Which album was more influential, Nevermind or Is This It?

[goodson]

nirvana does not matter and is trash

done with work in 45 min!!!!

[venom]

i would say the more influential album is Nevermind because that was key for nirvana whereas a lot of the hype on the strokes and their influence began well before Is This It.

[ten15]

Sorry, neader, but this is the most fuckin' neaderest thing that ever neadered.

[chvrchbarrel]

Not that this is the end-all-be-all, but even just comparing the Wikipedia sections on "legacy" for the two albums makes this a silly question.

Nevermind not only popularized the Seattle grunge movement but also brought alternative rock as a whole into the mainstream, establishing its commercial and cultural viability.

Nevermind's success surprised Nirvana's contemporaries, who felt dwarfed by its impact. Fugazi's Guy Picciotto later commented: "It was like our record could have been a hobo pissing in the forest for the amount of impact it had. [...] It felt like we were playing ukuleles all of a sudden because of the disparity of the impact of what they did".

Karen Schoemer of the New York Times added that "What's unusual about Nirvana's "Nevermind" is that it caters to neither a mainstream audience nor the indie rock fans who supported the group's debut album."

In 1992, Jon Pareles of The New York Times described that in the aftermath of the album's breakthrough, "Suddenly, all bets are off. No one has the inside track on which of dozens, perhaps hundreds, of ornery, obstreperous, unkempt bands might next appeal to the mall-walking millions".

Record company executives offered large advances and record deals to bands, and previous strategies of building audiences for alternative rock bands had been replaced by the opportunity to achieve mainstream popularity quickly.

Meanwhile, The Strokes inspired the bassist from Kings of Leon to join a band.

I'm not going to say it wasn't an influential album, but pretending it did close to what Nevermind did doesn't make sense to me

[goodson]

Dec 12, 2018 15:11:14 GMT -6 chvrchbarrel said:

Not that this is the end-all-be-all, but even just comparing the Wikipedia sections on "legacy" for the two albums makes this a silly question.

Nevermind not only popularized the Seattle grunge movement but also brought alternative rock as a whole into the mainstream, establishing its commercial and cultural viability.

Nevermind's success surprised Nirvana's contemporaries, who felt dwarfed by its impact. Fugazi's Guy Picciotto later commented: "It was like our record could have been a hobo pissing in the forest for the amount of impact it had. [...] It felt like we were playing ukuleles all of a sudden because of the disparity of the impact of what they did".

Karen Schoemer of the New York Times added that "What's unusual about Nirvana's "Nevermind" is that it caters to neither a mainstream audience nor the indie rock fans who supported the group's debut album."

In 1992, Jon Pareles of The New York Times described that in the aftermath of the album's breakthrough, "Suddenly, all bets are off. No one has the inside track on which of dozens, perhaps hundreds, of ornery, obstreperous, unkempt bands might next appeal to the mall-walking millions".

Record company executives offered large advances and record deals to bands, and previous strategies of building audiences for alternative rock bands had been replaced by the opportunity to achieve mainstream popularity quickly.

Meanwhile, The Strokes inspired the bassist from Kings of Leon to join a band.

I'm not going to say it wasn't an influential album, but pretending it did close to what Nevermind did doesn't make sense to me

it didn't do close to what nevermind did

it did much more

[rango420]

Ah yes, it inspired every label to give too much money and therefore too many restrctions on millions of college rock bands which caused them all to either break up or release their worst music and than all the major labels dropped and sued them and than just doubled down on hootie and the blowfish.

[chvrchbarrel]

god bless the strokes

[chvrchbarrel]

Dec 12, 2018 15:13:09 GMT -6 rango420 said:

Ah yes, it inspired every label to give too much money and therefore too many restrctions on millions of college rock bands which caused them all to either break up or release their worst music and than all the major labels dropped and sued them and than just doubled down on hootie and the blowfish.

This isn't 100% something I agree with, but you're not contradicting my point. It was a huge influence in the way the entire industry operated on finding talent and offering exposure. It didn't come without its evils.

I don't know exactly what The Strokes did to music except get a bunch of people to think they were cool and sound like them. Is that influence? Yeah. Is it as big? Not to me, at all.

[goodson]

Dec 12, 2018 15:13:11 GMT -6 chvrchbarrel said:

god bless the strokes

oh man we used to have to listen to this song in my gym class

did the teacher not know it was called "sex on fire" or was he just vibing with it anyway?

[neader]

but like that's what i'm talking about.

give me concrete examples.

Gary Mulholland of The Observer considers the release of Is This It a "world-changing moment" and notes that its impact was "immediate and dramatic" on both music and attire.[75] BBC Radio 1's Zane Lowe suggests that the album moved popular opinion from DJs and pop music to "skinny jeans and guitars", "the template for rock 'n' roll in the modern day".[76] Tam Gunn of FACT agrees and explains that it "caused a sea change" in mainstream music in the US and the UK,[77] while Anthony Miccio of Stylus points out that the Strokes' success created the commercial context for "other new-wavers" to flourish.[78] Rolling Stone writes that Is This It inspired "a ragged revolt" in Britain, led by the Libertines and Arctic Monkeys, and continued its influence in the US on the success of bands like Kings of Leon.[79] The Observer shares a similar view and concludes that "a fine brood of heirs", like the Libertines and Franz Ferdinand, would not have existed and been successful if the Strokes had not reinvigorated "rock's obsession with having a good time".[80] Jared Followill of Kings of Leon notes that the album was one of the main reasons that he wanted to get into a band; he states, "The title track was one of the first basslines I learned ... I was just 15 at the time."[81]

Jed Gottlieb of the Boston Herald argues that, although Is This It provided substantial musical influence, its biggest success was in revamping the music industry and making A&R delegates scout and promote alternative bands.[82] Gunn links the success of alternative music in British charts throughout the 2000s to the album, but notes that "the copyists" could never match the attention to detail and heartfelt emotion of the Strokes.[77] Mulholland adds that even the pop stars of that decade who rediscovered disco, electro, and synthpop owe a debt to the record, because its commercial success "made every forgotten art-pop experiment of the late 70s and early 80s instantly hip and ripe for reinvention".[75] Hamish MacBain of NME writes that "the western world has moved on, and is now swinging to the tune of Is This It",[83] while Pitchfork's Joe Colly suggests that "you only capture this kind of a lightning in a bottle once".[84] Gunn concludes that, while the status of the album as the 2000s' most influential guitar record may be "a double-edged sword" because of poor quality copyists, its status as the decade's best pop album should not be in doubt

like i do not believe we would have, besides those listed above, the killers, lcd soundsystem, franz ferdinand, bloc party, interpol, arcade fire, muse, etc.

[rango420]

yeah the difference is popular rock music after the strokes has been 100% indebted to the strokes.

With Pearl Jam and the Smashing Pumpkins popular rock music was gonna sound like grunge regardless.

[Xamnam]

Dec 12, 2018 15:11:14 GMT -6 chvrchbarrel said:

Not that this is the end-all-be-all, but even just comparing the Wikipedia sections on "legacy" for the two albums makes this a silly question.

Nevermind not only popularized the Seattle grunge movement but also brought alternative rock as a whole into the mainstream, establishing its commercial and cultural viability.

Nevermind's success surprised Nirvana's contemporaries, who felt dwarfed by its impact. Fugazi's Guy Picciotto later commented: "It was like our record could have been a hobo pissing in the forest for the amount of impact it had. [...] It felt like we were playing ukuleles all of a sudden because of the disparity of the impact of what they did".

Karen Schoemer of the New York Times added that "What's unusual about Nirvana's "Nevermind" is that it caters to neither a mainstream audience nor the indie rock fans who supported the group's debut album."

In 1992, Jon Pareles of The New York Times described that in the aftermath of the album's breakthrough, "Suddenly, all bets are off. No one has the inside track on which of dozens, perhaps hundreds, of ornery, obstreperous, unkempt bands might next appeal to the mall-walking millions".

Record company executives offered large advances and record deals to bands, and previous strategies of building audiences for alternative rock bands had been replaced by the opportunity to achieve mainstream popularity quickly.

Meanwhile, The Strokes inspired the bassist from Kings of Leon to join a band.

I'm not going to say it wasn't an influential album, but pretending it did close to what Nevermind did doesn't make sense to me

Let's be clear, this is the largest evil here. 

[Deleted]

Dec 12, 2018 15:15:13 GMT -6 neader said:

but like that's what i'm talking about.

give me concrete examples.

Gary Mulholland of The Observer considers the release of Is This It a "world-changing moment" and notes that its impact was "immediate and dramatic" on both music and attire.[75] BBC Radio 1's Zane Lowe suggests that the album moved popular opinion from DJs and pop music to "skinny jeans and guitars", "the template for rock 'n' roll in the modern day".[76] Tam Gunn of FACT agrees and explains that it "caused a sea change" in mainstream music in the US and the UK,[77] while Anthony Miccio of Stylus points out that the Strokes' success created the commercial context for "other new-wavers" to flourish.[78] Rolling Stone writes that Is This It inspired "a ragged revolt" in Britain, led by the Libertines and Arctic Monkeys, and continued its influence in the US on the success of bands like Kings of Leon.[79] The Observer shares a similar view and concludes that "a fine brood of heirs", like the Libertines and Franz Ferdinand, would not have existed and been successful if the Strokes had not reinvigorated "rock's obsession with having a good time".[80] Jared Followill of Kings of Leon notes that the album was one of the main reasons that he wanted to get into a band; he states, "The title track was one of the first basslines I learned ... I was just 15 at the time."[81]

Jed Gottlieb of the Boston Herald argues that, although Is This It provided substantial musical influence, its biggest success was in revamping the music industry and making A&R delegates scout and promote alternative bands.[82] Gunn links the success of alternative music in British charts throughout the 2000s to the album, but notes that "the copyists" could never match the attention to detail and heartfelt emotion of the Strokes.[77] Mulholland adds that even the pop stars of that decade who rediscovered disco, electro, and synthpop owe a debt to the record, because its commercial success "made every forgotten art-pop experiment of the late 70s and early 80s instantly hip and ripe for reinvention".[75] Hamish MacBain of NME writes that "the western world has moved on, and is now swinging to the tune of Is This It",[83] while Pitchfork's Joe Colly suggests that "you only capture this kind of a lightning in a bottle once".[84] Gunn concludes that, while the status of the album as the 2000s' most influential guitar record may be "a double-edged sword" because of poor quality copyists, its status as the decade's best pop album should not be in doubt

like i do not believe we would have, besides those listed above, the killers, lcd soundsystem, franz ferdinand, bloc party, interpol, arcade fire, muse, etc.

Muse was releasing albums before the Strokes existed. Also sound nothing like them.

Interpol released songs from Turn on the Bright Lights before Is This It was released.

LCD Soundsystem sound nothing like the Strokes.

Arcade Fire sound nothing like the Strokes.

Bloc Party suck.

[Xamnam]

Alright, but you use band names in a plural sense, so I do think that disqualifies your point unfortunately.

[neader]

whoooooooosh

[Deleted]

The Strokes made jean jackets and looking like you hadn't showered in days cool again.

[Xamnam]

Dec 12, 2018 15:27:28 GMT -6 scoots said:

The Strokes made jean jackets and looking like you hadn't showered in days cool again.

God bless us, every one. 

[Deleted]

Julian Casablancas looked like he had mange at the height of their popularity.

[neader]

Dec 12, 2018 15:27:28 GMT -6 scoots said:

The Strokes made jean jackets and looking like you hadn't showered in days cool again.

and 17 years later we're all still rocking them.

[alady]

Dec 12, 2018 15:15:13 GMT -6 neader said:

but like that's what i'm talking about.

give me concrete examples.

Gary Mulholland of The Observer considers the release of Is This It a "world-changing moment" and notes that its impact was "immediate and dramatic" on both music and attire.[75] BBC Radio 1's Zane Lowe suggests that the album moved popular opinion from DJs and pop music to "skinny jeans and guitars", "the template for rock 'n' roll in the modern day".[76] Tam Gunn of FACT agrees and explains that it "caused a sea change" in mainstream music in the US and the UK,[77] while Anthony Miccio of Stylus points out that the Strokes' success created the commercial context for "other new-wavers" to flourish.[78] Rolling Stone writes that Is This It inspired "a ragged revolt" in Britain, led by the Libertines and Arctic Monkeys, and continued its influence in the US on the success of bands like Kings of Leon.[79] The Observer shares a similar view and concludes that "a fine brood of heirs", like the Libertines and Franz Ferdinand, would not have existed and been successful if the Strokes had not reinvigorated "rock's obsession with having a good time".[80] Jared Followill of Kings of Leon notes that the album was one of the main reasons that he wanted to get into a band; he states, "The title track was one of the first basslines I learned ... I was just 15 at the time."[81]

Jed Gottlieb of the Boston Herald argues that, although Is This It provided substantial musical influence, its biggest success was in revamping the music industry and making A&R delegates scout and promote alternative bands.[82] Gunn links the success of alternative music in British charts throughout the 2000s to the album, but notes that "the copyists" could never match the attention to detail and heartfelt emotion of the Strokes.[77] Mulholland adds that even the pop stars of that decade who rediscovered disco, electro, and synthpop owe a debt to the record, because its commercial success "made every forgotten art-pop experiment of the late 70s and early 80s instantly hip and ripe for reinvention".[75] Hamish MacBain of NME writes that "the western world has moved on, and is now swinging to the tune of Is This It",[83] while Pitchfork's Joe Colly suggests that "you only capture this kind of a lightning in a bottle once".[84] Gunn concludes that, while the status of the album as the 2000s' most influential guitar record may be "a double-edged sword" because of poor quality copyists, its status as the decade's best pop album should not be in doubt

like i do not believe we would have, besides those listed above, the killers, lcd soundsystem, franz ferdinand, bloc party, interpol, arcade fire, muse, etc.

*scans list*

where is the loss

[chvrchbarrel]

Nirvana influenced and propelled a genre that swept music for years

The Strokes influenced and propelled a genre literally named after the fact that it was a smaller deal - "indie". And the entire time, it fought with rap, hip-hop and pop that was all immensely popular.

I get what you're saying here neader but I think the magnitude is just different, point blank

[alady]

Dec 12, 2018 14:55:34 GMT -6 teekoh said:

It is true that I had not considered Nirvana's role in the nascence of butt rock, and that is as close to an unforgivable offense as there is in my book.

But let us not forget that butt rock existed well before Nirvana, living under the moniker "hair band"

[jazzpolice]

Is there anyone here who was around when Nevermind came out that would vote against it? Not to sound like an old codger, but it is hard to overstate just how quickly and drastically it changed the musical landscape.

[thebosma]

I wasn't even In Utero when it came out

[monasterymonochrome]

I mean, look, if we're arguing which band inspired "cooler" disciples then sure maybe the Strokes edge out Nirvana. But as a historical question, this is not a debate. Nevermind colossally restructured the music industry in a way few albums have ever accomplished.

[Deleted]

Bosma makes a good point. Switching back to Nirvana.

[neader]

Pro Nirvana people need to give me some actual damn examples and ways instead of just saying it changed music forever over and over.

[Deleted]

Neader makes a good point. Switching back to the Strokes

[jazzpolice]

Dec 12, 2018 15:35:11 GMT -6 alady said:

Dec 12, 2018 14:55:34 GMT -6 teekoh said:

It is true that I had not considered Nirvana's role in the nascence of butt rock, and that is as close to an unforgivable offense as there is in my book.

But let us not forget that butt rock existed well before Nirvana, living under the moniker "hair band"

That reminds me of one of my favorite things ever:  Tom Petty talking about "hair bands" and Nirvana.

[monasterymonochrome]

Also, I'd say more contemporary rock bands than we think are indebted to Nirvana's ultra-loud, ultra-melodic style of chunky power-chords. See: Bully / Charly Bliss / Snail Mail