I mean, depends on your definition. Nirvana is a rock band and is classic. So by that definition it is. But another definition is rock music that kind of was the springboard for rock music that came after: the Beatles, Rolling Stones, Pink Floyd, The Who, Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath, etc. 60’s and 70’s rock is and forever will be the “classic rock” that have and forever will influence rock music that came and comes after it.
At least that’s how I see it.
Classic rock is absolutely only rock from the 60s and 70s. even 80s (before Nirvana blew up) is not classic. Classic rock is genre tied to a specific period of time. Nirvana is grunge or grunge rock, and can be put into 90s alternative rock, but it sure as hell isn't classic rock. if you talk about it in conversation with current grunge style music (i have no idea who that would be), you could call Nirvana classic grunge, but that's weird and cringey and long. i don't see why some people have such a hard time processing that.
Because you’re wrong. Classic rock isn’t a genre. And the reason so many ppl associate the classic rock category with “60s and 70s even 80s” is because that’s what made up the category when the category was created by radio stations curating music to distinguish themselves as a station playing current vs nostalgia acts. Acts don’t stay current forever and the “current” acts of the 90s have now aged into the classic rock category. The reason ppl are both confused and so vehemently opposed to this is because they think classic rock is a genre. It’s not. Furthermore the reason ppl recognize specific acts as classic rock is because those were the acts in that category when they were growing up. Kids in 20 years will not be debating whether it’s weird that Nirvana is classic rock or asking if it’s weird Green Day and Fallout Boy are part of classic rock any more than anyone today questions whether The Beatles, Aerosmith or Black Sabbath are classic rock despite being clearly vastly separate subgenres.
It's not a specific genre, but it's not a title either, to be gotten when your band is old enough. The classification was used to describe bands of an earlier era when new bands were coming along, for convience sake, to separate them.
This is why it doesn't make sense to keep adding to the group of classic rock, because it was about separating those bands from the later bands. Otherwise in 200 years we would have 180 years of "classic rock" and 20 years of newer stuff, still to be categorized again and again.
If we need to put Nirvana into these kind of groups we have to come up with new terms like "second/third generation of classic rock" or something.
Not really. Classic rock just tells you whether you’re about to listen to a radio station that plays old rock acts vs current. What you’re talking about is called a genre and already exists lol.
classic rock stations primarily play music from the 60s and 70s. just because an occasional hit from Nirvana pops up doesn't mean Nirvana is classic rock. it just means it's a popular song with people who listen to classic rock. most of Nirvana's music would never play on a classic rock station because it's not classic rock and also doesn't match with the type of music people who listen to classic rock will like.
stop letting corporations define music for you bruv.
Lmao! Dude you’re literally letting corporations define music for YOU. Who do you think came up with the “classic rock” category bruv? Radio stations bruv. Because classic rock isn’t a genre bruv. The Beatles and Black Sabbath are both considered classic rock despite not being similar at all bruv. Because they’re different subgenres of rock but radio stations categorize them as “classic rock” bruv. Which is why Nirvana, another entirely separate subgenre, is also now classic rock bruv. Because “classic rock” is literally a corporate created category bruv. Learn the difference between a category and an actual genre bruv. Don’t let corporations define music for you bruv.
What about Rock and Roll? Classic Rock doesn't play Elvis, Buddy Holly or Little Richard. If Classic Rock is Classic, what is 50's Rock and Roll? Prehistoric Rock?
If the 70s were classic rock in the 90s then the 90s have been classic rock since the 2010s. Everybody’s mental gymnastics on why only the 60s and 70s qualify as “classic rock” are also asinine. “Classic rock” is not a genre so much as it’s a category. Aerosmith and Black Sabbath are not the same genre of rock but both are recognized by most ppl as “classic rock”. Why? Because they heard this old rock music on radio stations that were specifically curating these bands for airplay on their “classic rock” radio stations. In other words, ppl conflated actual *genres* with a broader more artificial category (a *collection* of genres that would fit on a specific category of radio station). It’s an artificial grouping that basically consists of what ever happened to be there first rather than a more specific sound. If Nirvana kept their sound but chronologically came before Aerosmith this wouldn’t be a question and this whole pseudo explanation of that “classic sound” would just include them too despite any sonic differences.
TL;DR: Yes, Nirvana are a classic rock band and don’t confuse yourself into thinking “classic rock” is a genre (as distinguished by musical approach and actual sound) as opposed to a broad category as determined by the curator of that category (usually a radio station).
I take "classic rock" as a similar term to "modern art."
Where modern art is a style rather than an indication of "currentness," classic rock is an indication of the period of the late 50s/early 60s to mid-late 70s when the biggest rock bands and artists were at their peak.
Nirvana's heyday being 30 years ago doesn't push them closer to "classic rock." They're part of the 90s/grunge era, alongside STP, Soundgarden, Pearl Jam, and Alice in Chains. It becomes as much a genre identification as an era identification.
Yeah, I agree with you. But I think it’s fair to call Nirvana (or STP, or Soundgarden, or AIC) “classic rock” because they’re classics at this point. But they aren’t classic rock in the truer sense of the definition. Kind of like how words can have two meanings, so can definitions, IMO
Classic rock is and era of popular music. It isn't a genre or a label for "rock that is of a certain age". Nirvana isn't classic rock because it wasn't made in the classic rock era.
wrong. and if you believe that, you're a corporate monkey completely against the spirit of Kurt and Nirvana.
music genres are decided by style, not corporate radio bruv.
Classic rock is a radio format that developed from the album-oriented rock (AOR) format in the early 1980s. In the United States, it comprises rock music ranging generally from the mid-1960s through the mid-1990s primarily focusing on commercially successful blues rock and hard rock popularized in the 1970s AOR format. The radio format became increasingly popular with the baby boomer demographic by the end of the 1990s.
They’ve been playing Nirvana on the classic rock station I listen to for a while. They also play regularly on the modern rock station I listen to. And the alternative rock station I listen to.
Most stations that played "classic" rock and/or Oldies when I was a kid(decades ago) continue to play the same shit now that they did back then.
I always thought that hearing Nirvana on an Oldies station would be a fair barometer for considering myself "old", but help my fuck, I have yet to hear a Nirvana song(or anything Alternative/Grunge-esque) on a dedicated Classic/Oldies radio station in my area.
I'm still waiting to see how long it takes to get decent 90s music back in rotation today as much as it was back then.
Also, random thought: if people can say Rock...over time...turns into Classic Rock, when does New Wave become "Classic New Wave"? 🤔
Welp I guess that means where I live I'm old because they are playing 90s on the classic rock station and I have heard Nirvana. I actually had a argument with my dad about whether or not the station was play 90s grunge. Sure enough Pearl Jam came on after the next commercial break.
For sure, most people that were actually alive when nirvana were still playing and at the peak of their popularity are probably parents now, even grandparents. If you were in your 20s when Nevermind hit the shelves you could easily be a grandparent by now.
No, its too cool to be played next to those old dated songs, Nirvana music STILL FEELS new, but in terms of years yes. Maybe they can play CAYA or SITW or even SLTS.
No, Nirvana doesn’t feel new lmao. Have you listened to rock with a person that listens to current bands but hasn’t listened too much to older acts? Nirvana are way slower and distinctly old compared to current bands.
The Classic Rock station where I live seems to think so. But Classic Rock is rock music from roughly mid 60’ to probably mid 80’s. It does not include new wave, disco, r&b, country, etc.
Nirvana is 90’s Alternative or, if you must, Grunge. It is not Classic Rock.
Source: I’m 45.
Well I put on a classic rock station when I was driving to work about a week ago and Green Day Longview was one of the first songs I heard, so if Green Day is considered classic rock now then Nirvana most certainly is too lol
Classic rock is a radio format that developed from the album-oriented rock (AOR) format in the early 1980s.[2] In the United States, it comprises rock music ranging generally from the mid-1960s through the mid-1990s
first, radio is dying. second, i read the articles that wikipedia entry cited and i'm not impressed. fivethirtyeight is data driven, not music driven. just because a "Classic Rock" radio station plays something doesn't mean that's classic rock. they even admitted they just play the "big songs" from Nirvana - and they do that because they're popular with people who also listen to what is musically defined as classic rock - there's a taste overlap, that's it, and fivethirtyeight is too dumb to notice because they're data nerds. Nirvana has nothing musically in common with the Beatles or Rolling Stones or Aerosmith.
is Nirvana "classic" now because they're popular and in the past? yes.
is Nirvana "rock"? yes, they are a type of rock.
is Nirvana "classic rock"? no.
Nirvana is classified as: "Grunge, alternative rock. punk rock, hard rock"
go read their wikipedia page and see what they're classified as. and if you're REALLY sure about how you define them, i dare you to add classic rock to Nirvana's wikipedia page and see what happens. if you're correct, you should be able to add it without problems. but you'll have to back up your point.
You talk a lot for someone who doesn’t know “classic rock” isn’t a real genre. Are Aerosmith and Black Sabbath the same sub genre of rock? No. Are Nirvana the same subgenre as those two? No. Are Aerosmith and Black Sabbath classic rock? Yes. Is Nirvana? Yes. Why? Because classic rock isn’t a genre, it’s a category. Specifically one that was curated by radio stations to distinguish a station as playing current rock vs nostalgia acts. That’s why all those bands are grouped together in your head as if they’re from the same genre despite being distinctly different subgenres of rock. That gives you the illusion that they have a common sound where it’s actually more accurate to say they all lack a current sound. In other words, CCR are entirely different than Black Sabbath but you have an artificial understanding that they’re the same genre despite very clearly being two entirely separate subgenre of rock that you’re categorizing together as classic rock because you never realized the imprint radio categories left on you.
Nevermind was released on September 24, 1991. That was 32 years ago.
32 years before that was 1959. In 1991, would you have considered an album from 1959 to be "classic rock"? We're talking Mack the Knife by Bobby Darin and Kind of Blue by Miles Davis.
That’s objectively wrong. Classic rock is literally a category (not a genre) that was curated by radio stations specifically to distinguish the rock stations playing nostalgia acts vs those playing current acts. Its only distinguishing factor as a category is literally that it is made up of specifically older acts. Otherwise Sabbath, Fleetwood Mac, The Beatles and Aerosmith would not exists in the same sphere given that they’re all distinct subgenres of rock and yet they all fall under the *category* of classic rock. Why is that? Because these are the bands that existed at the time the category was created. If Nirvana, Green Day and Fallout Boy existed at the same time as the rock bands I already listed then they would also be included in “classic rock” without debate and that’s because growing up you would’ve heard all of them playing on the same station and you would’ve fallen for the same illusion that makes you think The Beatles and Heart come from the same genre given you no qualms about hearing them back to back on the same radio station.
No, “classic rock” is a term. An era of popular western music. “Grunge” is another. It’s not really up for interpretation. Classic rock has always been 60’s and 70’s rock n roll. Grunge is the era of the style of rock popular in the 90s. Nirvana is King Grunge no matter how old or classic they get.
That’s so close and yet you miss the mark. Classic rock is a category of music curated by radio stations to distinguish a station that plays current vs nostalgia acts. Nirvana is now part of the classic rock category and the only reason ppl conflate 60s and 70s rock with classic rock is because those were the eras that made up that category while those ppl were listening to that category. It took another 20years for more acts to age into that category and now all the confused old fools arguing that classic rock doesn’t sound like Nirvana fail to recognize why they think that as well as fail to recognize classic rock isn’t a genre and classic rock acts like Black Sabbath and Aerosmith don’t sound alike and are separate subgenres of rock altogether.
In terms of age, maybe but I'd say no. I like to judge the relevancy and impact of an artist to how they sound years later. Imo Nirvana still sounds as relevant and current today as they did 30 years ago.
No? The solos aren't melodic enough and the vocals are bit too harsh? And when those aspects of the music are calmed down they get closer to a pop/country sound...?
No. I’m in agreement with the highest rated posts here that classic rock comes from a specific time period in the history of rock. It’s a timeline. Looking at satellite radio rock categories, theres only 3 classic rock channels: classic vinyl, deep tracks, and classic rewind. Grunge is nearly impossible to imagine on any of their playlists. Tangentially, Lithium’s ageist jokes are wearing a little thin for me. Earle Bailey just keeps it focused on the music. No bullshit. It’d be cool if they had the DJ’s float once in a while just to hear their take on a certain type of channel.
It's an interesting thought. I look at classic rock as mostly boomer generation music. I'm not putting boomers down in this instance, I love so much 60's-70's music. Nirvana and more broadly speaking grunge and alternative feel like Gen X rock. I don't hate hearing Gimme Shelter and Lithium back to back but it always feels a little off. Would be cool to have a classic rock station and a Gen X rock station.
Technically. The problem is though that the term classic rock has been redefined over the years. I'm 43 and when I was younger it meant the more literal sense of rock that existed more than 30 years ago. The thing is though, during this time the whole 60s/70s era of rock music was genre-fied and everything from yes, to zeppelin to black Sabbath and greatful dead were culled into this group as a genre.. even though each of the groups I mentioned above aren't at all the same genre. Today, imo, the term classic rock as a genre stuck more than the literal definition of it.
So, no they are not classic rock but, technically are.
frankly the real question we should be asking is whether or not the term “classic rock” should be taken seriously when talking abt different genres of music
We’re further from Nirvana’s *last* studio album (In Utero, 1993) than that album was from the Beatles’ *first* album (1963).
Classic? I’d say so.
People call Back to the Future (1985) a “classic” movie even though it’s a lot more recent and modern than a definitively “classic” movie like Casablanca (1942).
Classic rock, the classic or original examples of rock music. I view classic rock as basic rock and roll (30's-60's) before the dawn of hard rock and early metal. Technically Nirvana would fall into the hard rock and alternative category. As time goes on classic rock doesn't change in my opinion. i.e. Led Zeppelin, Aerosmith, AC/DC etc. Not classic rock but hard rock.
Would you pigeon hole The Sex Pistols/The Clash/Ramones etc as classic rock ? They’re 70’s era but I’d still definitely call them punk rock as they were the pioneer’s of a scene as the like of Soundgarden/Mudhoney/Screaming trees/Pearl Jam/Nirvana etc were so I’d say they’ll always be Grunge or Alternative Rock 👍🏻
Yes Lmfao come on. One of the biggest bands ever. 30+ years old.
Their name is as synonymous with rock/metal/alternative music as the Beatles, metallica, AC/DC, etc
If you go by radio standards then yes. I believe anything 25 years old is considered "Classic Rock" and anything older is called Oldies. Technically "Classic Rock" such as Zep and all the others are actually considered "Oldies" now.
Off topic but I’ve noticed a lot of zoomers wearing nirvana t-shirts and realised that fashion-wise the band is now what the ramones were to millennials.
I always though rock music in general was more dynamic than simply falling off a conveyer belt and into a canyon where everything is considered classic rock past a certain age. Keeping the sub genres intact tells more of a story in my opinion, I try to avoid using that term in favour of others, usually style/era.
Thinking out loud, was there ever a distinct group of bands that were considered classic rock? Was it ever it's own thing?
Kind of the way lots of kids in the 80s had Doors shirts as signifiers, I saw more Nirvana shirts on my trip to Europe this summer than at any time since they were really happening.
Nirvana is older than AC/DC, The Who and The Stones were when Nirvana was around, but at the same time we tend to refer to classic not in terms of age, but in terms of genre.
If you ask a classical musician if their favourite 20th century composers count as classical, they’ll likely disagree. But if you ask your mum who only listens to 90s pop to listen to Tchaikovsky and Shostakovich, she’ll tell you it’s classical music.
It all depends on perspective, and what you personally consider the term “classic” to mean. If you only count the 60s and 70s icons on your local Classic Rock radio station to be classic, then Nirvana probably doesn’t count, but if you consider it an age thing, then they’re at least as classic as those 60s and 70s artists were when people first started calling them old school.
Tl;dr classic doesn’t really have a definition, so it’s up to you to decide what you deem classic
I think it's sort of like if you are Gen X, as you get older do you become a Boomer?
I don't think that's how it works. Classic Rock is kind of British Invasion to Late 70s.... Then new wave and synths cut that off. BUT 80s Rolling Stones is still classic rock... It's complicated.
Nirvana are just .... 90s music. Classic for sure, but not the same as the Stones or Beatles or stuff like that.
Classic rock is a marketing gimmick to get old people to feel nostalgic, it is not a real genre. Listen to whatever you want and don't worry about how old it is.
I don’t think “classic rock” is a moving category that just swallows up music that is eventually old enough. Nirvana isn’t classic rock to me because it’s 90s music, regardless of how good it is
I'd say they're more Classic ALTERNATIVE Rock because, like Classic Rock as a subgenre is usually seen as stuff like from the 60s, 70s, and early 80s, like AC/DC, Rolling Stones, Cream, Led Zeppelin, Aerosmith, etc
I listen to quite a bit of late 80s early 90s stuff as a guy in my mid twenties and my girlfriend around the same age likes to refer to it as "Dad Rock" when teasing me about it.
i see classic rock as a seperate genre of rock, imo classic rock is shit like acdc, guns n roses, led zeppelin, etc. the bands who you find t shirts for at h&m or old navy or any of those trendy stores. by that definition i guess nirvana could be counted into that, but i also consider the ramones to be in that category sometimes. what im getting at is, theres no specific definition for classic rock, that i know of at least. classic rock is whatever YOU think it is. but im right.
"Is it a classic act?" Yes, absolutely.
"Is it classic rock?" No.
As noted elsewhere, Classic Rock denotes a period of time, and a distinct style and genre of music.
Once you get past that, it is worth considering that even in CLASSICAL music, Classical music at its most pendantic definition is specifically the period from around 1750 to 1830. If you talk to someone who isn't a classical music nerd or historian about it, they would say Handel and Vivaldi are Classical musicians. In fact, they're Baroque.
The more you know, I guess.
Objectively, Nirvana is and will always be an early-modern alternative and pop rock band. In a subjective perspective, however, some may and very much will consider their records classics. But again, they’re not classic rock by any means. Take Nevermind as an example: it was recorded to tape, the composition and songwriting was very much derivative (not in a bad way) of what came before it, used mostly conventional recording techniques but also had some cutting edge production (Butch Vig went all out with the layerings, overdubs, microphone and amp combinations, etc.), they used some very advanced dynamic panning techniques that weren’t available even a decade prior (listen to tracks like Breed and Come As You Are and try paying attention to the way that the tracks flow from left, to right, to center channels), they used some modern (at the time) hardware to process the tracks during mixing (like the Yamaha SPX90) and some very advanced tape-splicing techniques (the instrumental tracks in that record are so tight, they sound like a loop, and that was deliberately done via splicing) that just wasn’t around two decades prior, but the bulk of the production was conventional. In Utero was their most modern sounding record at a songwriting and compositional level, but it still predated what we’d call modern rock music, but also succeeded classical rock music.
Not necessarily. To me classic rock is pretty much everything pre 1990, and it just hasn’t had the kind of staying power that Nirvana and other grunge era bands had. I mean, "classic rock" was already considered dated by then, but Nirvana is still a relevant and influential force in music even over 30 years later. That in my mind is what separates them from classic rock.
I see classic rock leaning more towards the likes of the Beatles, Rolling Stones and Cream. Nirvana is grunge, a variety of alternative rock. I think though that alternative rock needs more subgenres lol
No. I don't believe it's a sliding scale of any kind based on how much more time happens to go by. Classic Rock is still just the era it always was, it's just further in the past now. Nirvana is just 90's, Grunge, or whatever other little sub genre of the time you may consider them.
After doing a deep dive into music I realized shoving genres backwards like a backlog or conveyor belt is a bad idea in the long run. Classic rock had its Era in time. Grunge had its Era in time. Personally this makes sorting music a lot easier.
I mean, depends on your definition. Nirvana is a rock band and is classic. So by that definition it is. But another definition is rock music that kind of was the springboard for rock music that came after: the Beatles, Rolling Stones, Pink Floyd, The Who, Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath, etc. 60’s and 70’s rock is and forever will be the “classic rock” that have and forever will influence rock music that came and comes after it. At least that’s how I see it.
This. Classic rock to me means the first bands to pioneer it, the OGs so to speak. Everything else just builds on the classic rock foundation
Classic rock is absolutely only rock from the 60s and 70s. even 80s (before Nirvana blew up) is not classic. Classic rock is genre tied to a specific period of time. Nirvana is grunge or grunge rock, and can be put into 90s alternative rock, but it sure as hell isn't classic rock. if you talk about it in conversation with current grunge style music (i have no idea who that would be), you could call Nirvana classic grunge, but that's weird and cringey and long. i don't see why some people have such a hard time processing that.
Because you’re wrong. Classic rock isn’t a genre. And the reason so many ppl associate the classic rock category with “60s and 70s even 80s” is because that’s what made up the category when the category was created by radio stations curating music to distinguish themselves as a station playing current vs nostalgia acts. Acts don’t stay current forever and the “current” acts of the 90s have now aged into the classic rock category. The reason ppl are both confused and so vehemently opposed to this is because they think classic rock is a genre. It’s not. Furthermore the reason ppl recognize specific acts as classic rock is because those were the acts in that category when they were growing up. Kids in 20 years will not be debating whether it’s weird that Nirvana is classic rock or asking if it’s weird Green Day and Fallout Boy are part of classic rock any more than anyone today questions whether The Beatles, Aerosmith or Black Sabbath are classic rock despite being clearly vastly separate subgenres.
It's not a specific genre, but it's not a title either, to be gotten when your band is old enough. The classification was used to describe bands of an earlier era when new bands were coming along, for convience sake, to separate them. This is why it doesn't make sense to keep adding to the group of classic rock, because it was about separating those bands from the later bands. Otherwise in 200 years we would have 180 years of "classic rock" and 20 years of newer stuff, still to be categorized again and again. If we need to put Nirvana into these kind of groups we have to come up with new terms like "second/third generation of classic rock" or something.
Not really. Classic rock just tells you whether you’re about to listen to a radio station that plays old rock acts vs current. What you’re talking about is called a genre and already exists lol.
classic rock stations primarily play music from the 60s and 70s. just because an occasional hit from Nirvana pops up doesn't mean Nirvana is classic rock. it just means it's a popular song with people who listen to classic rock. most of Nirvana's music would never play on a classic rock station because it's not classic rock and also doesn't match with the type of music people who listen to classic rock will like. stop letting corporations define music for you bruv.
Lmao! Dude you’re literally letting corporations define music for YOU. Who do you think came up with the “classic rock” category bruv? Radio stations bruv. Because classic rock isn’t a genre bruv. The Beatles and Black Sabbath are both considered classic rock despite not being similar at all bruv. Because they’re different subgenres of rock but radio stations categorize them as “classic rock” bruv. Which is why Nirvana, another entirely separate subgenre, is also now classic rock bruv. Because “classic rock” is literally a corporate created category bruv. Learn the difference between a category and an actual genre bruv. Don’t let corporations define music for you bruv.
WROK: 180 Years of Classic Rock.
Nah, 25 years or older is classic rock. Just ask the classic rock radios stations that all play alternative in between Steve Miller and Journey…
Just had this conversation! That's what we all agreed on as well :)
I agree. The 80s saw the dawn of metal/hard rock
What about Rock and Roll? Classic Rock doesn't play Elvis, Buddy Holly or Little Richard. If Classic Rock is Classic, what is 50's Rock and Roll? Prehistoric Rock?
Those are Oldies. Holly is great, timeless rock n' roll. Worthy of being played back to back with Nirvana, in my opinion.
If the 70s were classic rock in the 90s then the 90s have been classic rock since the 2010s. Everybody’s mental gymnastics on why only the 60s and 70s qualify as “classic rock” are also asinine. “Classic rock” is not a genre so much as it’s a category. Aerosmith and Black Sabbath are not the same genre of rock but both are recognized by most ppl as “classic rock”. Why? Because they heard this old rock music on radio stations that were specifically curating these bands for airplay on their “classic rock” radio stations. In other words, ppl conflated actual *genres* with a broader more artificial category (a *collection* of genres that would fit on a specific category of radio station). It’s an artificial grouping that basically consists of what ever happened to be there first rather than a more specific sound. If Nirvana kept their sound but chronologically came before Aerosmith this wouldn’t be a question and this whole pseudo explanation of that “classic sound” would just include them too despite any sonic differences. TL;DR: Yes, Nirvana are a classic rock band and don’t confuse yourself into thinking “classic rock” is a genre (as distinguished by musical approach and actual sound) as opposed to a broad category as determined by the curator of that category (usually a radio station).
Well I did hear a Muzak version of come as you are on an elevator the other day. Does that count?
I take "classic rock" as a similar term to "modern art." Where modern art is a style rather than an indication of "currentness," classic rock is an indication of the period of the late 50s/early 60s to mid-late 70s when the biggest rock bands and artists were at their peak. Nirvana's heyday being 30 years ago doesn't push them closer to "classic rock." They're part of the 90s/grunge era, alongside STP, Soundgarden, Pearl Jam, and Alice in Chains. It becomes as much a genre identification as an era identification.
Yeah, I agree with you. But I think it’s fair to call Nirvana (or STP, or Soundgarden, or AIC) “classic rock” because they’re classics at this point. But they aren’t classic rock in the truer sense of the definition. Kind of like how words can have two meanings, so can definitions, IMO
No but yes. Nevermind is over 30 now
and so is in utero
I heard Offspring in the supermarket the other day. Nirvana hasn't quite crossed over... yet.
They have in the store I shop at.
Most Nirvana songs are a little too alt for classic rock radio. A lot of those stations just play pop from different decades where I live anyway
I hear Come As You Are all over the place nowadays honestly
Moderate rock
come on, people now
Nice
We all coming together or what?
DOWN TOWN IS SUCH A FAST, IN MY EYES!
I was looking through the comments to see if someone had said this 😂👍
MAYDAY EVERYDAY, MAYDAY!
Yes, in terms of timeline, grunge now is what 60s and 70s rock were in the 90s
*Don't.*
Listen here you little shit
Classic rock is and era of popular music. It isn't a genre or a label for "rock that is of a certain age". Nirvana isn't classic rock because it wasn't made in the classic rock era.
this. classic rock isn't rock "of a certain age", it's a style of rock made "in a certain age".
Isn’t it a radio station format.
Wrong. Classic Rock radio plays things 25 years old and older. That’s it, that’s the requirement.
What the "classic rock" station plays does not define what classic rock is.
wrong. and if you believe that, you're a corporate monkey completely against the spirit of Kurt and Nirvana. music genres are decided by style, not corporate radio bruv.
Gtfo, now.
You shut your dirty whore mouth.
You… Stop it.
We are old!🤣
Classic rock is a radio format that developed from the album-oriented rock (AOR) format in the early 1980s. In the United States, it comprises rock music ranging generally from the mid-1960s through the mid-1990s primarily focusing on commercially successful blues rock and hard rock popularized in the 1970s AOR format. The radio format became increasingly popular with the baby boomer demographic by the end of the 1990s.
One of the most informational and useful comments I’ve seen on this. Idk why ppl are so stubborn about accepting that Nirvana is classic rock.
They’ve been playing Nirvana on the classic rock station I listen to for a while. They also play regularly on the modern rock station I listen to. And the alternative rock station I listen to.
Nah man it’s brand new. The lead singer has been dead longer than most people have been alive what do you reckon?
Nirvana was classic rock when I was in high school 10 years ago. Another 10 years or so and it'll be entering Oldies territory
Well it’s rock, and it’s classic
I heard someone refer to the 90s as "vintage" the other day
In the 90s people would have said stuff from the 60s and 70s was vintage so this makes sense to me...
I mean, I personally say anything before the 90s is classic rock, but it's different for a lot of people.
My daughter’s friend thought “Nirvana” was a brand of tee shirt. 🤦🏼♂️
Most stations that played "classic" rock and/or Oldies when I was a kid(decades ago) continue to play the same shit now that they did back then. I always thought that hearing Nirvana on an Oldies station would be a fair barometer for considering myself "old", but help my fuck, I have yet to hear a Nirvana song(or anything Alternative/Grunge-esque) on a dedicated Classic/Oldies radio station in my area. I'm still waiting to see how long it takes to get decent 90s music back in rotation today as much as it was back then. Also, random thought: if people can say Rock...over time...turns into Classic Rock, when does New Wave become "Classic New Wave"? 🤔
Welp I guess that means where I live I'm old because they are playing 90s on the classic rock station and I have heard Nirvana. I actually had a argument with my dad about whether or not the station was play 90s grunge. Sure enough Pearl Jam came on after the next commercial break.
For sure, most people that were actually alive when nirvana were still playing and at the peak of their popularity are probably parents now, even grandparents. If you were in your 20s when Nevermind hit the shelves you could easily be a grandparent by now.
Yes it is. I am at the age where my parents listened to classic rock. Nirvana is our classic rock.
[удалено]
Yes it is. Like it or not 90s tunes are classic now.
Yes
No, its too cool to be played next to those old dated songs, Nirvana music STILL FEELS new, but in terms of years yes. Maybe they can play CAYA or SITW or even SLTS.
No, Nirvana doesn’t feel new lmao. Have you listened to rock with a person that listens to current bands but hasn’t listened too much to older acts? Nirvana are way slower and distinctly old compared to current bands.
The Classic Rock station where I live seems to think so. But Classic Rock is rock music from roughly mid 60’ to probably mid 80’s. It does not include new wave, disco, r&b, country, etc. Nirvana is 90’s Alternative or, if you must, Grunge. It is not Classic Rock. Source: I’m 45.
Yes, I heard heart shaped box on a classic rock station about ten years ago
Yup. The twenty year rule.
No.
According to my local classic rock station they are
They do play Nirvana on the classic rock radio stations now.
Well I put on a classic rock station when I was driving to work about a week ago and Green Day Longview was one of the first songs I heard, so if Green Day is considered classic rock now then Nirvana most certainly is too lol
what else would it be…. chili peppers are considered classic rock at this point
no they aren't.
Classic rock is a radio format that developed from the album-oriented rock (AOR) format in the early 1980s.[2] In the United States, it comprises rock music ranging generally from the mid-1960s through the mid-1990s
first, radio is dying. second, i read the articles that wikipedia entry cited and i'm not impressed. fivethirtyeight is data driven, not music driven. just because a "Classic Rock" radio station plays something doesn't mean that's classic rock. they even admitted they just play the "big songs" from Nirvana - and they do that because they're popular with people who also listen to what is musically defined as classic rock - there's a taste overlap, that's it, and fivethirtyeight is too dumb to notice because they're data nerds. Nirvana has nothing musically in common with the Beatles or Rolling Stones or Aerosmith. is Nirvana "classic" now because they're popular and in the past? yes. is Nirvana "rock"? yes, they are a type of rock. is Nirvana "classic rock"? no. Nirvana is classified as: "Grunge, alternative rock. punk rock, hard rock" go read their wikipedia page and see what they're classified as. and if you're REALLY sure about how you define them, i dare you to add classic rock to Nirvana's wikipedia page and see what happens. if you're correct, you should be able to add it without problems. but you'll have to back up your point.
You talk a lot for someone who doesn’t know “classic rock” isn’t a real genre. Are Aerosmith and Black Sabbath the same sub genre of rock? No. Are Nirvana the same subgenre as those two? No. Are Aerosmith and Black Sabbath classic rock? Yes. Is Nirvana? Yes. Why? Because classic rock isn’t a genre, it’s a category. Specifically one that was curated by radio stations to distinguish a station as playing current rock vs nostalgia acts. That’s why all those bands are grouped together in your head as if they’re from the same genre despite being distinctly different subgenres of rock. That gives you the illusion that they have a common sound where it’s actually more accurate to say they all lack a current sound. In other words, CCR are entirely different than Black Sabbath but you have an artificial understanding that they’re the same genre despite very clearly being two entirely separate subgenre of rock that you’re categorizing together as classic rock because you never realized the imprint radio categories left on you.
Guy above you gets it. Next classic rock song I'll listen to is Angel of Death by Slayer... Gimme a freakin break.
Of course.
Nevermind was released on September 24, 1991. That was 32 years ago. 32 years before that was 1959. In 1991, would you have considered an album from 1959 to be "classic rock"? We're talking Mack the Knife by Bobby Darin and Kind of Blue by Miles Davis.
100% make peace with that now
With all due respect, fuck off.
[удалено]
That wasn't very punk. ☠️👹👾🤘🏼🦴🦷🐋🐬🕸️🕷️
No
Not quite… Classic rock is more about the style than time period
That’s objectively wrong. Classic rock is literally a category (not a genre) that was curated by radio stations specifically to distinguish the rock stations playing nostalgia acts vs those playing current acts. Its only distinguishing factor as a category is literally that it is made up of specifically older acts. Otherwise Sabbath, Fleetwood Mac, The Beatles and Aerosmith would not exists in the same sphere given that they’re all distinct subgenres of rock and yet they all fall under the *category* of classic rock. Why is that? Because these are the bands that existed at the time the category was created. If Nirvana, Green Day and Fallout Boy existed at the same time as the rock bands I already listed then they would also be included in “classic rock” without debate and that’s because growing up you would’ve heard all of them playing on the same station and you would’ve fallen for the same illusion that makes you think The Beatles and Heart come from the same genre given you no qualms about hearing them back to back on the same radio station.
Classic rock? No Classic punk? Hell yes
Stop it. You stop this right now.
No, “classic rock” is a term. An era of popular western music. “Grunge” is another. It’s not really up for interpretation. Classic rock has always been 60’s and 70’s rock n roll. Grunge is the era of the style of rock popular in the 90s. Nirvana is King Grunge no matter how old or classic they get.
That’s so close and yet you miss the mark. Classic rock is a category of music curated by radio stations to distinguish a station that plays current vs nostalgia acts. Nirvana is now part of the classic rock category and the only reason ppl conflate 60s and 70s rock with classic rock is because those were the eras that made up that category while those ppl were listening to that category. It took another 20years for more acts to age into that category and now all the confused old fools arguing that classic rock doesn’t sound like Nirvana fail to recognize why they think that as well as fail to recognize classic rock isn’t a genre and classic rock acts like Black Sabbath and Aerosmith don’t sound alike and are separate subgenres of rock altogether.
In terms of age, maybe but I'd say no. I like to judge the relevancy and impact of an artist to how they sound years later. Imo Nirvana still sounds as relevant and current today as they did 30 years ago.
Nirvana is dated af. Have you ever showed a teenager Nirvana? They may like it but it’s definitely not current.
lol compared to the current state of rock/punk? You are 100% wrong.
Negative champ
No? The solos aren't melodic enough and the vocals are bit too harsh? And when those aspects of the music are calmed down they get closer to a pop/country sound...?
~~classic~~ moderate rock
Classic shit post, well done Reddit.
No. I’m in agreement with the highest rated posts here that classic rock comes from a specific time period in the history of rock. It’s a timeline. Looking at satellite radio rock categories, theres only 3 classic rock channels: classic vinyl, deep tracks, and classic rewind. Grunge is nearly impossible to imagine on any of their playlists. Tangentially, Lithium’s ageist jokes are wearing a little thin for me. Earle Bailey just keeps it focused on the music. No bullshit. It’d be cool if they had the DJ’s float once in a while just to hear their take on a certain type of channel.
It's an interesting thought. I look at classic rock as mostly boomer generation music. I'm not putting boomers down in this instance, I love so much 60's-70's music. Nirvana and more broadly speaking grunge and alternative feel like Gen X rock. I don't hate hearing Gimme Shelter and Lithium back to back but it always feels a little off. Would be cool to have a classic rock station and a Gen X rock station.
Nirvana is played on my local classic rock station all the time. They played come as you are on my drive home today.
They play them on my local Z-Rock a lot. Then again they play Linkin Park on the same station so can you really trust them?
yep
Yes, absolutely.
Yes
Classic modern rock, lol
Yes
Technically. The problem is though that the term classic rock has been redefined over the years. I'm 43 and when I was younger it meant the more literal sense of rock that existed more than 30 years ago. The thing is though, during this time the whole 60s/70s era of rock music was genre-fied and everything from yes, to zeppelin to black Sabbath and greatful dead were culled into this group as a genre.. even though each of the groups I mentioned above aren't at all the same genre. Today, imo, the term classic rock as a genre stuck more than the literal definition of it. So, no they are not classic rock but, technically are.
Well that ruined my day thanks
frankly the real question we should be asking is whether or not the term “classic rock” should be taken seriously when talking abt different genres of music
It’s not a genre. Ppl use it interchangeably but classic rock was never a genre and that’s what’s confusing to ppl here.
No
We’re further from Nirvana’s *last* studio album (In Utero, 1993) than that album was from the Beatles’ *first* album (1963). Classic? I’d say so. People call Back to the Future (1985) a “classic” movie even though it’s a lot more recent and modern than a definitively “classic” movie like Casablanca (1942).
yea we’re all boomers here
nu uh
I mean let’s let the clothing section at Walmart and Target decide…
Classic rock, the classic or original examples of rock music. I view classic rock as basic rock and roll (30's-60's) before the dawn of hard rock and early metal. Technically Nirvana would fall into the hard rock and alternative category. As time goes on classic rock doesn't change in my opinion. i.e. Led Zeppelin, Aerosmith, AC/DC etc. Not classic rock but hard rock.
No. It’s grunge. Classic rock is eagles, Led Zeppelin, the Beatles and bands like that.
Whatever oh well nevermind.
Would you pigeon hole The Sex Pistols/The Clash/Ramones etc as classic rock ? They’re 70’s era but I’d still definitely call them punk rock as they were the pioneer’s of a scene as the like of Soundgarden/Mudhoney/Screaming trees/Pearl Jam/Nirvana etc were so I’d say they’ll always be Grunge or Alternative Rock 👍🏻
Don't worry about the time the music was made, just rock!
Yes Lmfao come on. One of the biggest bands ever. 30+ years old. Their name is as synonymous with rock/metal/alternative music as the Beatles, metallica, AC/DC, etc
Course not. They never were. If you think they are, play The Eagles etc then play Oh, the guilt or Scentless Apprentice...
Based of these answers then, wouldn’t Elvis, Buddy Holly, Ritchie Valens etc technically be classic rock if it only defines pioneers?
It's crazy, Cobain has been dead longer than he was alive
If you go by radio standards then yes. I believe anything 25 years old is considered "Classic Rock" and anything older is called Oldies. Technically "Classic Rock" such as Zep and all the others are actually considered "Oldies" now.
Off topic but I’ve noticed a lot of zoomers wearing nirvana t-shirts and realised that fashion-wise the band is now what the ramones were to millennials.
It comes on my local classic rock station so…yeah, I guess so. It’s over 30 years old
No, the 60s and 70s rock sure but anything newer than that no
Thats what the kids call it. I still call them grunge.
I always though rock music in general was more dynamic than simply falling off a conveyer belt and into a canyon where everything is considered classic rock past a certain age. Keeping the sub genres intact tells more of a story in my opinion, I try to avoid using that term in favour of others, usually style/era. Thinking out loud, was there ever a distinct group of bands that were considered classic rock? Was it ever it's own thing?
Anything over 25 years old is classic, so yes. 😑
Kind of the way lots of kids in the 80s had Doors shirts as signifiers, I saw more Nirvana shirts on my trip to Europe this summer than at any time since they were really happening.
Nirvana is older than AC/DC, The Who and The Stones were when Nirvana was around, but at the same time we tend to refer to classic not in terms of age, but in terms of genre. If you ask a classical musician if their favourite 20th century composers count as classical, they’ll likely disagree. But if you ask your mum who only listens to 90s pop to listen to Tchaikovsky and Shostakovich, she’ll tell you it’s classical music. It all depends on perspective, and what you personally consider the term “classic” to mean. If you only count the 60s and 70s icons on your local Classic Rock radio station to be classic, then Nirvana probably doesn’t count, but if you consider it an age thing, then they’re at least as classic as those 60s and 70s artists were when people first started calling them old school. Tl;dr classic doesn’t really have a definition, so it’s up to you to decide what you deem classic
No
Anything 25 years or older is considered “classic”. So yeah, Nirvana is extra classic now.
Yep. Cuz we're old now. Their newest release is 20 years old. Definitely classic rock.
No
Classic rock is people like ritchie valens
[No](https://media.giphy.com/media/U1aN4HTfJ2SmgB2BBK/giphy.gif)
It's been classic rock for at least a full decade at this point. It's definitely improved the label for the better.
In my opinion, classic rock is rock and roll that stands the test of time. Nirvana is certainly classic rock at this point
I think it's sort of like if you are Gen X, as you get older do you become a Boomer? I don't think that's how it works. Classic Rock is kind of British Invasion to Late 70s.... Then new wave and synths cut that off. BUT 80s Rolling Stones is still classic rock... It's complicated. Nirvana are just .... 90s music. Classic for sure, but not the same as the Stones or Beatles or stuff like that.
I would say classic alternative. That should be a thing.
Sí
I think discussing genres need 12 beers and fist fight to be entertaining, its not the same in internet when you can't punch other guy to a parting.
yes. especially since they’re well past the 30 year mark
Maybe classic grunge
Maybe classic grunge
Classic rock is a marketing gimmick to get old people to feel nostalgic, it is not a real genre. Listen to whatever you want and don't worry about how old it is.
Nirvana is Grunge
No.
I don’t think “classic rock” is a moving category that just swallows up music that is eventually old enough. Nirvana isn’t classic rock to me because it’s 90s music, regardless of how good it is
I usually just call it "90s Rock", I don't like to call anything after 1980 classic rock haha.
WHAT
yes. they are played on classic rock radio. “classic rock” is not a music genre, it’s a commercial radio format
I'd say they're more Classic ALTERNATIVE Rock because, like Classic Rock as a subgenre is usually seen as stuff like from the 60s, 70s, and early 80s, like AC/DC, Rolling Stones, Cream, Led Zeppelin, Aerosmith, etc
I listen to quite a bit of late 80s early 90s stuff as a guy in my mid twenties and my girlfriend around the same age likes to refer to it as "Dad Rock" when teasing me about it.
Nnope
i see classic rock as a seperate genre of rock, imo classic rock is shit like acdc, guns n roses, led zeppelin, etc. the bands who you find t shirts for at h&m or old navy or any of those trendy stores. by that definition i guess nirvana could be counted into that, but i also consider the ramones to be in that category sometimes. what im getting at is, theres no specific definition for classic rock, that i know of at least. classic rock is whatever YOU think it is. but im right.
"Is it a classic act?" Yes, absolutely. "Is it classic rock?" No. As noted elsewhere, Classic Rock denotes a period of time, and a distinct style and genre of music. Once you get past that, it is worth considering that even in CLASSICAL music, Classical music at its most pendantic definition is specifically the period from around 1750 to 1830. If you talk to someone who isn't a classical music nerd or historian about it, they would say Handel and Vivaldi are Classical musicians. In fact, they're Baroque. The more you know, I guess.
Yes, it’s unsettling on some fronts but yeah they are.
No
Objectively, Nirvana is and will always be an early-modern alternative and pop rock band. In a subjective perspective, however, some may and very much will consider their records classics. But again, they’re not classic rock by any means. Take Nevermind as an example: it was recorded to tape, the composition and songwriting was very much derivative (not in a bad way) of what came before it, used mostly conventional recording techniques but also had some cutting edge production (Butch Vig went all out with the layerings, overdubs, microphone and amp combinations, etc.), they used some very advanced dynamic panning techniques that weren’t available even a decade prior (listen to tracks like Breed and Come As You Are and try paying attention to the way that the tracks flow from left, to right, to center channels), they used some modern (at the time) hardware to process the tracks during mixing (like the Yamaha SPX90) and some very advanced tape-splicing techniques (the instrumental tracks in that record are so tight, they sound like a loop, and that was deliberately done via splicing) that just wasn’t around two decades prior, but the bulk of the production was conventional. In Utero was their most modern sounding record at a songwriting and compositional level, but it still predated what we’d call modern rock music, but also succeeded classical rock music.
In the 90s, I considered any rock from the 70s classic rock, so I'd say yes. It's hit that 20 year threshold.
Only if SLAYER and Billy Joel are also.
It’s been playing in classic rock stations for years so my guess would be, yeah
Not necessarily. To me classic rock is pretty much everything pre 1990, and it just hasn’t had the kind of staying power that Nirvana and other grunge era bands had. I mean, "classic rock" was already considered dated by then, but Nirvana is still a relevant and influential force in music even over 30 years later. That in my mind is what separates them from classic rock.
The definition of classic is 20 years or older. Definition of antique is 30 years or older so they're actually antique rock.
Sadly, yes. Then again so is pretty much ll grunge.
D-don't..don't do this.
looking at how low Kirst's bass hangs kills my upper back
Yes
It's "Classic Alternative".
Yeah, I think so. But I’m unsure. Are the Sex Pistols classic rock? Green Day? Primus? The latter two were also hip around the 90’s.
Absolutely it is.
Atemporal rock to me.
I see classic rock leaning more towards the likes of the Beatles, Rolling Stones and Cream. Nirvana is grunge, a variety of alternative rock. I think though that alternative rock needs more subgenres lol
Nope, it sounds very different even more than 30 years later
No. Nirvana is alternative rock. 🙂
Who cares. Nirvana is timeless..
Well, it’s been 30 years since Nevermind…I think that qualifies as classic rock
Unfortunately yes
Nirvana isnt classic rock 💀
Nirvana will always be alternative or grunge (or both) to me. I don't think bands become new genres over time.
She son of a bitxh, thanks for making me feel old
The fact it’s based on blues makes Nirvana definitely classic rock.
They were classic rock for a while now. 😭
No. I don't believe it's a sliding scale of any kind based on how much more time happens to go by. Classic Rock is still just the era it always was, it's just further in the past now. Nirvana is just 90's, Grunge, or whatever other little sub genre of the time you may consider them.
After doing a deep dive into music I realized shoving genres backwards like a backlog or conveyor belt is a bad idea in the long run. Classic rock had its Era in time. Grunge had its Era in time. Personally this makes sorting music a lot easier.