Jump to content
Hamer Fan Club Message Center

"Why I Can't Stand Dave Grohl"


MCChris

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 104
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I am continually amazed by Grohl's natural abilities, and I'm not talking about Foo Fighters because I never heard their music until watching Sonic Highways. Ironic since the group formed in Seattle the year after I moved here. Grohl obviously is an effective band leader and front man, given that FF have now been around for 20 years. I am impressed with his drumming--very rhythmic and propulsive. I am also impressed with the FF drummer for similar reasons.

What really impresses me about Grohl is his fascination with cause and effect and appreciation for sound quality. He really "gets" the unique designs and quirks of these various analog-based recording studios around the country with their idiosynchratic approaches to room acoustics. He is a gifted director of documentaries on subjects he cares about, and for those who think that should be easy, it's challenging when you're close to the subject. I also remember the week when he guest-hosted "Chelsea, Lately." He's quick-witted, well-informed, and gets out of the way of the guests. When Chelsea returned to run the show, my interest in it dropped like a stone.

The writer of that hack piece points out a few debatable areas where one might agree to take issue with Grohl, Foo Fighters, and/or Sonic Highways. One can point out flaws in anything. But if you look at the bigger picture, Grohl has more marketable talent in his little finger, in his sleep, than that envious hack will display in his lifetime.

This post is entirely free of pictures, links, or adjustments for inflation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

bashing anything is usually the easiest way to make ones self feel superior, and much easier than trying to understand another point of view :lol: probably why its very popular these days

One could say the same thing about the defensive, knee-jerk reactions of Grohl supporters to articles like this without giving consideration to the (IMO) valid points that lie beneath the inherent pomposity.

To my ears, Foo Fighters are of the same ilk as Creed, Nickelback, Godsmack and any other post-grunge, bro-rock band, but with better, more thoughtful lyrics. The pedigree of their members (Nirvana, Sunny Day Real Estate, No Use for a Name and the Germs) doesn't change that fact. And it's perfectly fine to be a post-grunge, bro-rock band. Just don't pretend you're not.

yep so, my statement is more to the point if you have nothin good to say............ but then I play blues /rock and am not an art critic

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've known a few music critics and journalists; I've even been asked a few times to consider that path given that my education is mainly in literature and music. However, nearly all I've met have struck me as failed musicians and failed writers, and it shows in their work as they seem to bask in any excuse to rattle out bile on their keyboards. So, I tend to avoid them now, both in reading their work and especially in person. Most I've met really have been awful people to be around.

So, I suppose I could qualify as a failed musician and writer as well, but I definitely don't want to spend my days bitterly railing against everything and wondering why people avoid me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure this is exactly to Chris' OP, but it did make me think of this.

Grohl is no Kurt Cobain. And Kurt Cobain was no Mark Arm for a lot of the same reasons.

For some reason, I've been reading a helluvalot lately about Seattle from when the U-Men started playing through Layne Staley being found dead. It's fascinating how much I've forgotten about what actually happened during those years, despite being alive and into it, and replaced with myth myself.

Cobain gets held up as this artistically pure visionary who was crushed by a stardom he never sought. The visionary part of that is subjective of course, and he didn't deal terribly well with fame. However, he did absolutely want Nirvana to be huge, and that is the part that has been lost. He made decisions during the Bleach era through the recording of Nevermind specifically to take Nirvana to the next level. Unfortunately for him, he got exactly what he wanted only to find it wasn't for him at all and that he couldn't make it stop. Either way, Nirvana didn't accidentally get famous.

Grohl, on the other hand, is quite good at being famous, and that group of Nirvana fans that holds that against him for somehow corrupting Cobain's legacy have bought into a legend and are judging Grohl against it. That's unfair because a lot of what they believe is revisionist bullshit. Yes, familiarity breeds contempt, and Grohl is out there all the time. I do think Foo Fighters have a pretty standard formula they have been following forever that bores me to tears most of the time, but I do appreciate that Grohl is out there waving the flag. The guy does love Rock and Roll. Sure, he's trying to sell a product, but I do think he also wants more people to actually know more about the artists he digs, be it albums like the Probot project, the Sound City documentary, or this current thing.

Then you got guys like Mark Arm who really did help invent "grunge" (as flawed as that term is), and pretty much avoided every opportunity to make first Green River and later Mudhoney bigger bands than they were. That guy is closer to Cobain's myth than Cobain was, except he was smart enough to not let drugs and personal relationships corner him. Yet, I bet if you asked Cobain nuts who he is, almost none of them know who the hell he is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no issue with Grohl, Inc.

He's a genuine rock music music fan and a very good capitalist. Foo Fighters is precisely what happens when someone with a keen business sense, solid songwriting chops, unironic love of rock 'n' roll and perfect teeth works his ass off.

I find the music to fall into that category of not so bad I want to turn the radio off (Nickelback, Lady Antebellum) and not so good that I want to buy a CD. Solid riffing, immaculate production, lyrics that are vaguely rockin' but don't grab me in particular way, and a good voice that's like Paul Westerberg's if it was run through a Rock Star Creator-Matic 2000.

He's a smart guy.

ETA: If you doubt his drumming chops, listen to the 2003 Killing Joke CD "Killing Joke." The yellow one with the clown skull. Powerful drumming, and chops a plenty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am trying really hard to think of a band that formed in order to NOT be as huge and successful as possible.

Band dude #1:

"Hey dudes...let's spend hours/days/months/years writing our unique music, forging our craft, and honing our style, and then (here's the kicker!), let's not share it with ANYBODY outside of this garage! I mean, seriously! Let's not make a DIME off of all the work we put into it all!!"

Other Band dudes:

"Awesome! YEAHHHHH!!!!" We're TOTALLY doing that!"

I didn't get the impression from the episodes that the Naked Raygun, Bad Brains or Minor Threat guys were interested in mass success. Sure, anytime a band ventures out of the rehearsal room they do it for the accolades on some level, but not all of them crave world domination, something you kinda have to have if you're signing with Geffen.

"Success" is a very personal, subjective term I guess. I don't honestly think that Cobain/Grohl/Novoselic sought world domination when they recorded "Bleach", nor do I think Butch Vig thought that they would have been as huge as they got after "Nevermind" split things open. I knew of and saw Bad Brains and Minor Threat - and Fishbone, GWAR and a bunch of other under the radar at the time bands - and believe me, every single one of those guys were doing it because they wanted/needed to make it. When Ian McKaye realized the band thing wasn't going to be his ultimate ticket, he went where the bread was buttered better and produced.

Grohl started FF out with his own material - that HE wrote, not Courtney's cast-offs or anything - booked some studio time and played all the parts himself. He's a talented guy, clearly, because that's not something any knucklehead wannabe could pull off. "Foo Fighters" was originally just him, and I'm sure he thought his stuff was pretty okay, but I highly doubt he ever thought he'd be in another band as big as Nirvana. Lightning rarely strikes the same spot twice, as we all know. He certainly could have been happy living off of the Nirvana money for the rest of his life, but he is still putting out quality stuff two decades later. Honestly, the first couple of times I heard the first Foo album, I was a bit underwhelmed - some bright spots but it didn't floor me until I saw them a year later at a Tower Records show. Then I got it. Maybe that's just me, who knows, but it sure seems like a lot of other people are getting it too.

A good friend who I've played in bands with on and off for 20 years was Dave's assistant lacrosse coach when Dave was in high school locally. He told me years ago that the most humbling thing he had ever experienced was seeing Grohl accept an MTV Music Award one time back in the early/mid 90s. The reason? He and the BRYC Lacrosse coach had called young Dave in for a stern talking to 5-6 years before because they felt he wasn't 100% committed to the team. He had apparently been skipping practices to go bang on his drums in Mom's garage, and they both advised him to get real, give up that pipe dream and focus on getting a college LAX scholarship, because he really had some raw talent and could be somebody someday. He quit the team shortly afterwards, and dropped out of school, becoming a regularly-repeated cautionary tale to other players. In hindsight, he probably had the greatest work ethic and desire to make it than anybody else on the roster.

Not sure if that illustrates anything or not, but love his music or hate his music, he is (still) working harder at it than pretty much anybody else here!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Over-exposure sorta goes hand-in-hand with huge success. Some folks get irritated at this, some just tune it out a bit, and some hang on every syllable.

I think there's a good deal of that going on, but I was never a fan...well...ever.

I appreciate his talent (which I feel is substantial) and even his message.

I just never dug his music. It's as simple as that.

As for the new Sonic Highway series, I really enjoy it. Learning (and in some cases revisiting) the history of the different cities is very interesting as well as the interviews with the assorted artists.

The lyrics, however seem forced to me. Just as in the Buddy Guy example cited in the article, the lyrics just seem like a mashing together off assorted quotes from the interviews.

"I have to find something that rhymes with '...looking for a dime but found a quarter...'" was undoubtedly uttered at some point.

I too fell some stuff is forced, (Yes-ter-day & Today in Feast & The Famine), but he set out to use the interviews as direct inspiration for the lyrics. It wasn't a "gee, what do I do here" moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me the acid test was the episode about DC music. I'd never heard of go-go music and was oblivious to the punk movement in DC. I almost skipped the episode but decided it would be worth learning something new. I wasn't disappointed. In one hour Grohl captured a workable picture of that whole scene in the '70s--the sociological, political, and economic elements, the largely unknown major players, the studio that got their recordings out on the street, and the far-reaching influences into bands and artists we do all know (e.g., Grohl, Pharrell Williams, etc.).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Over-exposure sorta goes hand-in-hand with huge success. Some folks get irritated at this, some just tune it out a bit, and some hang on every syllable.

I think there's a good deal of that going on, but I was never a fan...well...ever.

I appreciate his talent (which I feel is substantial) and even his message.

I just never dug his music. It's as simple as that.

As for the new Sonic Highway series, I really enjoy it. Learning (and in some cases revisiting) the history of the different cities is very interesting as well as the interviews with the assorted artists.

The lyrics, however seem forced to me. Just as in the Buddy Guy example cited in the article, the lyrics just seem like a mashing together off assorted quotes from the interviews.

"I have to find something that rhymes with '...looking for a dime but found a quarter...'" was undoubtedly uttered at some point.

Uh, let see. "on the toilet, feeling fine, when I dropped a floater"

See, it's not that easy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Over-exposure sorta goes hand-in-hand with huge success. Some folks get irritated at this, some just tune it out a bit, and some hang on every syllable.

I think there's a good deal of that going on, but I was never a fan...well...ever.

I appreciate his talent (which I feel is substantial) and even his message.

I just never dug his music. It's as simple as that.

As for the new Sonic Highway series, I really enjoy it. Learning (and in some cases revisiting) the history of the different cities is very interesting as well as the interviews with the assorted artists.

The lyrics, however seem forced to me. Just as in the Buddy Guy example cited in the article, the lyrics just seem like a mashing together off assorted quotes from the interviews.

"I have to find something that rhymes with '...looking for a dime but found a quarter...'" was undoubtedly uttered at some point.

I too fell some stuff is forced, (Yes-ter-day & Today in Feast & The Famine), but he set out to use the interviews as direct inspiration for the lyrics. It wasn't a "gee, what do I do here" moment.

I think they're both horns on the same goat, el.

He grabbed comments from everyone he was interviewing and put them together in a song.

You can call it inspiration, I can call it forced, but it's still someone else's comments put into a blender until they rhyme.

Again, not being a "hater." I admire him. Just don't dig the music.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Success" is a very personal, subjective term I guess. I don't honestly think that Cobain/Grohl/Novoselic sought world domination when they recorded "Bleach", nor do I think Butch Vig thought that they would have been as huge as they got after "Nevermind" split things open. I knew of and saw Bad Brains and Minor Threat - and Fishbone, GWAR and a bunch of other under the radar at the time bands - and believe me, every single one of those guys were doing it because they wanted/needed to make it. When Ian McKaye realized the band thing wasn't going to be his ultimate ticket, he went where the bread was buttered better and produced.

We'll have to agree to disagree on the assumptions about Nirvana and Vig. You do not take the plunge with a major label unless you think you're going to hit the jackpot. There's too much to lose if you don't, as evidenced by the litany of bands that got dropped by and/or screwed by majors. Rest assured, when they put pen to paper they all thought they were gonna be KSFM. It's similar to when Metallica enlisted Bob Rock to produce the Black Album after hearing Dr. Feelgood. They didn't do it is an artistic statement; they did it to conquer the world. It worked.

My guess is that for the vast majority of bands, including the ones we're talking about, "making it" means being able to do music and nothing else; no day job required to pay the bills. Signing with Geffen is a different level of making it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We'll have to agree to disagree on the assumptions about Nirvana and Vig. You do not take the plunge with a major label unless you think you're going to hit the jackpot. There's too much to lose if you don't, as evidenced by the litany of bands that got dropped by and/or screwed by majors. Rest assured, when they put pen to paper they all thought they were gonna be KSFM. It's similar to when Metallica enlisted Bob Rock to produce the Black Album after hearing Dr. Feelgood. They didn't do it is an artistic statement; they did it to conquer the world. It worked.

There were a lot of people around them at the time that back up this assessment. In fact it seems one of the only things that Courtney Love, bandmates, other bands they were friends with a the time, and several journalists seem to have agreed upon. I mean, getting Love and Buzz Osborne from the Melvins to agree on anything is a minor miracle.

Yes, no one thought Nevermind would be what it became, but I think that is more due to who could have possibly seen that album not just being a hit but changing what mainstream culture was in about a night? DGC also had modest sales projections, but Butch and those guys definitely did their dead level best to produce a monster pop album.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There were a lot of people around them at the time that back up this assessment. In fact it seems one of the only things that Courtney Love, bandmates, other bands they were friends with a the time, and several journalists seem to have agreed upon. I mean, getting Love and Buzz Osborne from the Melvins to agree on anything is a minor miracle.

Yes, no one thought Nevermind would be what it became, but I think that is more due to who could have possibly seen that album not just being a hit but changing what mainstream culture was in about a night? DGC also had modest sales projections, but Butch and those guys definitely did their dead level best to produce a monster pop album.

And sales projections aside, I'm sure DGC did their dead level best to put Nirvana on the map by way of promotion, placement of the material on radio playlists and MTV, etc. That's probably the most significant reason why a band that signs (or signed; not sure how applicable this is to the current landscape) to a major label fails; lack of promotional support. If no one knows about your music, it's the proverbial tree falling in the forest.

At any rate, it's highly unlikely that such a cultural revolution happened by accident. Did said revolution exceed what the band and the label expected? Probably.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's a genuine rock music music fan and a very good capitalist.

That's not always appreciated. I can't count the number of times someone has been labeled a sell-out when they made it big, which is what every single band or person calling them the name wants to be.

You can see this everywhere. I was in Bend, OR last week when news hit that one of the most popular breweries/restaurant in town had just been sold to AmBev / Annheuser Busch. Holy hell, you'd think they'd sacrficed goats and pooped all over the running trails! News crews were out there for days, and the local vibe was angry not congratulatory. Of the three news nuggets we gave the locals the morning after election day (Republican victories, Oregon legalizing weed, and TenBarrel being bought) the only one that elicited BIG reactions was TenBarrel. The cries of "corporate sellouts" could be heard all around town. Given that the owners are known all over town you'd think more people would have congratulated them, but no, it was seen as some kind of backstabbing sellout.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Overexposure is a bit of a caustic agent for some music consumers. I'll admit that this is at least part of my problem with bro' country.

Thinking back to my formative years, I once cringed at the sound of any track from:

The Police - "Synchronicity"

AC/DC - "Back in Black"

Ozzy Ozbourne - "The Ultimate Sin"

Prince and the Revolution - "Purple Rain"

I like all of those albums now, but the rate of play those discs got on FM radio and MTV when they were first released simply made them unwelcome visitors to my ears.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There were a lot of people around them at the time that back up this assessment. In fact it seems one of the only things that Courtney Love, bandmates, other bands they were friends with a the time, and several journalists seem to have agreed upon. I mean, getting Love and Buzz Osborne from the Melvins to agree on anything is a minor miracle.

Yes, no one thought Nevermind would be what it became, but I think that is more due to who could have possibly seen that album not just being a hit but changing what mainstream culture was in about a night? DGC also had modest sales projections, but Butch and those guys definitely did their dead level best to produce a monster pop album.

And sales projections aside, I'm sure DGC did their dead level best to put Nirvana on the map by way of promotion, placement of the material on radio playlists and MTV, etc. That's probably the most significant reason why a band that signs (or signed; not sure how applicable this is to the current landscape) to a major label fails; lack of promotional support. If no one knows about your music, it's the proverbial tree falling in the forest.

At any rate, it's highly unlikely that such a cultural revolution happened by accident. Did said revolution exceed what the band and the label expected? Probably.

There is a pretty cool book, The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable, that talks a bit about how, in retrospect, we tend to look at watershed moments, well, as watersheds when in fact there were quite a few things going on prior that all had to do with that moment happening. Basically, the argument is that the story loves to have that one, unexpected moment, when in truth, that one moment is a product of various currents already set in motion.

Nevermind, to me, fits that pattern. Hair metal was already becoming passe, and that scene in the Northwest was bursting at the seams by 89/90. There was a huge audience waiting for a "Smells Like Teen Spirit" to come along. Nirvana and DGC happened to hit it just right, and I think the only accident to it was at the time the band and the label had no idea just how hungry and huge that audience was. That being said, if it wasn't Nirvana, I think it would have been someone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to say, I've never bought any FF music. Most of what I've heard has been pretty decent, just never anything that put me over the edge to buying it. Well, short of the Sound City soundtrack.

But the next time I see Grohl half-ass anything will be the first time - I've yet to see the guy play anything like it was less than the single most important piece of music in the world, ever.

And the guy clearly loves what he's doing. That kind of enthusiasm tends to rub some people the wrong way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah...Foos. I like loud, pop music so they are ok in my book. I didn’t really expand on the impact of their live thing in this old post, but it was clearly about Grohl and that slamming drummer. Dave came out, loosed a mighty scream into the mic and just owned the show. Great fun, and I’m not a fan of ALL of their stuff, but a lot of it.

As far as the music “journalist” goes, he’s certainly entitled to his opinion. Yet, in the words of Nathan Explosion: “He said that? Oh, yeah? F*** him. F*** that guy!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pfft! I read this earlier today and thought, fuck this fool! While I'm not as much of a fan of the Foos as I used to be, they are the embodiment of rock. They are amazing live and continue to pump out great, hard rock.

Would the author prefer Nickleback? I sure as shit would not.

Since when has good rock in the last 40 years been defined by lyrics? AC/DC, KISS, Def Leppard, not exactly the best lyrics out there. Who would dare say they aren't rock.

Is Pearl Jam rock? Maybe it is the lyrics that puts my love for them above the Foos but I'd say the Foos are more straightforward "rock". Stadium Rock, and no one does it better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...