Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nevermind, an album on major chords

farina00.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 114 posts

Re: Nevermind, an album on major chords

#41

Post by munchler »

bryceneal wrote: post #32
cue_the_strings wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, that's definitely 'the' Kurt thing, vocal melody completing power chords. I do hate how he (and the whole generation, and some of the punks before him + no wave crowd as well) pretended that they didn't know any music theory or practice at all. That was quite destructive for so many of us who aspired to play music in our teens, especially if you weren't exposed to music theory and practice in childhood through…

Going back all the way to the '60s, if you listen to interviews with Paul McCartney of The Beatles he states very plainly that he knows no music theory, and can't read music. I suspect this is true of many great songwriters, maybe even most of them. I would even argue that studying music theory may even make you a worse songwriter, because the most innovative songwriters don't seem to follow some clearly established…

Paul McCartney deliberately avoided learning how to read music, but he understands music theory just fine. They are two different skills. It's quite clear from The Beatles' music that they know about keys, chords, etc.

For example, McCartney tells a fun story about The Beatles traveling across Liverpool to learn a single B7 chord in their early days: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/_r5B1AhP1Fo

Re: Nevermind, an album on major chords

#42

Post by mtalantikite »

wyclif wrote: post #8
tptacek wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like Nirvana as much as the next 90s kid but there is no way these are the best songs in human history, or even in rock history, or even in "modern rock" history.

It's because the fans who like Cobain's songs overpraise him or praise him in the wrong terms: "OMG Kurt Cobain is a genius songwriter." I think, and as this post suggests, it's much more the case that "Kurt Cobain had very good instincts for someone completely untutored" which is a different thing altogether.

But I think most of us would take a musician with great instincts and not much theoretical understanding over one with extraordinary theory and poor instinct. How many thousands of boring jazz players have been pumped out by university programs over the past 50 years? Meanwhile John Lee Hooker could just vamp over a single chord and I could listen to it for hours.

I'm remembering a scene in Hampton Hawes's autobiography where a well known piano teacher was telling him his students were starting to ask how to play like Hampton. He tells him he wants to give him lessons to help his technique, which he thinks will help his natural talent even more, but Hampton finds it boring and never goes back. The teacher framed Hampton's check he used to pay for the lesson and put it on his wall. All that's to say having great ears can bring you a long way.

Re: Nevermind, an album on major chords

#43

Post by SwellJoe »

This is a remarkably ignorant take. Literally every detail is wrong.

They aren't major chords, they're mostly power chords, which are neither major nor minor (no third and the third provides the major/minor tonality). They often function as minor chords because of the melody or other parts, or just because of how the progression fits together. They aren't unique or new with Cobain, he was part of a long history of punk and rock and roll.

Cobain was a good songwriter in the rock and roll tradition. He was not particularly innovative or doing something technically unheard of, and he wouldn't have claimed to be. He wanted to be a good songwriter, and he succeeded. That's it, don't make up bullshit about it.

Re: Nevermind, an album on major chords

#44

Post by quesera »

tptacek wrote: post #19
jeswin wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> some of the best songs in human history I think this was the statement he/she was disagreeing with. No doubt a genius, but when you phrase it like that it's more than genius.

I don't know that I think he was a genius? If I don't think Husker Du, the Pixies, and Sonic Youth were genius-led bands, I'm not sure how a band that basically synthesized those bands and then lensed them through Guns n Roses could be genius. Is David Bowie a genius? Maybe, if we're generous? When I hear people call Cobain a genius I feel the way I do when I'm hear someone say they've never seen The Wire. Listen to…

I mostly agree with you, but I suspect there's an element of just being the right age.

I think of Kurt Cobain like an accidental Elvis Presley. Perfect for the moment, and (unlike Elvis) mostly organically grown, but with very clear antecedents.

I cannot point to strong antecedents of Pixies, Sonic Youth, Throwing Muses, PJ Harvey, Cocteau Twins, Bauhaus, Einstürzende Neubauten, The Slits, Bongwater, Kate Bush, The Cure, etc. In a couple of these cases, I suspect my own ignorance. In others, I could (and might) argue all night! :)

But I cannot assemble a case for not recognizing David Bowie as a (musical|performance) genius. I don't even enjoy his recordings very much, but he was artistically sui generis and enormously influential.

Influence might not be a requirement of genius (I'm not sure), but surely a novel creativity is at the root of it?

Re: Nevermind, an album on major chords

#45

Post by horns4lyfe »

tptacek wrote: post #6
thisismytest wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s just not true. Off the top of my head Lithium, Dumb, About A Girl have critical minor and major chords. Also part of what made him so good was how he played vocal melody and rhythm off of chords. So in some songs you might have plain power chords but the melody hits important major or minor notes. I don’t know what your definition for genius is but the guy wrote some of the best songs in human history and did…

I like Nirvana as much as the next 90s kid but there is no way these are the best songs in human history, or even in rock history, or even in "modern rock" history.

I don’t know how you can say with a straight face that smells like teen spirit isn’t one of the greatest modern rock songs. That riff is etched in music history at this point

Re: Nevermind, an album on major chords

#46

Post by hbsbsbsndk »

codazoda wrote: post #26

If you like this you might like The Storyteller by Dave Grohl, it’s a great read from the vantage point of Nirvana’s drummer and his adventures and music influences both before and after. The Kindle version is $3 right now. https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B091Q9VCP4/

Dave needs all the money he can get, he has two families to feed!

Re: Nevermind, an album on major chords

#47

Post by quesera »

globnomulous wrote: post #30
thisismytest wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When it comes to cultural significance and catchiness the fact that people have been doing it for a long time doesn’t matter. In fact, the ability to tap into mass media only makes the impact of a song greater. Access to electric instruments and effects only gave them more ability to create interesting music. I’m a fan of all kinds of music old and new. But anyone saying German leders or old timey civil war ditties a…

This comment is such a weird way to defend the patently absurd claim that he wrote some of the best songs in human history. Even the first sentence makes no cogent sense, especially when read alongside your original comment: > When it comes to cultural significance and catchiness the fact that people have been doing it for a long time doesn’t matter. You've apparently changed your argument. "Best in human history" do…

> You've apparently changed your argument. "Best in human history" does not mean "most culturally significant and catchiest."

To be fair, "best" has no correct definition.

What's yours?

Re: Nevermind, an album on major chords

#48

Post by jamesblonde »

tptacek wrote: post #19
jeswin wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> some of the best songs in human history I think this was the statement he/she was disagreeing with. No doubt a genius, but when you phrase it like that it's more than genius.

I don't know that I think he was a genius? If I don't think Husker Du, the Pixies, and Sonic Youth were genius-led bands, I'm not sure how a band that basically synthesized those bands and then lensed them through Guns n Roses could be genius. Is David Bowie a genius? Maybe, if we're generous? When I hear people call Cobain a genius I feel the way I do when I'm hear someone say they've never seen The Wire. Listen to…

Loud-quiet-loud was the signature sounds of Nirvana - borrowed from Frank Black who pioneered it with the Pixies. Kurt was a way better singer and better looking than Frank Black. Along with good songs, that was a recipe for success. I am a big Nirvana fan. But a bigger Pixies fan. A chunk of Pixies sound/energy was inspired from the guitar middle/outro in B52's "Rock Lobster".

Re: Nevermind, an album on major chords

#49

Post by amanaplanacanal »

0_____0 wrote: post #27
vunderba wrote: post #23

From the article: > Careful music analysis was left for other bands. I'm sorry... but lol what. > And it's fascinating to think that Kurt Cobain was unaware of any musical composition's rule he was following, but just trusting his musical instict (sic). This doesn't come as much of a surprise. A good deal of my friends who are musicians (particularly those who could sing) found themselves writing music at a pretty yo…

It was wild to watch deadmau5 live streams and see him dink around in the piano roll seemingly with no plan or idea what key he was in. This isn't a knock either, clearly he makes some dope 4/4 house bangers, but not because he went to Berklee.

Western music theory is all coming along after the fact to explain why something sounds good.

Re: Nevermind, an album on major chords

#50

Post by globnomulous »

quesera wrote: post #47
globnomulous wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment is such a weird way to defend the patently absurd claim that he wrote some of the best songs in human history. Even the first sentence makes no cogent sense, especially when read alongside your original comment: > When it comes to cultural significance and catchiness the fact that people have been doing it for a long time doesn’t matter. You've apparently changed your argument. "Best in human history" do…

> You've apparently changed your argument. "Best in human history" does not mean "most culturally significant and catchiest." To be fair, "best" has no correct definition. What's yours?

> What's yours?

Just not whatever that guy's is.

Less cheekily, I agree with you that, in the case of something like music, the concept of "best" has no correct meaning. It's literal nonsense.

Post reply on HN