View Full Version : Paul McCartney is: NIRVANA

12-12-2012, 11:48 AM
Teenage angst: 70 year-old man style!

The sensational gig will see the surviving members of the grunge band together for the first time in 20 years.

And former Beatle Sir Paul will sing with them as they play a new song at a star-filled charity concert in New York.

McCartney, 70, has been secretly working with Foo Fighters singer Dave Grohl and bassist Krist Novoselic after a recent session at a studio. The pair were founding members of Nirvana along with Cobain, who committed suicide in 1994.

Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/showbiz/music/4693497/Sir-Paul-McCartney-replacing-Kurt-Cobain-in-Nirvana.html#ixzz2ErvaPyIk

This might turn out to be listenable, but I doubt it will be anything special. I guess both bands were controversial at one point, but I still don't see them as similar at all. Just can't see McCartney fitting the atmosphere of Nirvana's music.

cool 2 hate 681
12-12-2012, 12:23 PM
I hope this isn't true Paul McCartney singing for Nirvana would be awful

12-12-2012, 12:24 PM
It's for a great cause. :) Nirvana's Kurt Cobain is simply not replaceable. Period. The Beatles are a cool band but I only like a few is their jams. A lot of musical artists and musicians are performing at that special event. I wish our band The Offspring and my favorite band Young The Giant could've played live there as well. :p

Tiny Vessels
12-12-2012, 12:38 PM
I hope this isn't true Paul McCartney singing for Nirvana would be awful

I agree. It just won't work, it's just a bad idea. Like you said awful.

cool 2 hate 681
12-12-2012, 12:48 PM
It won't be called Nirvana because Courtney Love has the rights to the name :)

12-12-2012, 01:11 PM
Take it for what it is, a tribute. Nothing more. I hope it stays that way, there are bands that can be revived but Nirvana isn't one of them as the main ingredient is missing.

My first reaction to this was "lol wut?"

12-12-2012, 02:32 PM
Wait, what the fuckin fuck?
McCartney= gay.
Nirvana= awesome.
I don't see this turning into anything.

12-12-2012, 02:45 PM
It won't be called Nirvana because Courtney Love has the rights to the name :)

Did she really bought the rights? How can she afford the money, since she also lost the rights to he's daughter Frances Bean Cobain.

12-12-2012, 04:09 PM
Nirvana only have the relevance they have today because Kurt Cobain died when they were a hit. If Dexter had died in 1995 we'd still be hearing how great Dexter was and how the Offspring were a great band. Don't get me wrong, I like Nirvana, but there's no way they would have that much importance these days if they had kept making music until now. They would have eventually gotten down to the relevance of The Offspring or Pearl Jam.

12-12-2012, 05:21 PM
For what is worth, just appreciate Paul and Dave are doing in remembering the great Kurt Cobain. Nirvana's legacy is not put to rest. :)

12-12-2012, 05:34 PM
They could've at least chosen a grunge singer... what about Chris Cornell? Or even Gavin Rossdale? Both would've been far better choices than Paul, as iconic as the Beatles are...

And I agree completely with Sapococas. 100%.

12-13-2012, 12:34 AM
I read somewhere (it was in one of the early Nirvana interviews I think) that Cobain didn't really like McCartney. A grunge singer would be much better choice, like Chris Cornell or Mark Arm, or Black Francis from Pixies as Cobain used to idolize them.

As for their relevance today, it's true that Cobain's suicide helped the band reach the status of immortality, but it can't be denied that Nevermind is basically the album that caused the whole alternative rock explosion in the '90s, and made it much easier for punk bands to break through also. So yes, they are overrated, but still very important.

Edit: This is a video of their new song (yes, new :rolleyes:) that was performed at the yesterday's concert. It's not really a bad song, but it's NOT Nirvana, doesn't sound like Nirvana at all. Nirvana songs always seemed to have that spontaneous feel, this sounds much more carefully constructed. This is why I've always been saying that changing a band member was ok (well, changing the singer can turn out well but that's not guaranteed), as long as he wasn't the main songwriter also. Change the main songwriter and it can not be the same band anymore.


cool 2 hate 681
12-13-2012, 11:28 AM
the video was taken down :(


12-13-2012, 12:32 PM

12-13-2012, 02:21 PM
Eh, it wasn't the worst thing in the world.

12-13-2012, 02:47 PM
It's not a bad song as such, but I just wish they wouldn't call it a new Nirvana song. Call it something else and then it's fine. We're not sure at this point under which moniker the studio version (to be featured on "Sound City Real to Reel: Music from and Inspired by Sound City" soundtrack) will be released, but it better not be as Nirvana.

12-13-2012, 03:08 PM
The pair were founding members of Nirvana along with Cobain, who committed suicide in 1994.

Dave Grohl wasn't actually a founding member of Nirvana.

Also, Curt Kirkwood would have been good for this. And not just because his name is Curt.

12-14-2012, 03:37 AM
Dave Grohl wasn't actually a founding member of Nirvana.

True, he joined the band after Chad Channing left in 1990.

Anyway, the more I'm looking into this thing the more I think people are just blowing this out of proportions. I don't think Dave, Christ and Pat actually called this a Nirvana reunion at all, they simply wanted to jam together with Paul McCartney. Dave even said they didn't want to do any Beatles or Nirvana songs but rather something new. But of course, Nirvana reunion seems like bigger news than just ex Nirvana members jamming together with a Beatle. Fuck the media.

So, life returns back to normal :)

edit: Imagine this song with Mark Lanegan on vocals. Mother of God...:eek:

cool 2 hate 681
12-17-2012, 12:44 PM
here is a studio version of the song they also played it on saturday night live

and courtney love said this

''There it was. It was bad. Paul better get earmuffs for the bass playing is all, [Krist] is n ot exactly known for [his] brilliance. The only person that would be [in Nirvana with] Kurt as of [his suicide] was and would still be was [second guitarist and former Germs member ] Pat [Smear]. But If they don't do songs they didn't write, I don't care''