Was Seattle rock aka GRUNGE really massively mainstream popular in its time?

[CarlosTheGaucho]

I am just listening to some old Soundgarden and it got me thinking,

I grew up with those bands, but obviously I haven't lived in US at that time, and I remember they indeed were on radio and TV representing those days rock scene (god bless those times).

But it never was like mass hysteria, that you would see teenagers trying to immitate hip west coast shirts or work boots etc. on the street.

So people knew that, it was on TV and it was on radio, but it wasn't like the heavy metal movement with mullets and denim and everything orthodox or disco movement with killer hairdos, sick color combinations etc. - it wasn't very visual.

On the other hand, as I saw the "HYPE" documentary from 1996, they implied exactly the opposite.

Or was that the Nirvana hysteria, that made a lot of kids and pubescents go Kurt Crazy and unleashed the fanatism?

I know Nirvana has a lot of following even with these days pubescents, although they usually don't know nothing about other good related bands like The Gits, Tad, Screaming Trees, Mother Love Bone, bands that never made it that big, compared with Alice In Chains, Pearl Jam or Soundgarden .

How do you remember those times?

[gornyhuy]

I remember being pissed that all the 'cool kids' were suddenly dressing like me and my friends after they had been insulting the same exact look for the previous 10 years.

So, yeah I remember it becoming a pretty dominant craze.

[WebairGerard]

it was HUGE at the time. some great music from bands that weren't the big popular ones too during that era. sunny day real estate comes to mind as does mother love bone.

[CaptainHowdy]

I remember all the U.S. people I've meet on MIRC were from or had anything to do with Seattle back then...

[Fletch XXX]

Originally Posted by CarlosTheGaucho

How do you remember those times?

drinking beer and listening to metal

[MaDalton]

it was very visual to me - every "cool kid" looked like a bum

[corvette]

Originally Posted by WebairGerard

sunny day real estate comes to mind as does mother love bone.

i loved sdre you never hear about them

[Fletch XXX]

Originally Posted by corvette

i loved sdre you never hear about them

becasue no one really likes bands where the singer freaks out and becomes all reglious and starts "talking to god" once you do that, you slowly fade away into nothingness

[WebairGerard]

Originally Posted by corvette

i loved sdre you never hear about them

The first 2 CDs were awesome. Then kind of wandered off track.

Originally Posted by Fletch XXX

becasue no one really likes bands where the singer freaks out and becomes all reglious and starts "talking to god" once you do that, you slowly fade away into nothingness

This is true too. Jeremy's solo stuff was hard to listen too.

[cykoe6]

Yea it was massively popular and it massively sucked.

[MRock]

Simply put, Grunge killed the Big Hair. It was big. And so it goes every 5 to 7 years with the turn of the "new sound". Personally I liked the bands mentioned above, but it put a nail in the coffin for a major label to sign my band of that time. We were being courted by several labels and I even had a VP at Atlantic Records soliciting song writing from me ... it all changed with Nirvana. Still, those were some kick-ass times for me!

1986: http://www.myspace.com/inticerock

1989:http://www.myspace.com/inticefl

[Agent 488]

your posts and threads suck.

[CarlosTheGaucho]

Originally Posted by MRock

Simply put, Grunge killed the Big Hair. It was big. And so it goes every 5 to 7 years with the turn of the "new sound". Personally I liked the bands mentioned above, but it put a nail in the coffin for a major label to sign my band of that time. We were being courted by several labels and I even had a VP at Atlantic Records soliciting song writing from me ... it all changed with Nirvana. Still, those were some kick-ass times for me!

1986: http://www.myspace.com/inticerock

1989:http://www.myspace.com/inticefl

Very cool,

yeah I remember that the crowd of non orthodox fans probably switched from Big Hair to flanel shirts, as it was in vogue, you haven't see that here though.

I still believe the movement was somehow pure, there was good stuff going on, there was stuff that sucked going on, and as with everything that gets a lot of airing it also got a lot of fake following.

The documentary "Hype"

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0116589/

is actually well worth watching, I saw that on German TV a couple years ago, then I bought the soundtrack, and the band I started to like the most, that was featured there are The Gits.

Some orthodox metal guys can't stand it up to this date, but I guess that's why they're called orthodox.

[_Richard_]

thought everyone copied the grunge style?

logger style really

[WebairGerard]

Originally Posted by MRock

Simply put, Grunge killed the Big Hair. It was big. And so it goes every 5 to 7 years with the turn of the "new sound". Personally I liked the bands mentioned above, but it put a nail in the coffin for a major label to sign my band of that time. We were being courted by several labels and I even had a VP at Atlantic Records soliciting song writing from me ... it all changed with Nirvana. Still, those were some kick-ass times for me!

1986: http://www.myspace.com/inticerock

1989:http://www.myspace.com/inticefl

My band was playing the NYC scene and yes those were good times for sure!

[kane]

I saw it first hand. I wrote for a Northwest music magazine called The Rocket during those years. As the music scene got big the magazine grew with it and we went from being a smaller local type magazine to having more nationwide paid subscriptions than issues we gave away for free in stores (it was a free bi-weekly mag).

The scene didn't just get big it exploded. When Nirvana's Nevermind came out I was at the listening party for the release and I remember thinking that it would be big and it would make them big, but I had no idea. Six months later they were the biggest band in the world. A few months after that Pearl Jam were on the cover of Time Magazine. Entire New York fashion houses were changing their lines to be more "grunge." Bands that nobody outside of the the Pacific Northwest had heard of were suddenly having albums that debuted in the Billboard top 5 (if not number 1.) Record labels were pay mid to upper six and even seven figure advances to Seattle bands that had never even played a live show just to sign them.

As others said it killed the glam/heavy metal of the 80's. I remember seeing Jani Lane the singer from Warrant say that he went into the the band's record company and saw a huge banner for Warrant in their lobby. Their record came out and they hit the road and three months later at the end of the tour he went back in for a meeting and the banner was gone and one for Alice In Chains was there and he knew then that the gravy train was over.

It really was a hysteria. I think part of it was that the bands were kind of private and they didn't do a million interviews so finding out stuff about them was not easy and the fans were rabid. It was a wild, big time for sure. Like all music scenes it didn't last long. Within about 4-5 years it had calmed down. The really good, talented bands continued to have success but most of the bands faded away and disappeared and the next new thing started to kick up.

[MaDalton]

i was working as a DJ at that time and they forbid me to play Nirvana cause it was "too heavy"

[kane]

oops double post

[Rock It]

Nirvana came out like a fuckin Nuclear weapon....it basically killed Heavy Metal...only Metallica survived it.

[Far-L]

Grunge is dead? Holy crap. Time to kick the heroin habit I guess...

[CarlosTheGaucho]

Originally Posted by kane

I saw it first hand. I wrote for a Northwest music magazine called The Rocket during those years. As the music scene got big the magazine grew with it and we went from being a smaller local type magazine to having more nationwide paid subscriptions than issues we gave away for free in stores (it was a free bi-weekly mag).

The scene didn't just get big it exploded. When Nirvana's Nevermind came out I was at the listening party for the release and I remember thinking that it would be big and it would make them big, but I had no idea. Six months later they were the biggest band in the world. A few months after that Pearl Jam were on the cover of Time Magazine. Entire New York fashion houses were changing their lines to be more "grunge." Bands that nobody outside of the the Pacific Northwest had heard of were suddenly having albums that debuted in the Billboard top 5 (if not number 1.) Record labels were pay mid to upper six and even seven figure advances to Seattle bands that had never even played a live show just to sign them.

As others said it killed the glam/heavy metal of the 80's. I remember seeing Jani Lane the singer from Warrant say that he went into the the band's record company and saw a huge banner for Warrant in their lobby. Their record came out and they hit the road and three months later at the end of the tour he went back in for a meeting and the banner was gone and one for Alice In Chains was there and he knew then that the gravy train was over.

It really was a hysteria. I think part of it was that the bands were kind of private and they didn't do a million interviews so finding out stuff about them was not easy and the fans were rabid. It was a wild, big time for sure. Like all music scenes it didn't last long. Within about 4-5 years it had calmed down. The really good, talented bands continued to have success but most of the bands faded away and disappeared and the next new thing started to kick up.

What was the role of the Sub Pop records in the whole thing.

Did they have all those artists signed before the Nirvana explosion?

What's their story after the wave faded away?

[The Bender]

unfortunately it was huge. was into it at the time but now must of that stuff makes me cringe. especially soundgarden!

[CarlosTheGaucho]

Originally Posted by MRock

Simply put, Grunge killed the Big Hair. It was big. And so it goes every 5 to 7 years with the turn of the "new sound". Personally I liked the bands mentioned above, but it put a nail in the coffin for a major label to sign my band of that time. We were being courted by several labels and I even had a VP at Atlantic Records soliciting song writing from me ... it all changed with Nirvana. Still, those were some kick-ass times for me!

1986: http://www.myspace.com/inticerock

1989:http://www.myspace.com/inticefl

Btw. your stuff sounds great! I'll want to add you once I'll put together the stuff for my band, but that will take a bit yet.

[kane]

Originally Posted by CarlosTheGaucho

What was the role of the Sub Pop records in the whole thing.

Did they have all those artists signed before the Nirvana explosion?

What's their story after the wave faded away?

Sub Pop played a huge roll in it all. They had Nirvana signed and released their first record called Bleach. They put out these now legendary compilation CDs that had bands like Nirvana, Mother Love Bone, Soundgarden, Alice In Chains, Mudhoney and others on them and those albums got them some real attention. The thing they did best was that they marketed themselves as a whole unit and a way of life. Instead of just marketing a bad the label marketed itself as the Sub Pop brand and with that they promoted the "Seattle" sound. When the scene exploded Sub Pop cashed in big time. They got a little bit of the money from Nirvana's Nevermind, but they re-released Bleach and it sold like mad because the fans were clamoring for anything Nirvana they could get their hands on. They were selling the compilation CDs as fast as they could print them.

As the scene got bigger they marketed themselves as kind of the godfathers of the Seattle music scene. And really they were just that. They were signing and recording and releasing these bands long before anyone had ever really heard of them. Suddenly anything Seattle was huge and they were selling records like crazy. They sold as many T-shirts that just said "Sub Pop" on them as they did band t-shirts. They made a ton of money just selling contracts of their bands to major labels. There was a band called Pond that was on Sub Pop and Elektra wanted them. The band wanted to go to Elektra so Sub Pop sold the contract to Elektra for about 2 million dollars. Pond recorded a record for Elektra, the label hated it and dumped them. They had spent 2 million just to get the right to sign them then spent around 800K signing them only to dump them. Pond then went back to Sub Pop, made another record and released it through them.

So they cashed in big having all these recordings from many of the big Seattle bands before they were big. As the scene faded they still sold fairly well and they went back to being what they were before which is a label the focuses on the local Northwest bands. The thing that changed was that the now had a worldwide name so they were able to better promote them and get more airplay and exposure for the bands that want it. They actually nearly went bankrupt in the late 90's because they thought they could do it again and signed a bunch of acts, dumped a ton of money into them and pushed them hard only to have them not be successful. That is the way the music business is. Sometimes the times are just right and the right band comes along at the right time. If the public isn't ready for it no amount of of money can convince them otherwise.

They eventually signed a band called The Shins and Jack White's pre White Stripes band called The Go and the band Hot Hot Hot among othera and redirected themselves back to what made them good before which was supporting bands as they developed themselves, went on the road and created a fan base. So it looks like they are back on the track of doing things well and are back to being an indie label that has developing good artists as its primary goal.

[CarlosTheGaucho]

Originally Posted by kane

Sub Pop played a huge roll in it all. They had Nirvana signed and released their first record called Bleach. They put out these now legendary compilation CDs that had bands like Nirvana, Mother Love Bone, Soundgarden, Alice In Chains, Mudhoney and others on them and those albums got them some real attention. The thing they did best was that they marketed themselves as a whole unit and a way of life. Instead of just marketing a bad the label marketed itself as the Sub Pop brand and with that they promoted the "Seattle" sound. When the scene exploded Sub Pop cashed in big time. They got a little bit of the money from Nirvana's Nevermind, but they re-released Bleach and it sold like mad because the fans were clamoring for anything Nirvana they could get their hands on. They were selling the compilation CDs as fast as they could print them.

As the scene got bigger they marketed themselves as kind of the godfathers of the Seattle music scene. And really they were just that. They were signing and recording and releasing these bands long before anyone had ever really heard of them. Suddenly anything Seattle was huge and they were selling records like crazy. They sold as many T-shirts that just said "Sub Pop" on them as they did band t-shirts. They made a ton of money just selling contracts of their bands to major labels. There was a band called Pond that was on Sub Pop and Elektra wanted them. The band wanted to go to Elektra so Sub Pop sold the contract to Elektra for about 2 million dollars. Pond recorded a record for Elektra, the label hated it and dumped them. They had spent 2 million just to get the right to sign them then spent around 800K signing them only to dump them. Pond then went back to Sub Pop, made another record and released it through them.

So they cashed in big having all these recordings from many of the big Seattle bands before they were big. As the scene faded they still sold fairly well and they went back to being what they were before which is a label the focuses on the local Northwest bands. The thing that changed was that the now had a worldwide name so they were able to better promote them and get more airplay and exposure for the bands that want it. They actually nearly went bankrupt in the late 90's because they thought they could do it again and signed a bunch of acts, dumped a ton of money into them and pushed them hard only to have them not be successful. That is the way the music business is. Sometimes the times are just right and the right band comes along at the right time. If the public isn't ready for it no amount of of money can convince them otherwise.

They eventually signed a band called The Shins and Jack White's pre White Stripes band called The Go and the band Hot Hot Hot among othera and redirected themselves back to what made them good before which was supporting bands as they developed themselves, went on the road and created a fan base. So it looks like they are back on the track of doing things well and are back to being an indie label that has developing good artists as its primary goal.

Well definitely an interesting story, entertainment is a real gamble and the way you direct what the public is able to absorb and what they want, what has the mass appeal.

But as I mentioned many times, I haven't noticed ANY movement in popular music once this was over.

Meaning something that would became popular the other way than producer - > production - > propagation - > sell

Well maybe the trip hop wave was something fresh, but that was also like half of the 90's when it got a bit more mass popularity.

[securedservers]

Originally Posted by kane

I saw it first hand. I wrote for a Northwest music magazine called The Rocket during those years. As the music scene got big the magazine grew with it and we went from being a smaller local type magazine to having more nationwide paid subscriptions than issues we gave away for free in stores (it was a free bi-weekly mag).

The scene didn't just get big it exploded. When Nirvana's Nevermind came out I was at the listening party for the release and I remember thinking that it would be big and it would make them big, but I had no idea. Six months later they were the biggest band in the world. A few months after that Pearl Jam were on the cover of Time Magazine. Entire New York fashion houses were changing their lines to be more "grunge." Bands that nobody outside of the the Pacific Northwest had heard of were suddenly having albums that debuted in the Billboard top 5 (if not number 1.) Record labels were pay mid to upper six and even seven figure advances to Seattle bands that had never even played a live show just to sign them.

As others said it killed the glam/heavy metal of the 80's. I remember seeing Jani Lane the singer from Warrant say that he went into the the band's record company and saw a huge banner for Warrant in their lobby. Their record came out and they hit the road and three months later at the end of the tour he went back in for a meeting and the banner was gone and one for Alice In Chains was there and he knew then that the gravy train was over.

It really was a hysteria. I think part of it was that the bands were kind of private and they didn't do a million interviews so finding out stuff about them was not easy and the fans were rabid. It was a wild, big time for sure. Like all music scenes it didn't last long. Within about 4-5 years it had calmed down. The really good, talented bands continued to have success but most of the bands faded away and disappeared and the next new thing started to kick up.

great story, thanks for posting

[DaddyHalbucks]

It was very big and made tons of money.

[cherrylula]

plaid flannel shirts, ugh

[kane]

Originally Posted by CarlosTheGaucho

Well definitely an interesting story, entertainment is a real gamble and the way you direct what the public is able to absorb and what they want, what has the mass appeal.

But as I mentioned many times, I haven't noticed ANY movement in popular music once this was over.

Meaning something that would became popular the other way than producer - > production - > propagation - > sell

Well maybe the trip hop wave was something fresh, but that was also like half of the 90's when it got a bit more mass popularity.

When it comes to success in music a lot of it is luck, timing and hard work. Had sub pop been a record label that focused on hip hop or country music they would have never gotten big. They were in the right place at the right time and did the right things. They caught lightning in a bottle.

As far as popular music once this was over it really depends on what you are looking for. When the Seattle scene got big it became a worldwide obsession and there probably hasn't been anything like that as far as a single hotbed of music since then, but there have been similar trends. Pop made a huge comeback at the end of the grunge era. Britney Spears, Nsync, Backstreet Boys and acts like that were suddenly the hot new thing. They were selling big, all over the radio and MTV and they were setting fashion trends like crazy. It wasn't long after it all started when half the girls in the country were wearing belly shirts and low rise jeans and dressing like Britney and Christina. Every major label ran out as fast as they could and signed either a boy band, a girl band or some kind of pop singer. It wasn't really a geographical thing, but it was big. There were a ton of bands that had a hit song or two then disappeared and the ones that were first cashed in big and had some staying power.

I think the industry has changed enough since the early 90's that it will be hard to fully replicate what happened in Seattle. Now days the labels are pushing hard to get a single out on Itunes so they can sell it, sell the ring tone and then get the person on tour as soon as possible. There are people who are big and peak before they even have a record out. Then the album comes out and six months later they are gone. If Nirvana came out today they may have never made it any further than to have Smells Like Teen Spirit on Itunes and the radio.

Maybe one day we sill see another situation where a single location ignites the music industry, but I think it is getting harder and harder. It used to be that bands got together and they played locally and built up a name for themselves on the local scene while shopping their demo around. They often would sign with a smaller local label and hope that with that behind them they could attract the attention of the major labels. Now they form, record a few songs, make a myspace and face book, put their songs on Itunes and work to market themselves online and to the masses before they ever even really play live. I'm not saying all bands do that, but many of them do. There are still vibrant music scenes out there, but I'm not sure we will be seeing anything like what happened in Seattle in the early 90's again any time soon.

[CarlosTheGaucho]

Originally Posted by kane

When it comes to success in music a lot of it is luck, timing and hard work. Had sub pop been a record label that focused on hip hop or country music they would have never gotten big. They were in the right place at the right time and did the right things. They caught lightning in a bottle.

As far as popular music once this was over it really depends on what you are looking for. When the Seattle scene got big it became a worldwide obsession and there probably hasn't been anything like that as far as a single hotbed of music since then, but there have been similar trends. Pop made a huge comeback at the end of the grunge era. Britney Spears, Nsync, Backstreet Boys and acts like that were suddenly the hot new thing. They were selling big, all over the radio and MTV and they were setting fashion trends like crazy. It wasn't long after it all started when half the girls in the country were wearing belly shirts and low rise jeans and dressing like Britney and Christina. Every major label ran out as fast as they could and signed either a boy band, a girl band or some kind of pop singer. It wasn't really a geographical thing, but it was big. There were a ton of bands that had a hit song or two then disappeared and the ones that were first cashed in big and had some staying power.

I think the industry has changed enough since the early 90's that it will be hard to fully replicate what happened in Seattle. Now days the labels are pushing hard to get a single out on Itunes so they can sell it, sell the ring tone and then get the person on tour as soon as possible. There are people who are big and peak before they even have a record out. Then the album comes out and six months later they are gone. If Nirvana came out today they may have never made it any further than to have Smells Like Teen Spirit on Itunes and the radio.

Maybe one day we sill see another situation where a single location ignites the music industry, but I think it is getting harder and harder. It used to be that bands got together and they played locally and built up a name for themselves on the local scene while shopping their demo around. They often would sign with a smaller local label and hope that with that behind them they could attract the attention of the major labels. Now they form, record a few songs, make a myspace and face book, put their songs on Itunes and work to market themselves online and to the masses before they ever even really play live. I'm not saying all bands do that, but many of them do. There are still vibrant music scenes out there, but I'm not sure we will be seeing anything like what happened in Seattle in the early 90's again any time soon.

I mean, the role of mass media is more and more dominant, you get to see LESS and less diversity and more concentration of "IT".

Be IT anything, that should sell, recycle, sell.

There's less diversity then ever, rock or other theme programs are being aired at 11pm and pushed

And Web 2.0. won't save it, cause the chances you get to find that one great band out of thousands that are out there WITHOUT a recommendation (again we're back at the media question) is not too big.

Be it you're say young, so you can't have too much of a taste in music, you're forming it and then you're lucky to find someone to show you the world of the past and the world outside of MTV... or you'll most likely end up as choosing something from that what's "available", and that's the point.

I've seen a Sony BMG contract they offered to a very talented local band and it was basically a relation between a slave and a master, kidding aside they would have to record 5 records in 5 years having no say whatsoever about WHAT will they record.

That opened my eyes.