Originally Posted by *BaseClogger*
Was Nirvana ever known for their live shows? Honest question. Depending on the year, you totally could have seen Kurt on a bad night too...
I have some nice bootlegs from 89, but they are more Bleach than Nevermind.
It's not as though they were a pure studio band, Bleach was recorded in 30 hours for $606.17.
I love Nirvana but they are plagued by a small catalog and as the years go by they will be unable to add to that and the gap with longer standing bands will grow. They certainly aren't the first band with that problem.. ahem Big Star comes to mind.
What's awesome about the Axel / Cobain comparison is that they were contemporaries but weren't... Axel was headlining a genre that was petering out of being in the center ring and Nirvana was bringing in the new guard at the same time.
But really you can't condemn folks for liking the Foo Fighters in the wake of Cobain's death anymore than you could condemn New Order fans for preferring that group over Ian Curtis's Joy Division