Nirvana ~ In Utero (album review) ... Serve this to the servants with pleasure!

Style: grunge
Label: DGC
Year: 1993
Home: Seattle, Washington

Members: Kurt Cobain ~ guitar/vocals
Dave Grohl ~ drums
Krist Novoselic ~ bass

Additional: Kera Schaley ~ cello


The impact of Nirvana on music will be eternal, which is a heavy statement but considering its been almost two decades since the band ended & their influence is as strong as the much older Bob Marley or the Beatles its thus a heavy statement I feel comfortable saying ... though, on the other hand will the music business be eternal? Considering how rarely we hear about the latest rock band or guitar hero on Star Trek the Beatles don't have longevity according to Gene Roddenberry & to talk about reggae touches on racism. It's almost strange to think that for such a powerful influence Nirvana only made three studio albums & their debut is more akin to a demo, while it wasn't until their second album that they became internationally famous or infamous. Coming only two years after that breakthrough second album no one would have predicted that their follow-up would also be their swan song. While nobody probably also predicted how different this album would sound compared to what came before, but then in retrospect all three albums are their own creatures with little common ground. Debut Bleach is a raw garage band not out to change music, Nevermind is a pop punk angry young man album maybe a bit more commercial pop than rough punk, while swan song In Utero just pulls everything back into a stark cold abyss that careens from tender ballads, some of Nirvana's best actually, to alienating guitar jams. In some ways this musical move might be compared to, of all bands, Metallica who moved from the commercially successful sounds of The Black Album to the cold intimidating St. Anger that was once described by a reviewer as a naked bulb too bright in an empty room. In Utero might be Nirvana's empty room with only a naked bulb, though its not quite so bright depending on where one is standing. But, one must also consider it took Metallica years to get to this naked place while Nirvana did it seemingly overnight, both naturally & a bit intentionally with a new producer in tow. This album has almost become less famous for its music & more famous for asking a lot of questions, with Kurt Cobain's death not long after its release not opening the door to any answers. Was Cobain deliberately in attack mode while creating this album jumping out against all that angered him, including his fans, or has the coldness of parts of the album been misinterpreted in light of his mysterious inner demons & suicide & the anger over-emphasized over other more important or less angry lyrical images? Can there be found in the music signs of the beginning of his mental breakdown, some like to point to closing song "All Apologies", or is this Cobain actively trying to work through his demons before they conquer him & this is actually Custer's last stand on Capitol Hill? Was Nirvana reaching into the past for a new sound or looking to the future with the eye of a musician in a mode of natural progression, or was Nevermind the fluke sound & this more akin to the real Nirvana? Considering Nevermind turned grunge into a household word is In Utero still a grunge album, but then what is grunge essentially? What music was Cobain & company listening to at the time & can it be heard as an influence here, as nothing is created in isolation. Is this a transition album in disguise from a tortured artist that never got to have its next piece put into place? So many questions with what answers out there coming from everyone but Cobain & even then his answers at the time might be more the game of an artist weaving through the music business than a heart to heart confession. This is not as musically focused or as lyrically strong & addicting as Nevermind & one wonders how it would rate if it hadn't been their last album or if it hadn't followed a groundbreaking & legacy making album. One also wonders what might have followed this musically if Nirvana had continued. Also, its gone on to be a top selling album, but how much of that has to do with the music & how much has to do with the name of Nirvana & the fact this is their final studio outing? Some critics, including the record label at the time, said his writing was not at its best & the album a difficult listen. Is this a true opinion as its certainly a difficult album or does the name Nirvana give leeway where other bands get criticized? Or, is it only in light of the commercial sounding Nevermind that its unlistenable? In Utero has some strong memorable tracks in "Serve The Servants", "Heart Shaped Box", "Dumb", "Rape Me", "Pennyroyal Tea", "All Apologies", though a few suffer on some level from either sounding undeveloped. The rest of the songs tend to sound somewhat unfocused & meandering & more akin to jams than completed ideas either musically or lyrically & it's hard to call Cobain a guitar god by any means who can dance his way through a guitar solo. The highs are great, the lows can be avoided, some have said the tracks that didn't make the cut should have & the result would be a far stronger album. In 2013 a deluxe version was released with more than seventy tracks including rare & unreleased recordings & demos plus live recordings of the final line-up of Cobain, Novoselic, Grohl plus rhythm guitarist Pat Smear. It doesn't fully answer the what if questions but its a nice attempt to create some context to an album that really needs it.

Slash ~ Slash (aka self-titled) (album review) ... Slashing through guests to get somewhere!

Style: hard rock
Label: EMI
Year: 2010
Home: n/a

Members: Slash ~ guitars
Chris Chaney ~ bass
Josh Freese ~ drums

Additional: Eric Valentine ~ keyboards
Big Chris Flores ~ keyboards/programming
Taylor Hawkins, Kevin Churko ~ b. vocals
Joe Sandt ~ harpsichord
Deron Johnson ~ organ
Mark Robertson, Alyssa Park, Julie Rogers, Sam Fischer, Grace Oh, Songa Lee, Maia Jasper, Lisa Li ~ violins, Anton Patzner, Lewis Patzner ~ strings
Steve Ferrone ~ drums
Lenny Castro ~ percussion

Guests: Ian Astbury ~ lead vocals/percussion
Izzy Stradlin ~ rhythm guitar
Lemmy Kilmister ~ lead vocals/bass
Kid Rock, Iggy Pop, Chris Cornell, Ozzy Osbourne, Fergie, Myles Kennedy, Andrew Stockdale, Adam Levine, M. Shadows, Rocco DeLuca ~ lead vocals
Dave Grohl ~ drums
Duff McKagan ~ bass/b. vocals


What is wrong with this album? Technically nothing. But, how come after listening to it over & over & over via a couple days I almost have to force myself to get interested? I find myself wondering what happened to the trademarked bluesy riffs I used to love by Slash? & how come the singers don't seem to sound as interesting as I know all of them are? & how come none of the songs I can remember once the album ends? & how come I'm not playing air guitar to Slash as I used to? It's as if Slash has, deliberately or not, laid his Guns N Roses roots finally to rest, only to create some new music that lacks any distinct personality or any real emotional push in any direction. Some critics have talked about how this goes back to the 90's, but for me I can't help but hear the lack of things versus what is here. While none of the participants really do anything to pull the songs in any direction, not even the main player himself I feel. It's like there's a different vocal tone on each song, but it doesn't really mean much as nothing feels distinct. It's a duets album without any interesting duets. While there's a guitarist on all the tracks, Izzy Stradlin' appears on rhythm track on the first track & is the only additional guitarist, but I'm not really that engaged by the playing & it seems to lack any distinctiveness or personality. I can only think of some interesting points to touch upon. "Ghost" with Ian Astbury of the Cult feels like it has too many layers. Is there three guitars here all at once or is it four? What is this trying to be - the new utterly cluttered Aerosmith? While I realize I've been listening to Astbury too much with the reunited Doors versus the Cult as I'm always looking for Jim Morrison in his vocals, but that's not fair to him. The tracks with Ozzy, Lemmy & Iggy Pop feel like Slash is just trying to recreate each player's individual sound versus challenging them with a new setting. None are that interesting lyrically either & like most of the singers on the album the performances aren't so hot & feel more autopilot than anything. Ozzy is great partly because of dirty & stomping guitar licks in his solo albums, but his song here is a weak imitation that is neither dirty nor stomping & imitate the notes without the essence. Which means, it would have been better not to imitate at all. The fact that Slash is a blues-based rocker not a heavy metal guitar makes it feel worse as nobody is thus in their creative zone. Fergie probably made "Beautiful Dangerous" the standout single because she's the token female & something to look at in a video, as it's not really that interesting of a song & suffers from more Aerosmith-esque too many layers that take the focus in too many directions & none are particularly good. Chris Cornell turns in a good performance on "Promise", though it sounds more like his Euphora Morning meets Time over Soundgarden. He's always a great voice, but his solo career just makes us miss the power & majesty of Soundgarden & this guest spot is no exception. No doubts why Slash chose Myles Kennedy to join him on his next album from his two tracks here, the only singer with two songs. He might be the least famous guest but turns in the best tracks & I would have grabbed him too. The only real standout, or at least in terms of what I expected to hear, might be the instrumental "Watch This" with Dave Grohl & Duff McKagan which has hints of classic Slash days. Maybe Slash could continue this duet album theme with a group of instrumentalists on some future release? A guitar fest maybe? Though, that might go in the opposite direction & not be uninspired but too inspired & in your face. Though, I'll pay for Slash & Ronnie Woods in the same song any day given their mutual blues base the sparks would surely fly. What's interesting is there's a bounce with Slash. One great outing (i.e. Guns N Roses), then one iffy outing (i.e. Slash's Snakepit), then one great outing (i.e. Velvet Revolver), then this iffy outing & now his new album with Myles Kennedy & the Conspirators is great. I might be a bit off, but that's a thought that came to me while walking down the sidewalk today trying to figure out what I think of this album after spending days listening. I put off listening to this album for awhile as the idea of Slash's debut solo album got me excited & I didn't even read the reviews to keep my ears virginal. I should have listened earlier & gotten it over with. Sadly.

Nirvana ~ MTV Unplugged In New York (live) (album review) ... The band who sold the world!

Style: live, grunge
Year: 1994
Label: Geffen
Home: Seattle, Washington

Members: Kurt Cobain ~ vocals/guitar
Krist Novoselic ~ bass/accordion/rhythm guitar
Dave Grohl ~ drums/bass/b. vocals

Additional: Pat Smear ~ guitar
Lori Goldston ~ cello

Guests: Cris Kirkwood ~ bass/b. vocals
Curt Kirkwood ~ lead guitar


Is it fair to call this an album for non-Nirvana fans? Are there any non-Nirvana fans out there? Is it also fair to call this a highlight, an unexpected one no less, from the Nirvana catalog? Is it further fair to call this a show that defied expectations for all involved? When I was a junior in high school Kurt Cobain committed suicide. I had numerous friends that wanted to follow, but I wasn't that big of a fan so I didn't understand the adoration & on some level I still don't. But, I won't deny I see Cobain as nothing less than the John Lennon of my generation in terms of his status ... though Lennon is the better songwriter & political activist. While, ironically, the music of neither of their spouses interests me much. Cobain might also be the last iconic figure who changed music & set a generation alight. Was he in the right place at the right time? It's hard to say what pushed him to such levels, but no one has come after him. Amy Winehouse? She didn't spur a whole musical genre that would collapse every down before it. Lady Gaga? What's her musical movement? The genre of imitation? Doesn't count. I remember my friends bringing over Nirvana's Nevermind for weekend poker nights. We'd play it over & over & over. That was actually the first time I heard the album complete. Though, I was always partial to their raw debut Bleach & the final studio release In Utero, though I can't exactly say why. Perhaps the fact I didn't hear those songs played constantly like the ones on their debut Nevermind or perhaps it was because the music was so different than their debut. As for their acoustic moment on MTV, which actually came after a poorly sold tour, this was something skeptics probably thought the band couldn't pull off, even with the addition of a second guitarist & strings. Surprise, three chord rock might never have sound so good acoustically, considering how many far more talented bands with thick arrangements have failed in the unplugged spotlight. It's not the best unplugged. There's songs that sound more demo-ish & lacking some depth, even more raw & barren than we might want them in repeated listens. While a few songs, such as David Bowie's "The Man Who Sold The World," are almost un-Nirvana sounding in their complexity. Somewhere in between is an array of songs that shoot right from the hip & bring the music back to earth, bring back the Nirvana we love. Nirvana is from the gut music that is the motto of a disenfranchised generation tired of musical excess & clichés & pretentiousness. None of that is here. What makes this concert so good is that it's modest, unpretentious & with a diverse set-list that might have shocked some casual fans ... numerous cover tunes & a lack of recognizable hits. There's also a tenseness here, even apparent at the time, like Cobain is singing for his life & is being serious for the first time ... & in retrospect maybe he was, considering this was released after his death & who knew how he saw the future. Some say the seriousness was due to Cobain coming down from a drug high, but this is far more than that. Thus, compared to notorious Nirvana concerts this is simple, straight-forward & starkly intimate. Honestly, Cobain is not a guitar hero by far, nor the greatest hero plain & simple, while his lyrics tend to be more simply constructed than not & leave much up to the listener, but there's something absolutely appealing about this concert & it might just be that intimacy that blankets over the weaker parts. Or, maybe not & we just want to hear the strengths & ignore the weaknesses in light of all that would follow. Certainly, watching the video is better than just listening to the audio, particularly with the funeral-esque stage setting, but the audio stands up well on its own. Though, be warned, however glorious this is, it is a difficult concert to listen to. It might be the hindsight that haunts the show, but even at the time I remember it was riveting like the world was watching something that shouldn't be happening. It's stark & barren as if Cobain is putting his music out there in a way he doesn't want to & are suffering through it & we're witness to their suffering. Any moment he's going to walk off stage because the intimacy is just too much for him to take. This was the first album to come after Cobain's death. Of note is that unlike most MTV Unplugged performances the show was done in a single take for TV.

Courtney Love's Hole ~ Pretty On The Inside (album review) ... And, poetry on the outside!

Style: alt rock, noise
Label: Caroline Distribution
Year: 1991
Home: Los Angeles, California

Members: Eric Erlandson ~ lead guitar
Courtney Love ~ guitar/vocals
Caroline Rue ~ drums
Jill Emery ~ bass

 

Abrasive but yet not as alienating as expected & very much reminiscent of Patti Smith, completely the opposite of what one might expect looking only a frontwoman Courtney Love's wild woman reputation, are the first thoughts that come to mind listening to this album. I'll confess I never heard Hole's debut until I decided to listen to it to potentially review. While her later albums are more user friendly, abrasive but in a more polished & musically diverse & generally get higher critical reviews I never found them that interesting. I'd put off listening to this as I didn't want to hear more of Hole. I found the later albums punchy & angry for the sake of it with no real internal venom that wasn't being forced out of the musical toothpaste tube. I'd heard similar music done by other bands with far greater skill. I expected to enjoy this much less & not even review it. How shocked I was. I greatly enjoyed this album & its certainly changed my view of the band. Love is so wrapped up in the mystique surrounding her late spouse, the iconic Kurt Cobain, it's easy to forget that Hole, co-founded with guitarist Erlandson, debuted before meeting Cobain. It's also easy to forget that Cobain didn't make Love an angry uncompromising controversial woman, often called slut, manic, troubled ... she was always like this. Hole's debut is witness. Actually, being a former stripper trying to form a band might have made her a bit angrier than later being the all-star wife of an international star, let alone mother. Here the inner demon comes out in more than just anger, but poetry & art that I don't feel the later albums have. Actually, members of the band have said they felt the later music was often fake. This is a East Village album but recorded in Hollywood in so many ways. It's got Love reading poetry alongside shouting out lyrics, while Erlandson churns noisy crooked lines behind her. Producing is Kim Gordon of Sonic Youth & Don Fleming of Velvet Monkeys. It's noisy like Sonic Youth, while later albums move away from that jagged feeling. It's alienating yet sounding familiar. It's Patti Smith & Lou Reed. Some have linked Hole to the Olympia/Seattle centered feminist Riot Grrrl musical movement. Love has been very critical of this grouping, let alone the movement in general, & decries any connection. But, when opener "Teenage Whore" belts out, "Here you come sucking my energy ... I'm not free she says/help me I'm withering", while Love never confessed to being able to play guitar very well, one can't help but see the unintentional similarities. The sound, the energy, the angry woman is all there. But, this is not a feminist album out to change the world. This is not a man-hating or revenge album as Riot Grrrl was often labeled. The difference between Hole & the Riot Grrrl bands is that Love is just angry at anything that crosses her path, not necessarily anything in particular or society or what have you. Love slashes out a few chords, screams & shouts, reads her poetry & has a producer make it sound better than it might in rehearsal. It's not about fancy playing but expressive. Similarities, completely coincidental, could also be drawn with Nirvana & their debut Bleach. While the later Nevermind brought them fame, it was also a highly polished & professionally record album compared to the underground rantings & noise of Bleach. Comparing Pretty On The Inside to later Hole, this is Love's Bleach. I should mention I liked Nirvana when they debuted, but I didn't really take a deeper interest until hearing Bleach & immediately loved its rawness over the MTV hits.