got them on Classic Rock radio along side Alternative stations that were already playing them at that point...their touring had also taken them to 9 different countries total.... its no wonder Pearl Jams numbers were bigger regardless of how the two albums sounded.....but between the two albums there was only one music video made and that was Heart Shaped Box.....so would almost lead you to think that if the larger audience had begun to move on from the two bands....the two bands had also moved on from trying to hard to gain or maintain a wide audience.
Nirvana was the biggest band in the world at the time of Cobain's passing. I grew up during that time. I was 16 when Kurt died. Everyone knew In Utero wasnt going to produce the numbers that Nevermind did, including Nirvana themselves. It was a totally different sounding album that was only going to attract the hardcore fans, and thats exactly what it did.
when the unplugged album came out they shot into orbit
I mean, its hard to top Nevermind, right? I was in High School when this was going down, so I remember it well. Nirvana was “less popular” than they were, but were still quite popular. In fact, In Utero wasnt super well-received at first, but caught on quite a bit later. There was also their Live in NY Unugged performance & album right around the same time, which was HUGE. Bigger than the In Utero album.
When I saw PJ's "Alive" video for the first time in 1992, I thought "here we go, this is a corporate record label's idea of a grunge band". Looking at their history, going back to Green River (with pre-Mudhoney Mark Arm), I realise that they certainly had an authentic grunge pedigree. But I still have to agree with Kurt who said PJ was a "safe, corporate rock band".
Basically true. NIN, Weezer, Offspring, Green Day and all the rap that included Snoop and TLC were all the fresh new thing. Not to mention Oasis were about to become the biggest band around
It's understandable that Nirvana lost popularity and that Pearl Jam became bigger than them at the time. In Utero was a very polarizing album for the mainstream audience and the fact that it reached #1 was more due to the expectation they had of hearing Nevermind 2, which turned out to be the opposite and they found a rawer album, which leads me to believe that perhaps because of this situation of loss of popularity they did the MTV Unplugged. On the other hand, Pearl Jam was a band that knew how to put on a good live show and reminded you of bands like Led Zeppelin or The Jimi Hendrix Experience and that was more appealing to the audience, and you can even see that they were more popular because they have more references in the media, an example being the Adam Sandler sketch on SNL, in addition to the amount of copies that came out that sounded like Pearl Jam. I'm not saying that one is better than the other, but by 1993/94, Nirvana's moment had already passed.
In utero was a great album👍 nirvana waa the biggest band in the world when Kurt died.
Grunge was gonna die out regardless. Good music but all those guys were whiny junkies. Signed mainstream deals yet whined about being famous. Meanwhile the 80s metal bands embraced it.
You’re one of those people…
I like Nirvana and dug them before they got so huge but I have to admit there was always a certain vibe around them (Kurt in particular) that rubbed me the wrong way. In latter years I would say I can pinpoint a lot of the "sjw/woke" garbage to that vibe which is pure toxic cancer.
It wasn’t woke back then
It was classical liberalism
Different
@@Daneiladams555 No it was radical leftism and the term "woke" was already in use by then .
@ Kurt was not woke
The right wing party was totally different to what it is today
Essentially the left is radical right now
Why doesn't anyone mention that in In utero there was only 1 music video to push and promote the album ...
Kurt told you it wasn’t going to be like nevermind so why would you expect it to be nevermind part 2?
Everyone loses popularity after their peak fame. Its normal
I don't hate Nirvana but didn't care much for them when they exploded (or now). By that time I was more into the British scene & I'd long been a fan of Nine Inch Nails, and Jane's Addiction and saw Nirvana as a welcome addition to the club.
But to say Pearl Jam was bigger... I don't buy it. When Nirvana hit, suddenly everyone was wearing flannel and ugly sweaters. They, like The Beatles, were a cultural phenomenon. And though I hate putting Nirvana anywhere near The Beatles (who I didn't care for at the time), there's no denying their impact. Pearl Jam? Nah, not even close.
I didn't realize today was "Make Sh*t Up As You Go Along" Day!" Thanks for reminding me with this ridiculous video you made for some attention.
Nirvana became a cartoon, Pearl Jam always was a cartoon
“We avoided mainstream rock bands, which is how we perceived Pearl Jam, so we didn’t play their music…until 1993, when Pearl became mainstream.”
Okay!
I've heard a lot of odd takes on Nirvana, but this one is clueless...
And people still say "oh, he couldn't handle fame". Like... 2 and a half years later?
Nirvana and grunge was a lot of record industry hype.
Bullshit
@stevenhenry5267 Yes, exactly, that's what it was for the most part. Nothing against Nirvana they're a great band. Just overhyped.
nirvana were actually very gracious towards mighty Joe young, who would later change their name to stone temple pilots
Most Nirvana fans loved In Utero when it was released. And most people consider it their best album. So them being less popular just doesn’t sound right to me.
I hate to say it but it’s true. PJ and AiC were more popular than Nirvana at that point in time.
Well you said it right there: Nirvana fans loved it. I guess the mainstream public were getting Nirvana fatigue.
Not everyone is a hardcore fan. they’re talking about sales
I hate to say it but people were starting to get tired of nirvana right before Kurt's death .
@@Davidshapira-zn9mq Who? lol My group of friends certainly weren't.
Did you just completely forget that Walmart and Kmart which were the BIGGEST retailers at the time for CDs did not carry in utero initially due to the “graphic” cover art?? Or does this fact just not matter lol. Nirvana would’ve done 2 mill easy
Genuinely can’t stand when people try to rewrite history because they lack the knowledge.. do your research before speaking.
Pearl Jam are shite.
And always will be.
Maybe you forget that Nirvana lost popularity with Kurt himself. Haven't you made a thousand videos of Kurt quitting the In Utero Tour?
i dont think so, if nirvana released a record in 1995, it would have been number 1
You're higher than Kurt was if you think they lost popularity
They did, and you're obviously too young to have been there. In Utero was nit nearly the sensation that Nevermind had been. By that point, Pearl Jam had overtaken Nirvina as the biggest band in the world. Nirvana was still huge, but not like they were two years prior
They did, and you're obviously too young to have been there. In Utero was nit nearly the sensation that Nevermind had been. By that point, Pearl Jam had overtaken Nirvina as the biggest band in the world. Nirvana was still huge, but not like they were two years prior
@@pete7164 lol. Not too young. I was in the thick of it.
VS was more radio friendly (unit) than In Utero… In Utero was more aggressive, edgier and noisier than any Pearl Jam song. Pearl Jam is just boring classic rock band. Nirvana was the band that opened the door for me to indie bands in the mid 90’s like Bed Head, Shellac, Dinosaur jr. and even MBV…
He never got on a plane cuz he got killed:(
Once Kurt was done dunking on Axel Rose the party was over.
. they where there for a second
. we where barely gettin acostumed when it happen
In Utero was mid and sounded uninspired
Nirvana wasn’t losing popularity. In utero debuted at number 1. The MTV unplugged was a massive success. What a dumb bullsh*t video. And they were on a worldwide sold out tour.
Pearl Jam and Alice In Chains looked like posers. They looked like they were trying to look cool. Nirvana and Soundgarden were the real deal.
Uhm no , Alice In Chains was the most raw real deal
Pearl Jam blows
I don't agree. In Utero wasn't Nevermind and true Nirvana fans understood that. If Kurt had survived and the band has produced another album, it probably might have been even better ....but at this point everything is just conjecture ....
Insesticide was way better. So was nevermind
Well unfortunately this is true , Nirvana was losing popularity…Nirvana fans then weren’t these nirvana fans now who are fans cuz the man’s dead….he was not “saint Kurt” then ….these fans also knew Kurt didn’t want to make another Nevermind so it was basically a meh situation, with heart shaped box as their go to…even on radio and mtv
thats funny, because if we look nirvanamania was still going on. No one know who you are, everyone knows kurt
No alternative music in '91? Not true!
There was a compilation album called No Alternative and people bought it ONLY because Nirvana had a “hidden” song on it…. But I digress, the city I grew up in had a “alternative” radio station in ‘90.
Nirvana were so ubiquitous after Nevermind that it kinda became uncool to like them for a while, but there was always a respect for them. Pearl Jam were really more like a mainstream band - caremalised grunge. They were popular, yes, but I remember the people whole liked Pearl Jam were usually only into Nevermind and didn't understand Bleach or In Utero. They were mainstream type of people. Nirvana fans were more likely to be into Big Black, Sonic Youth and Pixies. Pearl Jam fans were more likely to secretly have a Nickleback and Spin Doctors CD somewhere.
Nickelsack wasn't even around when VS was released. 😂
. nikelbak? the fuck ! ? 😅
Pearl Jam had the burnouts...Nirvana had the art kids.
Pearl Jam was boring classic rock that jocks liked, just like Hootie and the Blowfish.
Marry him or marry me.
Lol, lots of context missing here. In Utero sold under 200k its first week, but it was still the number 1 selling album in the US. Comparisons to Lannigan and Homme are just silly. Kurt’s songwriting abilities were beyond both of them. A path similar to Chris Cornell would have been more likely.
By the time VS was released, Pearl Jam was like a mainstream pop group, which Nirvana went out of their way to avoid. Cobain had become disillusioned with the fame he thought he always wanted, and was retreating from the spotlight while PJ chased it. That was the main difference.
If PJ chased the spotlight, then why did they stop making music videos around the time of VS?
You’re wrong on PJ…and a #1 billboard album from a band of nirvanas caliber falling off the spot after one week was very telling…also many nirvana fans including myself were over Kurt’s dramatics ….good music, but he was annoying
I think if Kurt had lived he was going to take a step back in Nirvana and probably do drone/experimental stuff on his own for a few years.
@@DrownSodaMejia And why it fell off was explained. They changed their sound from Nevermind, and widespread appreciation for it didn’t happen until years later. It was also marketed in a limited way, with no effort to contact top-40 markets. No US released singles, and heart shaped box was only sent to college and rock associated radio stations. Some huge chains stores, like K-Mart refused to sell it because of the album artwork. The band targeted alternative markets exclusively, with Kurt flat out saying he anticipated the album would sell less than a quarter of what Nevermind did. Again, context, what’s that? And no, I’m not wrong about Pearl Jam. There were girls swooning over Vedder like he was in a boy band or something. That band became pop sensations in the early 90’s..
@@selfan2005 They made music videos for songs on VS. And they only stopped doing videos temporarily, in large part because of the backlash and interpretations over Jeremy. Vedder came out and said he was tired of overexposure, but people behind the band have since come out and shared how pissed he was over the Jeremy uproar.
Inutero may have lost some fair weather fans, but it saved face and solidified their intent to make art over cash, cultivating long-term fans.
Fuck popularity, In 1994 Peal Jam , A.I.C. were more popular, while were at it so was Mary J.B.. they made different music. Pearl Jam were rock, Nirvana, was alternative.
This dude has always been a nirvana hater. His numbers are inaccurate. In-utero sold very well i its first fee weeks.
Kurt would be a woman now
Hardly
Pearl jam definitely filled the void after nirvana
The biggest reason for that was the rise of grunge and Lollapalooza.
This is ridiculous nonsense.
👋🏻
Nirvana sucks
Commercial success of music is inversely proportional to its quality.
...sometimes, not always.
Yes. If he had not killed himself, Nirvana would just be another has been band with a string of irrelevant albums, filling out concerts with boomers reliving their youth.
Maybe they would be headliners on the rock n roll cruise ship or something too