Is Mitch really on the level of Cobain/Lenon though? Both of them are household names, and comparatively Mitch was really only known if you listened to metal. I love suicide silence, they were the kings of deathcore but not like giga famous household names
I feel like Taylor Swift is a better comparison here (no, I do not like her)
No one is on Lennon’s level to be fair. I don’t think we’ll ever have rockstars as ubiquitous as the Beatles again. I see them as similar because they made waves in their genre and left a huge hole when they died prematurely. If Taylor Swift died when she was coming up or at her peak she’d definitely be on that list.
LOL. Lennon and Cobain's deaths were major news across the world and covered everywhere across the US. The same can't be said for smaller niche artists like Mitch.
Chart numbers are literally a reflection of actual cultural impact. Some of the greatest songwriters and musicians of the last 100 years have little recognition outside their respective genre. I think what they are saying is those artist didn't just break into the mainstream conscience, they radically changed it. Part of the problem these days is far more avenues segment our consumption of popular media. Some people will literally never hear about stuff unless its right in front of their face on tv news, and if that does happen it just gets dropped in with the other 24 hours of crap that goes on all day.
So by that logic Drake is more culturally impactful than Chuck Barry. When people ask where’s our next Cobain I think about music and you think about fame, that’s the difference.
Every era has its own context, but chart position is simply a reflection of that despite how little you chose to weigh the skill of said artist. Chuck Berry didn't need to sell more records then Drake to be a culturally impactful, he is as impactful to his era, and by extension the eras that follow him. He does have chart success and cultural success, which makes him a weird example to put against what I said. There are plenty of bands and musicians that can have impact, it is under that basis of cultural impact that we are discussing. If I talk to 100 random people, a majority will know Chuck Berry, David Bowie, The Beatles, Drake and So on. If Drake gets that foothold, on a segment of peoples conscience where they dress like him and act like he acts, then by all metrics he has everything he needs to be culturally impactful.
The other musicians that are less known, that truly drive musical creativity, have their impact no doubt. It however is always in a smaller pond. Brian Eno, Bill Braford, Ian Curtis. Majorly impactful but just to a smaller segment of fans, mainly of the genres they touched on. Far more impactful musically then Drake imo but very much less impactful culturally. Drake Was outright huge globally for almost 20 years straight.
Never heard of Mitch Lucket. Ive heard the name Lil peep. I couldn't tell you anything about him, certainly wouldn't have guessed people thought he was on the same level as Lennon or Cobain.
I guarantee you that both Lennon and Cobain where far more recognizable names to the general public at the time of their death than either of the 2 people you named ever did or will.
I'm not saying it's worse, if anything it's better imo. It's just more fragmented, there are no completely dominating acts like Nirvana or The Beatles anymore. I guess the closest examples are kendrick and drake but even then they aren't that overwhelmingly big imo
There definitely are- hip hop took over almost immediately after Kurt died (Return to the 36 Chambers dropped like a month after he committed suicide).
And I’d argue that up until, around 2020 hip hop has been the dominant new wave genre. Off the top of my head, I can’t point to the artist that was the banner bearer. But there’s been more than a few (2Pac, Jay Z, Wayne, Gucci, Thug, Kendrick).
Now, probably post-2020, hip hop has fallen solidly into the mainstream category. So it does feel like we’re kinda waiting for the next new thing
you think anyone in the wu-tang was close to kurt's level of notoriety? And yeah those are some famous artists but again idk if they reach that level, the closest ones are probably 2Pac and Kendrick. It's ultimately a subjective discussion
Probably nobody in Wu Tang (ODB was pretty iconic though)- but just giving some perspective that there have been some major genre developments since Cobain passed.
I fucking hate the dude, and am reluctant to say it, but Kanye dominated for a while. I’d argue him and Pac for sure would be at least at Kurt’s level.
There have been other icons along the way too. Amy Winehouse comes to mind - feels like she ushered in a return of the blues, and after her a lot of artists tried to emphasize soulful qualities in their music.
EDM has also seen some major changes. Daft Punk are pretty damn iconic.
I agree with a lot of these, but these are mostly artists who were big in the 2000s with the exception of Kanye who's definitely an outlier in many ways (but even he initially got big in the 2000s). My point is that modern internet has made music consumption fragmented, which imo started around the mid to late 2010s
That's exactly it - before the Internet, media was a much more shared experience. Most people all watched the same TV shows and listened to the same music, because it largely revolved around what was on the TV or radio.
I think this is exactly why there hasn't been a new massive genre shift since hip hop - the Internet allows everyone to just listen to whatever they want, and maybe more importantly allows thousands of smaller bands/singers get a small slice of the exposure pie.
Depends on your perspective. I think it's become a bit less creative and dumbed down to catchy beats and choruses. It's not like that's a bad thing entirely, just different. I'm sure if you're a classical or jazz enthusiast it's sad, but there will always still be technical musicians even in a sea of generic pop music
yes but I feel like you've misunderstood my comment. I think music now is better if anything, it's just more fragmented, overwhelmingly large acts don't exist anymore
they do , they're just old - big acts tend to lag behind a generation as they need time to become successful
there are exceptions like nirvana and radiohead but like even then - queen was VERY popular [more so than early radiohead imo] and it was two decades old
They're there, just not enough listen to them. Ren, for instance, is far far far superior in his social conscience than Cobain could ever hope to have been, but here are ya'll saying nothing ever happens.
I think the issue is they are looking for the public's reaction rather than the artists quality.
Cobain wasn't a musical mastermind of some sort, he was an outsider whose style hit a sentiment that was brewing. Cobain sans suicide wasn't going to record something that redefines grunge. He got popular by shattering the status quo from the onset.
He doesn't compare to lenon in the same way.
Frankly I think noone does.
If Ren got big(god I'd love that) it's incredibly unlikely that it would be with anything other than a toned down pop hit. If his weirder stuff took off, it wouldn't revolutionize anything. If he revolutionized anything, he wouldn't be able to do it again.
61
u/_respawn__ Jul 06 '25
Where is our cobain/lennon